RE: [asa] dreamtime (was: The ASA and the Soft Sciences (ASA focus for the future))

Hi Pastor Murray-

 You said:
" But as I wrote, there are no simple western categories which are adequate to describe the notion of the Dreaming, and I can assure you the idea has NOTHING whatsoever to do with what westerners would call a "vision"."

I read the article at wikipedia about it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamtime

I don't really see anything unique there. They believe spirits exist before and after a material manifestation as a person, plant, or animal. Sounds like re-incarnation. Mormons also believe in pre-existence in the spiritual world. Looks like "more of the same" in spiritual experiences we already know about... nothing new and certainly nothing helpful in providing new information for understanding the interface of science and religion... unless you think superstition would be more helpful (because the western world is doing a good job of rooting-out superstition).

As far as I can tell- this "dreamtime" totally ignores book 2 in the two book analysis (God's word and God's works; also ignores book 1 to boot, I guess). If dreamtime helps, maybe if we all smoke some dope and drop some acid we could get some new and useful input too... it's worth a shot. ;-)

Info on Aboriginal drug use:
http://aboriginalrights.suite101.com/article.cfm/aboriginal_drug__pituri
http://aboriginalrights.suite101.com/article.cfm/aboriginal_substance_abuse

...Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Murray Hogg
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 2:45 PM
To: ASA
Subject: Re: [asa] The ASA and the Soft Sciences (ASA focus for the future)

Hi Bernie,

Your reply is in many ways typical of the sort which occurs when people first encounter the notion of the Dreaming.

But as I wrote, there are no simple western categories which are adequate to describe the notion of the Dreaming, and I can assure you the idea has NOTHING whatsoever to do with what westerners would call a "vision".

Frankly, even the terms "Dreaming" is a misnomer - it was coined by Spencer and Gillan in the late 1800's when it was assumed that Australian Aboriginals lacked the conceptual capacity to hold sophisticated cultural or philosophical understandings. They were, along with the Hottentots of Africa, considered to be the most primitive race on earth.

Largely, this impression was formed because of the Aboriginal's lack of technological and scientific development. And it was assumed that any group lacking development in the material sphere must therefore lack development in the cultural and philosophical spheres. Since then, however, we've come to realize that the Dreaming is far more sophisticated than Westerners imagined - but simply due to weight of historical usage the term itself remains.

To broaden the discussion a little bit, I think it helpful to understand the way in which non-western theology is moving. In particular, I think it helpful to understand that there has been a recent reaction amongst non-western Christians against western theology. This is true not just of Aboriginal Australian Christians, but of African and Asian Christians also. To put it crassly, they are pretty fed up with the western claim that scientific and technological superiority translates into any sort of spiritual or theological superiority. They have particularly rejected the naive assumption that western theology is itself free of cultural entanglement.

We might look at (say) African Christianity and wonder at some of the rather bizarre goings on in that neck of the woods, but rest assured that they look at us with the same sort of suspicion. Indeed, Australian Aboriginals _generally_ think westerners are spiritually bankrupt and the famous remark "white man got no dreaming" is intended to portray the fact that westerners live with a complete disassociation of the spiritual and the earthly which is unthinkable in the Aboriginal world-view. Aboriginal _Christians_ are more charitable, but while they thank us for the gift of the Gospel, they are a bit less complementary in respects of our insistence on telling them how to live it. They particularly struggle with the fact that the same folks telling them how to be "Christian" were, at the same time claiming their land, poisoning their water, stealing their children, raping their women and shooting their men!

So, what I'd urge here is that BEFORE making the claim that western Christians have something to say to non-western Christians on the science/faith dialogue front, we should keep in mind the broader theological and historical picture. Particularly we should remember that there has been a LONG history of western political and cultural imperialism in which non-western cultures have been misunderstood, denigrated, oppressed and destroyed, and in which non-western Christians have been treated as second-class citizens of God's kingdom.

Of course, the misunderstandings have flowed both ways, and I have no doubt that western Christians have much to offer our non-western brothers and sisters, but if we insist on starting with an assumption of cultural superiority, with misunderstanding and misrepresentation, without acknowledging that the Holy Spirit might speak to us through those of less technologically and scientifically sophisticated cultures, then we shouldn't be surprised if our non-western brothers and sisters have no interest in sitting at our table.

Blessings,
Murray

Dehler, Bernie wrote:
> Hi Pastor Murray-
>
> What you refer to as "dreaming" in a positive estimation I think westerners would call a "vision." Dreams are usually goofy. "Visions" are from God... whether obtained from a dream state or an awake trance-state. So I see nothing new or different being offered here at all.
>
> ...Bernie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Murray Hogg
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:40 AM
> To: ASA
> Subject: Re: [asa] The ASA and the Soft Sciences (ASA focus for the future)
>
> Hi All,
>
> I'll only offer the observation here that the only people I've ever met who offer anything like a fully-orbed, theologically orthodox, scientifically informed, and biblically literate resolution of the nexus between evolution and Christian faith have been Australian Aboriginal Christians.
>
> This is primarily because of the approach they take to Genesis - treating it as "a Dreaming" rather than as a historical narrative. I'm sorry that I can't easily flesh that out much more as the Dreaming is a quite profound approach to describing reality through the use of narrative which has no counterpart in western thought.
>
> The problem for contemporary westerners is that we tend to have a pretty stark dichotomy between the notions of "history" and "myth" - with the former being "true" and the later "false." But the Dreaming is quite another category altogether - it reads like history, but it has more affinity with something like a Platonic plane of forms.
>
> As such a Dreaming might read to us like a historical narrative, but it's actually a description of present reality, of the proper order of things, so to speak. As such to ask the question "did it happen?" is actually a category error (and will only result in much shaking of heads amongst Aboriginals dismayed by white-fella's ignorance). The only proper question is "is it so?" -- which one answers by appeal to the power of the Dreaming in question. Very powerful Dreamings have a sort of intuitive obviousness which can't be gainsaid and in some respects an Aboriginal might appropriate the famous words of CS Lewis to say something like: "I know that this Dreaming is true, not because I see it, but because by it I see everything else".
>
> As a consequence of this sort of approach to Genesis, Australian Aboriginals tend not to find ANY difficulty in holding together evolution and the biblical account of creation. The key is not critiquing the science, but in understanding the role of creation stories in "ancient" cultures. Personally, I think westerners are by and large clueless on this score and, as David suggests, we could learn ALOT from our third-world brothers and sisters in regards to how creation stories should be appropriated.
>
> Blessings,
> Murray.
>
>
> Dehler, Bernie wrote:
>> David, when you say:
>> "Maybe some of our brothers and sisters from parts of the world that
>> aren't so influenced by rationalism will some day offer some solutions
>> that /we/ will need to integrate"
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm wondering what you could possibly mean by that. It seems to me that
>> the educated western world is at the forefront of integrating science
>> and religion; groups such as the ASA. How could another place come up
>> with better understanding after groups like ASA have been struggling
>> with it for many years- many of the brightest scientists and
>> theologians? Are you thinking maybe a mystic or prophet of God will
>> arise to illuminate all of this?
>>
>>
>>
>> ...Bernie
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Jan 6 11:49:45 2009