Bernie said: * 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.
;-)*
I respond: Bernie and all, forgive me for being direct, but your ignorance
here is exceeded only by your arrogance. Do you really think that in a few
minute's browsing of Wikipedia you have a better grasp on this than a Pastor
/ theology student who actually has some personal experience with aboriginal
people? Or are you just trolling like Lynn Walker / Janice Matchett?
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>wrote:
> 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.
>
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 11:56:45 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jan 06 2009 - 11:56:45 EST