Six Books that Changed the Way I Think (And the People who made me read them)
Mircea Eliade, The Sacred and the Profane.
In my third year in college, I took a class from Prof. Cameron McKenzie on the Latter Prophets. It was a seminar style class that involved a crash course in Old Testament and Ancient Near Eastern prophecy as well as a series of student paper-presentations on the book of Ezekiel. As this paper was worth the majority of our grade, we were all required to consult with Cameron on what we would be writing. It was in one of these meetings that Cameron introduced me to this philosopher who would go on to radically change how I read the whole bible.
Eliade, a philosopher of religion, argues that across the ancient world there was generally a much more robust participatory ontology operating in the social imaginary than there is today. His discussion of types and archetypes was essential reading for me as preparation to engage the neo-platonism that underwrites Christian sacramentalism and Patristic exegesis. For anyone struggling to enter into the world of Ancient Christian exegesis, a quick read of Eliade's work will go a long way to introducing you to the basic logic in very clear and readable language.
J.L. Austin, How to do things with words.
I believe it was while on tour with the Providence Chamber Singers in the UK in 2012 that I had a conversation with Dr. Randy Holm about speaking in tongues. He suggested that tongues-speech is not speech in the way we normally conceive of speech in that it doesn't "mean" anything. Instead, Randy argued, that we should ask, "what does tongues-speech do?" This was my first introduction the realm of speech-act theory. At some point soon after, Randy recommended that I read J. L. Austin's book to get a better understanding of the theory, and my view of language was changed forever. Austin's work on speech-act theory was the gateway drug for my later Wittgensteinian turn. For it was Austin who first alerted me to the social contexts within which speech-acts succeed or fail. There are clear connections between the criteria for a successful speech-act and Wittgenstein's conception of language-games, connections that many evangelical theologians would benefit from taking a second look at.
Stanley Hauerwas, Working With Words: On Learning to Speak Christian.
For those who know me, you know that Stanley Hauerwas has come to dominate my thinking on most things. If you ask my opinion on something, you are more likely to be met with a Hauerwas quote than with anything else. Well that journey all began with a gift from my good friend, Mark Jensen. Mark gave me this book in my second year of college and I proceeded to read through it that summer. To be honest, I didn't understand most of it at the time, but as I look over the shape that my MA thesis ended up taking, I must admit, that the central part of my argument is largely indebted to the essays Hauerwas wrote in this book. My focus on and interest in the influence of ordinary language philosophy on theology largely stems from the "grammatical point" that Hauerwas is making in many of the essays included in this book. It is not his most accessible work, but I would argue that it is as good a place as any to begin to engage with the theologian whom Time magazine has named, "best theologian in America."
Christian Smith, The Bible Made Impossible: Why Biblicism is Not a Truly Evangelical Reading of Scripture.
Smith's book was the assigned text in another class I took from Randy, I believe it was an experimental class that fell under the vague category of a "Special Studies" course number. Smith's 10-point definition of biblicism and his long list of examples was extremely eye-opening and should be required reading for anybody who wants to read the Bible faithfully. The real benefit of Smith's book is in the first half, with his critique of biblicism. His proposed solution relies heavily on speech-act theory, and ultimately led him to convert to Roman Catholicism, which unfortunately has undermined the impact this book should be having among its intended evangelical audience. Nonetheless, this is a book who's critique evangelicals cannot afford to ignore.
Alain Badiou, Saint Paul: The Foundation of Universalism.
This was the most difficult book that I have ever read. I'm still not sure that I understand or agree with most of it. Nonetheless, I have been haunted by what I found in this book ever since it was assigned as an optional reading by the pastoral staff at St. Margaret's Anglican Church in Winnipeg. I was taking a course entitled Theological Exegesis for Preaching, and we ended up running out of time to discuss this book, but Kirsten Pinto Gfroerer announced at the end of class that, "you know who you are among us who need to read this book." Of course, I accepted that challenge and I'm glad I did. As I sat under the preaching and lecturing of David Widdicombe for the next 2 years, I was repeatedly confronted with theme of Christian univeralism, both its strengths and pitfalls. It was in subconscious dialogue with these more universalist themes that my own focus on particularity has emerged. My intuition is that Christian universals must be arrived at through particularist commitments - an intuition that has been recently well articulated by David under the name of "concrete universalism," in a lecture entitled, "Slouching Towards Washington: Part 1."
Jurgen Moltmann, The Crucified God.
Days before I began my seminary degree, I received word that a friend of mine had lost a battle with depression. The problem of evil took on a more absurd and sinister light during my first year in the seminary. I took a class on Christology that first year from Dr. Patrick Franklin in which we each had to sign up to give a presentation on a different theologian's christology. I chose Moltmann and was assigned a lengthy passage from The Crucified God. I'm not sure I'm completely on board with all the implicaitons of what Moltmann has to say, but what struck me was that instead of a cheap answer about how everything works out for the best, God has entered into our mess and taken the evil and suffering of this world into himself. The answer to evil isn't a flippant assurance that the absurd can be made intelligible, but is instead the equally absurd image of God dead on a cross. Reading Moltmann lead me to read Dostoyevsky, Elie Wiesel, and others in attempt to stare unblinkingly into the face of the absurdity of evil and not abandon hope in God. Perhaps the poet Malcolm Guite has best articulated my own current hope in his poem "Descent" with the line, "Weak to be with us when we fall, and strong to save." What Moltmann gave me, more than anything, was the theological means to spend a little bit more time with the contradictions of Good Friday before rushing to Easter Sunday.
There have been many other books that have changed my mind about things in large or small ways over the years, but these have been some of the most significant. I thank the friends and teachers who passed them on to me in order that I might be disillusioned of the way I believed the world to be and discover even more rich complexity in God's good creation.
