How do I describe what’s in my brain? Perhaps a historico-contextual approach will do.

So I’m sitting in church hearing some guy with a PhD “preach.” It’s not preaching though. It’s not even counseling. Luckily, it’s not opinion spouting either. Rather, I’m listening to what I deem as “80′s fallout”– making the gospel “palatable.” So that’s the context. Time for history.

Historical Situation

I’ve put a lot of time into my perspective on the development of American Christianity in the late 20th century. I’d like to think it’s rather accurate. It’s more a sociological-linguistic dig than anything, but here goes..

My adaptation of Wikipedia’s Birth Rate Chart shows 4 groups, oddly enough easily divisible into 15 year groups.

GenInf

But being a 15-year split, there’s plenty of variation possible. Take this age chart:

A: Baby-Boomers
Years Age-split
1945-60: Baby boomers born.
1960 15/0
1970 25/10 The eldest have just been apart of the late 60′s counter-culture, and some have children. The youngest are still learning, and looking up to them.
1980 35/20 The eldest now have children (A’) and are settled. The youngest will have children(B’) and are expressing their identity in 80′s music: metal/punk + feminization.
1990 45/30 The youngest are now enacting what they learned in the 60′s from the older: “The 60′s dream has become the 90′s nightmare”-A.Begg. This younger crowd are the nihilistic drug-rock scene carry-overs from the 80′s. And they are leading the Gen-Xers who are looking up to them.
B: Gen-X
Years Age-split
1960-75: Gen X born.  
1975 15/0 The eldest have missed the 60′s “high life.”
1985 25/10 The eldest are embracing the 80′s scene, The youngest are looking up to them.
1995 35/20 The eldest are now pushing their late-modern, social technique. The youngest are exerting their cynicism on their uni’s, playing in the bands the Millennials want to be in.
2005 45/30 The eldest are still holding on to their 80′s style and waning leadership(like the youngest of the boomers), The youngest are embracing their leadership in their anti-authoritarian(though often still rather modern) ways. These are the new wave of PhD’s.
A’: Millennials
Years Age-split
1980-95: Mill’s born. Children of the Baby Boomers(authoritarian),influenced by the GenX’ers(anti-authoritarian). From Melancholy to positive, post-nihilistic
1995 15/0 The eldest are growing up in the thick of the 90′s nihilism defined by the Gen-Xers who got it from the ’60′s.
2005 25/10 The eldest are still following the GenX’ers Starbucks-yoga’ing, The youngest are looking up to them, clueless about any nihilism or life without internet.

For the past two decades we’ve been hearing the rumblings of those who grew up and gained their social identity in the 80′s(late boomers & early GenXers).. These are the ones who have been infiltrating teaching on the PhD level, and teaching our churches in the “slick” and “sophistic” fashion, still using modernism to their own ends. Their message of glory to the mega-churches are money and “Vision, Mission and Goals(Pragmatic-Modernism!).” Theology was for the baby boomer’s parents, stuffy and having no pragmatic utility.

Now, the late Gen-X’ers, who gained their identity in the melancholic 90′s are starting to lead churches. Their message is no longer the 80′s “Big/fast money” but highly social gatherings in the “third places” of Starbux and online. No longer quick-fast-easy, but promotion of “struggle,” “questioning,” and other PostModern/Melancholy “I don’t know it all and neither do you!” values. Theology has returned, but in a non-authoritarian, descriptive (changable) way.

What’s on the horizon? The “Happy Entitlement Do-No-Harm” People. The kids who’ve grown up with all the goodies and expect “quality” over anything else. I expect theology will again be subject to uber-pragmatism, much like all other intellectual enterprises(going to uni).

Church Today

So back to my experience in church today. It makes complete sense. The guy who spoke today was form the 80′s church(theology-blendering for “vision” pragmatism), speaking to a church who’s used to a 90′s-mindset preacher(who’s bringing in the social return of theology-in-life).

Now, Christianity has typically divided epistemology into 2 varieties: that which everyone has access to(General revelation) and that which no brain could “prove”, but which God has made known to us(Special revelation: Jesus). Today, I did not hear any Special revelation. Rather, I heard generation revelation. Thus the newly oft-quoted line, “I don’t see the church offering anything different.” No kidding. I left my church in Chicago for the same reason. Jesus came to tell us something more than what we already know and can find out on our own.

The trouble is that the church hasn’t been “finding out” but has been a few decades behind, stuck holding on to whatever “life” is had. Living in fear of liberalism, conservatives have decided the brain isn’t such a terrible thing to waste, and besides, thinking too much turns one liberal, right? Wrong: thinking too little does. Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin were hardly ill-aquainted with intellect. So without attacking life and methods of living it with our God-given brains, the church apparently now has to teach it’s children how to become “normal” social beings.

