Thriving in Babylon

Essays in Honor of A. J. Conyers

Capes, Charles

• Publisher: Pickwick Publications
• Year: 2011
• eBook ISBN: 9781498273114
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Religion

This delightfully multifaceted volume, comprised of thoughtful essays by an esteemed array of cultural critics, probes the intersection of Christian faith and culture to honor the memory of A. J. Chip Conyers, a remarkably ecumenical Christian scholar and cultural warrior whose premature death in 2004 cut short a remarkable career in teaching and writing. As those who knew him can attest, Conyers lived his life at the intersection of Christian theology and cultural concern with a singular blend of astuteness, gracefulness, and Christian conviction.This festschrift, as esteemed theologian and Conyers's mentor Jurgen Moltmann indicates in the foreword, is intended to mirror Conyers's own commitment to incisive cultural criticism and theological faithfulness in the mold of the great tradition. This is no small achievement even for so venerable a cast of scholars as the contributors to this volume, as Conyers crossed interdisciplinary boundaries--in a day of escalating hyper-specialization--with the greatest of ease. He was comfortable discussing contemporary church life or the christological controversy of the patristic era, Heideggerian hermeneutics or human dignity and the imago Dei, faith and the Enlightenment or the fatherhood of God, Catholic substance or Protestant reform.Yet Conyers always did this through the lens of historic Christian orthodoxy. Though he was a most incisive student of culture, in a most refreshing way he steered clear of being co-opted by the currents of culture. Neither retreating into pious devotionalism nor opting for the theologically unreflective activism that has become so chic in our post-consensus climate, he embodied a theological perspective that blends responsible cultural engagement with eschatological hope.The reader is sure to encounter the same blend in this festschrift, and to come away both challenged and edified toward fulfilling the message and hope of Conyers' life and work: to faithfully thrive in Babylon.

part one

Faith

1

The Unfinished Agenda of Evangelical Theology

Millard J. Erickson

One of the highlights of my visits to Waco was always the opportunity to discuss theology with Chip Conyers. His keen mind, intellectual curiosity and warm personality made those discussions both enjoyable and beneficial. As everyone who knew Chip remembers, he was passionate about theology, and, as a churchman, especially about its relevance to the life of the church.

One topic we frequently discussed was evangelical theology’s unfinished agenda. As long as evangelicals have been examining the doctrinal content of Scripture, one would expect that the major issues had been worked out, or at least that the major positions on each of these issues would have been defined. Yet despite this long and intensive effort, much remains to be done by way of theological reflection. Some issues pertinent to the evangelical theological endeavor have scarcely been addressed, while others, although explored, are in need of additional attention. This essay will not attempt to resolve those issues. Rather, it will be programmatic in nature, seeking to examine certain of these issues by identifying underlying issues, describing some of the positions taken on them, and in some cases, suggesting directions in which the discussion might profitably go.

The reasons for this task being still incomplete are several. It may be worthwhile to examine these reasons before investigating the actual topics, for unless we know why these have been neglected, that trend may continue.

One reason for this neglect is a failure to think through the logical implications of elements of one’s theology. Thus, the need for certain questions does not arise. One theologian affirmed his belief in the bodily resurrection of Jesus but did not subscribe to the idea of his ascension. When asked, “What happened to the body of Jesus, then?” he replied, “I just don’t think about that.” For if there is any truth to logic, then one who holds an idea (or a combination of ideas) that implies another concept is logically committed to belief in the conclusion as well. One advantage of working out the implications of a particular tenet is that it may assist us in assessing the truth of that tenet. It may be that the tenet itself cannot be conclusively verified by appeal to our primary authority, being insufficiently addressed there. The logical implication, however, may be more clearly addressed in the primary authority, thus giving us clues to the veracity of the initial tenet. This will be a negative rather than a positive test of the truth of the antecedent. If the implication is positively taught by Scripture, that does not guarantee the truth of the tenet that forms the premise, being a case of affirming the consequent. If, however, the implication is disproved by Scripture, that would, by the valid argument of denying the consequent, establish that the premise (the antecedent) is also untrue.

The failure to see unexpected consequences of belief or action is, of course, not unique to theologians, or even to scholars in general. It is said that 95 percent of all new businesses fail within five years. There are many reasons for such failures, including inadequate capitalization, inexperienced leadership, and other factors, but a major cause is simply failure to anticipate the problems that may, and in many cases do, arise. Similarly, security lapses in software may not be discovered until a hacker exploits them. In the case of theology, it may be many years, even centuries, before someone takes a logical implication and extends it to its extreme. Often, the heretic is the best friend of the orthodox theologian, for the former forces the latter to think through his position more adequately.

Another reason is following what I term “customary consistency,” over against logical consistency. In a given tradition, a certain idea may be held, not because it is clearly taught in Scripture, or because it follows by logical implication from other elements of that doctrinal position, but simply because it has always been held and taught by theologians in that tradition. It may be an attempt to sustain that position by taking the most extreme form thereof, thus making it as complete as possible. What happens is that the customary form in which the theological system is encountered includes this feature or this element of doctrine, so that there comes to be a psychological expectation that this is logically implied by the major tenets of the system. This being the case, if the major elements are considered to be demonstrably supported by Scripture, the supposed implication will be thought to be warranted as well. This will then close discussion, whereas in reality the issue has not been resolved. A closely related phenomenon is the tendency to cite all possible arguments for a position, even if there is contradiction among some of those arguments.

A third reason for failure to explore an issue may stem from inability to recognize the cultural or other factors that condition one’s own view. Thus, no need is felt to formulate or revise the doctrinal expression in light of new developments bearing on the doctrine. Another way of putting this is that what has sometimes been thought to be biblical teaching was actually a widely held view of astronomy, physics, or metaphysics.

One instance of this now widely recognized by holders of a variety of positions was the geocentric view of the universe. For a long time this was thought to be taught by Scripture, and therefore any variant view had to be resisted. At some point the Copernican revolution succeeded, and was sufficiently established that it became apparent even to the theologians. They came to recognize that what they had been defending was not a teaching of the Scriptures at all, but rather a particular astronomical view that was so much a part of the general public’s thinking that the Scriptures were read through the lens of that view. The same can be said of numerous philosophies.

Ironically, certain theologians have made much of the influence of certain ideologies on opposing theologies, yet either without an awareness or an admission of a similar conditioning effect of historical or cultural forces or of non-theological assumptions on their own theology. In the...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Contributors
• Foreword
• Introduction
• Biography of A. J. “Chip” Conyers
• Eulogy for Abda Johnson “Chip” Conyers
• Part One: Faith
• Part Two: Culture
• Selected Bibliography of A. J. Conyers