{"id":17856,"date":"2018-05-30T22:07:02","date_gmt":"2018-05-31T05:07:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/?p=17856"},"modified":"2018-05-30T22:08:21","modified_gmt":"2018-05-31T05:08:21","slug":"the-grass-might-actually-be-greener-over-there","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/the-grass-might-actually-be-greener-over-there\/","title":{"rendered":"The Grass Might Actually be Greener Over There"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>Simon Chan\u2019s book, Grassroots Asian Theology: Thinking the Faith from the Ground Up<\/em>, was an interesting read. I not only learned about Asian theology, but also about all the nuances of how theology is derived in various cultures around the world. Chan said it best when he stated, \u201cContextual theologies emerge as the church lives out its given script in new situations. In other words, theology is first a lived experience of the church before it is a set of ideas formulated by church theologians.\u201d[1]<\/a> I would expect the context of the church in Asia to produce a very different lived experience than my own in America. I also believe just about anything grassroots seems like it would be the most authentic than anything that comes from the top down. This is what I see Chan bringing forward when he talks about grassroots theology versus elitist theology.[2]<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Chan also brings out that \u201cwhat passes as Asian theology tends to be confined to a limited number of themes and theologians. Although there are some refreshing exceptions in recent years, the old perception of Asian theology is so deeply entrenched that it has become virtually the received view in the West.\u201d[3]<\/a> After reading this section, it made me realize why he wrote the book. He wanted to debunk the myth that all Asian theology is the same and wanted to introduce a refreshing look at Asian theology from another point of view. It made sense when he explained why it is so important for us to listen to the local church before we size up theology for that particular culture. \u201cThe task of the professional theologian is not to tell the church what is good for it but to listen carefully what the Spirit of truth who indwells the church is saying through the people of God. Elitist theologians who fail to recognize what God is doing among his people by his Spirit are no better (and are perhaps worse) at recognizing what God is doing in the world.\u201d[4]<\/a> It seems to me that many theologians should take this advice and not focus so much on telling the church what is good for it and listen more.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

One of my favorite ways to look at the Trinity is to think of it as a family representation of God, with God as the father, the Holy Spirit as the mother, and Jesus as the son. Most people get uncomfortable with placing a female figure in for the Holy Spirit but if God created us as male and female in His image, then that female part needs to be represented somewhere. Also, the Hebrew word for spirit happens to be a feminine noun.[5]<\/a> Interestingly, The Shack<\/em> has sold over 20 million copies and Young actually uses women to personify both God the father and the Holy Spirit in the book. The author of this book seems to agree with my view of the Trinity. He states, \u201cA more adequate way of organizing an Asian theology is to center it in the doctrine of the triune God as the divine family. This is not an arbitrary choice but faithfully reflects the fundamental way in which the first two persons of the triune God are revealed, namely, as Father and Son. In much of Asia a person\u2019s foremost identity is defined in relation to his or her family, and not just the immediate family but also the extended family, which may include an entire clan, and the linear family, which includes deceased ancestors. Given its importance, the concept of God as the trinitarian family could serve as theology\u2019s organizing principle.\u201d[6]<\/a> This made a great deal of sense for the Asian culture, but like Jackson Wu, I was wondering where the Holy Spirit fit into his trinitarian family. Wu states, \u201cChan\u2019s theological conclusions need further defense and explanation. For example, he speaks of the \u201ctriune God as the divine family.\u201d After talking about the Father and Son, he has little to say about how the Holy Spirit fits into that particular analogy.\u201d[7]<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Another area of the book that caught my attention was the part about shame and honor in chapter 3. Shame is an area I deal with every day in my work with clients. Often times, people tend to carry a great deal of shame around in their lives for years that keeps them from accomplishing everything God has for them. I will often point them to materials and videos by Brene Brown, one of the foremost authorities on the topic of shame. (here is a link to one of her videos: https:\/\/www.ted.com\/talks\/brene_brown_listening_to_shame?utm_campaign=tedspread&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=tedcomshare<\/a>) Seeing my clients experience freedom from this dark cloud of shame is a very satisfying part of my job. Also, growing up in an area of Los Angeles that was predominantly Asian, I observed many of them struggle under the extreme burden of shame from the cultural pressure to be perfect and not defame the family name. Chan explains this further in the following statement: \u201cIn an honor-and-shame culture sin takes on two major characteristics. First, sin is a personal-relational problem. Sin is offending the honor of another person or the community. A person who sins brings shame to those with whom he or she is closely identified, especially his or her family and the community to which the family belongs\u2026 Second, sin is pollution that can be removed only through purification. Thus purification rituals are important. They are not so much for achieving personal purity as for maintaining public or social order: They show the person\u2019s conformity to what is culturally appropriate, which leads to restoration of honor.\u201d[8]<\/a> If theologians don\u2019t take the time to listen to the church and understand how the Asian concept of shame and honor influence theology, then we could be inadvertently creating an unnecessary barrier for people to understand the gospel message.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

____________________________________<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [1] Simon Chan, Grassroots Asian Theology: Thinking the Faith from the Ground Up<\/em>, (InterVarsity Press, Kindle Edition), 15.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [2] Ibid., 7.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [3] Ibid., 23.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [4] Ibid., 30.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [5] Genesis 1:2<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [6] Simon Chan, Grassroots Asian Theology: Thinking the Faith from the Ground Up<\/em>, (InterVarsity Press, Kindle Edition), 42-43.<\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [7] Jackson Wu, Review of Grassroots Asian Theology: Thinking the Faith from the Ground Up, <\/em>http:\/\/themelios.thegospelcoalition.org\/review\/grassroots-asian-theology-thinking-the-faith-from-the-ground-up<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [8] Simon Chan, Grassroots Asian Theology: Thinking the Faith from the Ground Up<\/em>, (InterVarsity Press, Kindle Edition), 83.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Simon Chan\u2019s book, Grassroots Asian Theology: Thinking the Faith from the Ground Up, was an interesting read. I not only learned about Asian theology, but also about all the nuances of how theology is derived in various cultures around the world. Chan said it best when he stated, \u201cContextual theologies emerge as the church lives […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":95,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[634,2],"class_list":["post-17856","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-chan","tag-dminlgp","cohort-lgp8"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17856","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/95"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17856"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17856\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17860,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17856\/revisions\/17860"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17856"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17856"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17856"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}