In my third year in college, I took a class from Prof. Cameron McKenzie on the Latter Prophets. It was a seminar style class that involved a crash course in Old Testament and Ancient Near Eastern prophecy as well as a series of student paper-presentations on the book of Ezekiel. As this paper was worth the majority of our grade, we were all required to consult with Cameron on what we would be writing. It was in one of these meetings that Cameron introduced me to this philosopher who would go on to radically change how I read the whole bible.
Eliade, a philosopher of religion, argues that across the ancient world there was generally a much more robust participatory ontology operating in the social imaginary than there is today. His discussion of types and archetypes was essential reading for me as preparation to engage the neo-platonism that underwrites Christian sacramentalism and Patristic exegesis. For anyone struggling to enter into the world of Ancient Christian exegesis, a quick read of Eliade's work will go a long way to introducing you to the basic logic in very clear and readable language.
J.L. Austin, How to do things with words.
I believe it was while on tour with the Providence Chamber Singers in the UK in 2012 that I had a conversation with Dr. Randy Holm about speaking in tongues. He suggested that tongues-speech is not speech in the way we normally conceive of speech in that it doesn't "mean" anything. Instead, Randy argued, that we should ask, "what does tongues-speech do?" This was my first introduction the realm of speech-act theory. At some point soon after, Randy recommended that I read J. L. Austin's book to get a better understanding of the theory, and my view of language was changed forever. Austin's work on speech-act theory was the gateway drug for my later Wittgensteinian turn. For it was Austin who first alerted me to the social contexts within which speech-acts succeed or fail. There are clear connections between the criteria for a successful speech-act and Wittgenstein's conception of language-games, connections that many evangelical theologians would benefit from taking a second look at.
Stanley Hauerwas, Working With Words: On Learning to Speak Christian.
For those who know me, you know that Stanley Hauerwas has come to dominate my thinking on most things. If you ask my opinion on something, you are more likely to be met with a Hauerwas quote than with anything else. Well that journey all began with a gift from my good friend, Mark Jensen. Mark gave me this book in my second year of college and I proceeded to read through it that summer. To be honest, I didn't understand most of it at the time, but as I look over the shape that my MA thesis ended up taking, I must admit, that the central part of my argument is largely indebted to the essays Hauerwas wrote in this book. My focus on and interest in the influence of ordinary language philosophy on theology largely stems from the "grammatical point" that Hauerwas is making in many of the essays included in this book. It is not his most accessible work, but I would argue that it is as good a place as any to begin to engage with the theologian whom Time magazine has named, "best theologian in America."
Christian Smith, The Bible Made Impossible: Why Biblicism is Not a Truly Evangelical Reading of Scripture.
Smith's book was the assigned text in another class I took from Randy, I believe it was an experimental class that fell under the vague category of a "Special Studies" course number. Smith's 10-point definition of biblicism and his long list of examples was extremely eye-opening and should be required reading for anybody who wants to read the Bible faithfully. The real benefit of Smith's book is in the first half, with his critique of biblicism. His proposed solution relies heavily on speech-act theory, and ultimately led him to convert to Roman Catholicism, which unfortunately has undermined the impact this book should be having among its intended evangelical audience. Nonetheless, this is a book who's critique evangelicals cannot afford to ignore.
Alain Badiou, Saint Paul: The Foundation of Universalism.
This was the most difficult book that I have ever read. I'm still not sure that I understand or agree with most of it. Nonetheless, I have been haunted by what I found in this book ever since it was assigned as an optional reading by the pastoral staff at St. Margaret's Anglican Church in Winnipeg. I was taking a course entitled Theological Exegesis for Preaching, and we ended up running out of time to discuss this book, but Kirsten Pinto Gfroerer announced at the end of class that, "you know who you are among us who need to read this book." Of course, I accepted that challenge and I'm glad I did. As I sat under the preaching and lecturing of David Widdicombe for the next 2 years, I was repeatedly confronted with theme of Christian univeralism, both its strengths and pitfalls. It was in subconscious dialogue with these more universalist themes that my own focus on particularity has emerged. My intuition is that Christian universals must be arrived at through particularist commitments - an intuition that has been recently well articulated by David under the name of "concrete universalism," in a lecture entitled, "Slouching Towards Washington: Part 1."
Jurgen Moltmann, The Crucified God.
Days before I began my seminary degree, I received word that a friend of mine had lost a battle with depression. The problem of evil took on a more absurd and sinister light during my first year in the seminary. I took a class on Christology that first year from Dr. Patrick Franklin in which we each had to sign up to give a presentation on a different theologian's christology. I chose Moltmann and was assigned a lengthy passage from The Crucified God. I'm not sure I'm completely on board with all the implicaitons of what Moltmann has to say, but what struck me was that instead of a cheap answer about how everything works out for the best, God has entered into our mess and taken the evil and suffering of this world into himself. The answer to evil isn't a flippant assurance that the absurd can be made intelligible, but is instead the equally absurd image of God dead on a cross. Reading Moltmann lead me to read Dostoyevsky, Elie Wiesel, and others in attempt to stare unblinkingly into the face of the absurdity of evil and not abandon hope in God. Perhaps the poet Malcolm Guite has best articulated my own current hope in his poem "Descent" with the line, "Weak to be with us when we fall, and strong to save." What Moltmann gave me, more than anything, was the theological means to spend a little bit more time with the contradictions of Good Friday before rushing to Easter Sunday.
There have been many other books that have changed my mind about things in large or small ways over the years, but these have been some of the most significant. I thank the friends and teachers who passed them on to me in order that I might be disillusioned of the way I believed the world to be and discover even more rich complexity in God's good creation.
Comments
Post a Comment