Keepin’ it Real
When working with people from different ethnicities, cultures or eras, contextual theology is critical to consider so we can propel people towards a relationship with God versus pushing them away from Him. Transforming theology into contextual theology not only makes sense but gives freedom for individuals to represent the nature of God in a way that is comprehensible to those individuals.
I find this to be a refreshing and inviting way to introduce theology, despite how this bumps against some of my rigid Christian education or objective classic theology I’ve experienced. To operate in contextual theology frees me up from the staunch belief system that I am compromising the integrity of the gospel because I’m changing it to fit the environment; it allows me to be subjective and culture friendly while presenting theology. This is what I had to learn, and am still learning to do when I counsel with non-believers who have no concept of God in their lives or when their perception of God is judgmental, harsh, and punitive. It makes me go to the person and learn the history, experiences, and culture of the individual instead of making the person come to me when presenting theology or spiritual concepts. In social work, this is called treating the “person in the environment” methodology. When you treat the person from their environment, it changes your perspective and influences your therapy techniques.
Similarly, when we operate from the perspective of contextual theology, we also read the Bible in context to its’ culture. This is valuable when we attempt to apply certain scriptures to our culture, as we can take passages out of context and perceive it to be objective, classic theology, versus contextual theology that fosters a subjective view. Tragically, teaching the Bible out of context has created grounds for: instituting slavery, exaggerative punitive measures to children, spiritual abuse of leaders, and gender biases to name a few. Teaching the Bible within context makes a significant difference in evangelizing successfully.
Conversely, we can compromise and betray the integrity of Christianity when we allow culture to have too much of an influence in shaping it. Finding the balance where culture does not define theology and theology is not incongruent with culture is a challenging task to define and achieve. Ideally, theology and culture need to develop a symbiotic relationship to make Christianity appealing and comprehensible to society.
The various models used to express contextual theology are unique solutions to the diversity one encounters in sharing Christianity, and provides creative modalities in teaching theology. Out of the 6 contextual theology models described, the one that seems to best describe the spirit of contextual theology is the Translation model. Presenting Christianity as something that is relevant and pertinent to the current culture, while preserving the spirit and integrity of Christianity appears to embody the heart of contextual theology. The Anthropological model is intriguing, as it emphasizes the goodness of the person and the healing God offers to people. This model could be paralleled to some psychology theories that capitalize on the value of humans and relationships. As a therapist, I find myself often using these two models to bring about spiritual and emotional healing in a person’s life and their relationships. But now I know what I am technically doing and look forward to strategically applying more contextual theology principles in my work.
About the Author
Jennifer Dean-Hill
9 responses to “Keepin’ it Real”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
“Conversely, we can compromise and betray the integrity of Christianity when we allow culture to have too much of an influence in shaping it. Finding the balance where culture does not define theology and theology is not incongruent with culture is a challenging task to define and achieve.”
That seems to be the crux of it Jennifer! It is my sense, currently, that we are erring too much in the direction of cultural sensitivity, rather than letting Biblical truth speak to and challenge society!?
” it allows me to be subjective and culture friendly while presenting theology. ”
Jen, that’s the “symbiotic” relationship you talk about. It’s how we keep the truth of the Gospel in tact, and yet relate it to where the person is in their relationship with God.
I like what you say about not driving people away. I know that the Gospel has been called an “offense”, but I wonder if that is for those who have already made up their minds.
What about all those people who haven’t heard the good news? How should we present it to them.
Great post, Jen and I really appreciate what you say because you deal with it on a day to day basis.
You are in such a wonderfully unique position to listen to and understand another person’s context, and thus speak the good news in ways they understand.
Bevans, in his conclusion, offers that each of these models is valid, and “can function more adequately within certain sets of circumstances.” This is refreshing; we don’t need to choose one model over another, but recognize that “it depends on the context” when one might be more useful than another for that moment.
BTW– I love “your” new tattoo! 🙂
Good point and refreshing to have choices in how to connect.
Yeah, that tattoo was painful! 🙂
Jen yes having a one fits all way of thinking and practicing theology has indeed brought more harm than good. I am leary though of models that base its theology solely on the human. My reason being is that it puts us at the center and de-emphasizes Christ. If it is about my inherent goodness I become my own Holy Spirit. I am led by my own goodwill and I experience God based on my works and not His. I am also aware that having a perspective that constantly reinforces human depravity makes us always sinful and bad can be just as dangerous. There has to be a balance and I do think each model is insightful in understanding how we are attempting to find a way to share the gospel and live out our faith. One thing is for sure finding a balance is is not a simple task. I appreciate how you practice daily appying theology within our culture as you serve those who you are called to bring hope and healing to each and every day! ❤
Thank you, Christal! Yes, finding a balance is challenging. I don’t even consider introducing spiritual concepts or theology until I have earned the right by developing a loving, accepting relationship. Then God sells Himself 🙂
HI Jennifer,
As I reviewed your post on the models, it reminded me as I read the book that maybe we should not focus on just one model but use a mixture. Using a mixture of models when we preach, teach or speak, our text would be compatible to the audience we are addressing and reach more than one sector of the audience.
Jennifer,
Thanks for the great post…. I like how you talked about ‘translating’ the translation model and the anthropological model into your work as a therapist….. it seems a very apt comparison and one that likely provides a lot of tools for contextual theology.
Thanks again!
Jen, I hadn’t thought about how contextual theology aligns with the idea of treating a person within their environment. What a powerful insight.
I really appreciate the way you wrestled with the fine line we have to walk with contextual theology. “Presenting Christianity as something that is relevant and pertinent to the current culture, while preserving the spirit and integrity of Christianity appears to embody the heart of contextual theology.” I feel like we walk this line every time we broach the subject of Christ here in the PNW. I never want to abandon the integrity of the gospel, but it’s pointless to approach someone with a picture of Christ that assumes followers of Christ must abandon all culture or strip themselves of their personality.