But that is too harsh a critique. The world with it’s ill-advised idealism has offered no solid stone to stand on, indeed the point of PostModernism is to remove such a stone for free-flailing of self as one would please, only then able to move beyond self and society to become the Nietzschian uber-mensch.

That life is not so happy an existence, since most are not willing enough to overcome all of life, but get caught in their own addictions, bringing only more brokenness into their lives.

Life 1.0

It’s good that the church offer counseling into truth. We all need that. We’ve all been broken and twisted by sin, whether inside or outside the walls of the church. But I suppose that as much as such redevelopment of self in accord with reality a good thing, it alone is weak.

Say we have Reality. It’s going. It’s moving in the direction it’s going, and like a multi-threaded cord, we each have our own “wave” to ride. Some seem determined not to ride it, but to define it. Insofar as that works, they become prideful(and usually alone). If it doesn’t & Reality pushes back, they become bitter. Hmm..

So maybe we should just “go along” with reality. And perhaps being so compliant isn’t a bad thing, we’ll get “something” at least. But that is rather despair-ish. I *do* have desire and a will I wish accomplished! Perhaps there’s a symbiotic relationship?

Christianity holds (in various forms) that God has Reality in motion. Likewise, he put us here to “tame” it(Gen 2) and there’s always a sense of “placed here in this time and space for God’s own purpose/reason.”

I keep going with that idea and understand that God has placed me where I am(in so far as I follow him, and not run off) to do what he would have for me, and oddly enough, since he made me, he made me to enjoy what he has for me.

Everyone else out there doesn’t have such sense of purpose with the force of omnipotence behind them. With our own brains, we just can’t figure out which data is “real” and which is “interference” to block out. And that’s the goodness of God’s spirit– bringing us just enough subtle “hints” which is real data, and which is fuzz to block out.. what to push off of and what to push aside.

I like such a message. It helps so very much in living life. It’s so very rational: I use my brain to figure out what I can.. there is a rational structure behind Reality (Truth). And I love analyzing, so I’m always analyzing what *could* be real data and what *could* be fuzz. But such analysis is only fun when you actually know what *IS* fuzz. Otherwise it dumped me into depression.

Deeper Life

I’ve already hinted at it, and most of my blog-life is about understanding it: Jesus did come for some reason right?

Did Jesus explain general revelation to us? Yes. He certainly did cut out the fuzz. There *IS* a structuring which is necessary for life to be enjoyed. And the fact that “even the Gentiles” can pull it off is a good thing!

But there’s more. The structure of Reality which we can rationalize out isn’t the Gospel. Reality isn’t “news” as all, but the Gospel is “good” news.

Proverbs makes available to us a standard structure for living. Most call it “wise,” but Proverbs also calls it “righteous.” That’s a new one for ya. It’s a “wise” idea to keep the house clean isn’t it? Well, apparently it’s also “righteousness” too.

Proverbs makes clear that such wise-righteous living will provide what every pragmatic dream desires: life that “just works.” That’s pretty good for house-cleaning! Why? Because you’re going along with reality.

But going along with reality is available for all men to accomplish. It’s just that reality is bigger, and God’s plan is uber-Reality as well as through Reality. Sure, I can love my friends and clean my house on my own. But loving those who you feel back-stab you? Those who you’ve had dreams for and they’ve ran off with their own idealism? Not just when you’re addicted and need to be “normal” but more than fine? More than normal? More than what you even want to do? Somehow that’s not going to happen through the almighty merits of “vision.”

I’m still trying to get a grip on all this myself.. I’ve been happy with living just & only in accord with the Reality my own brain can come up with. That alone has been plenty enough for me. I know there’s this “more” out there, in here inside of me.. it’s the difference between letting go of desire and expectation, loving enemies and hating them, even to those you don’t and won’t know.

Appendix:

Regarding my conclusion, some may say, “That’s irrational! See! You don’t need to think about it! You just need to love others!” Not exactly. Take that graph above. There’s a reason for each and every up-tick and down-fall. I only know the Major reasons for the Major changes.. WWII and basic economics. That is reason enough to describe the pattern(reality). To not think about it and “just love others” tells me nothing, and gives me no means nor method of love. This entire article has been entirely rational, and from it, I am able to know what aspects of love ought be displayed.. where the vacuous holes are in society and where there’s too many already rushing the hill. “Just love” just isn’t enough. It’s the same as “I teach.” Who do you teach? What do you teach? What direction of teaching is needed?

Since God’s desire is not wholly antithetical to Reality in some way which we must then “do our best” to synthesize. Rather, God’s desire as understood in this article is in accord with Reality, which is his own making. Thus the answer to those questions about who to teach or love is hardly “not my brain” but it is rather “more than just my brain.”