Sociology of Knowledge

Few PhD candidates outside of the United States (and yet who wants to work in North America or parts of Asia) will fail to realise the structures of power in the academy. How does one situate one's work within the wider disciplinary sphere? Is one an 'area specialist' or 'international relations theorist' or a 'political scientist'? Situating oneself in a discipline is essential (or becoming essential) especially in this current age of 'professionalisation'.

Depending on one's disciplinary affiliation, one has to master (or at least be cognisant) of the body of knowledge in that field, being in touch with the journals there.

The fear, perhaps often overstated by me, is that the lack of structure and short graduate training (or the lack thereof in relations to the US graduate schools) will disadvantage my job prospects. In a sense, the fears and considerations are real. They should also remind us that knowledge itself is not neutral but is shaped by the social and political contexts in which that intellectual inquiry is undertaken. (This is not to say that there is no objectivity to which we aspire to or that it doesn't even exist but that we need to be careful of the bias inherent in our intellectual pursuits).

With increasingly specialisation in the academy, universities in Singapore, US and possibly Canada are demanding that the applicants for lectureship (or be considered for a tenure-track job) be coversant with methodology, techniques and other theoretical frameworks associated to the discipline. Inter-disciplinary inquiry is not always appreciated at least at the junior level.

On the other hand, as a Christian, how does one affirm that the pursuit of truth should trump the other consideration, especially monetary and professional (in terms of career prospects) ones? Is this once again, another instance where we are reminded to seek first his kingdom and his righteousness and all these things [food, drink, clothes.. our material needs] will be givn to us as well and that we are not to 'worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself...' (Matthew 6: 25- 34)

Pastorally (and practically), we should not be paralysed by such fears but instead be concerned first about where our intellectual journey leads us. Only then can we be a good scholar and be faithful to the calling for which He has called us.

NT Wright's Lecture- Can a Scientist Believe in the Resurrection?

Went to Bishop Tom Wright's lecture organised by the Faraday Institute. It was such an inspiring lecture, providing an example that erudition need not come at the expense of clarity.

While I can't say that I understood some parts (given that I was quite tired) Wright's lecture reminded me of why I wanted to devote my life to an academic vocation in the first place. He not only knew his subject well but was able to explain his reasoning in a fairly accessible way.

I couldn't wait to return to my office after the lecture to work on my PhD and read more about my own subject. Not only the cool, dispassionate pursuit of knowledge but also to love one's work and subject. Just as we not only need to know Jesus intellectually or cognitively, but we also need to love him.

Confession of an unthinking Christian

Decided to reproduce some articles I wrote that were first published in the Methodist Message, a publication of the Methodist Church in Singapore. This was first in the series.

Confession of a unthinking Christian
“Why so many questions? You don’t need to know so much, just God. Will answering all these questions strengthen your faith? Some questions just cannot be answered!”

These were some of the common responses given when I first started my Christian walk. I was divided- torn between the questions in my minds and the sense that from hence forth, I should learn to ask less and trust more. It was strange. Before I received Christ, my Christian friends took the time and effort to reply to my questions and work through some of the issues. After I received Christ and attended the church, it seemed that asking too many questions was not going to be helpful to my Christian life.

Although the rebellious streak in me meant that I never gave up asking awkward and difficult questions, I also developed an artificial divide between what I believed and what I knew.

This divide grew deeper in my undergraduate days when I was also involved in a Bible study group. Whatever I learnt in the lecture halls had no relevance on my Christian faith and whatever I learnt in my weekly Bible study sessions remained in a separate universe.

It was only later when I was pursuing my Masters and met with two friends who challenged me to surrender to Christ in every area of my life that I started to think more seriously what it meant to be a Christian and to integrate my faith and my studies. The challenge itself came as a surprise. One of my Christian friends confronted me after a class, “How can you be a Christian and yet believe in the post-modern line of argument?” Somewhat startled, I replied defensively, “But I don’t believe in it. I’m just using the argument to answer the question the way I know my lecturer wants it to be answered. It’s no big deal.”

Yet deep down, I knew that it was a big deal. If Christianity was merely a moral set of teaching or a set of subjective spiritual experience, then it had nothing to say to my topic of international political economy or international history, only in my private spiritual life. Yet, if Christianity was true or the Truth (with the capital ‘T’), then surely, there must be something Christianity has got to say to my field of international political economy or even the sociology of the state.

Gradually, I started reading more serious Christian books and having discussions with other Christians who were also trying to integrate their Christian faith with their academic studies. Where previously, I exercised my mind only on my academic work, I started to take God more seriously and strive towards a coherent Christian worldview- that is working out the implications of what Christianity in every aspects of my life.

We all know the commandments that Jesus summarised in Matthew 22: 37- 39. “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment.” Yet how many of us have taken the effort to love our God with our mind?

Common misunderstood texts

Perhaps one of the objections some might raise after reading the above article would be to quote 2 biblical passages. 1 and 2 Corinthians as well as Colossians 2: 8 are two texts commonly taken to suggest that the mind can be disregarded.

For instance, Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 1: 20, “Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” Furthermore, some even add that since Paul wrote

There are some objections to such a reading of the passage. First, we have to read this 1 Corinthians 1 and 2 as part of 1 Corinthians. Paul is not discarding all necessity to reason. In fact, in the same letter, Paul appeals to various arguments and evidences on the Resurrection (1 Corinthians 15). He himself does it throughout Acts, reasoning with the various Jews and philosophers.

Second, Paul here might be condemning the practice of Greek rhetoric which had become a means to convince others not rationally but on speaking ability. That is, too much emphasis had been spent on honing one’s own technique but not on the substance of the speech itself (Augustine later came to the same conclusion on the often lack of substantive truth in the Greek rhetoric).

Third, if we look at Romans 1: 18- 24, we would see the similarities of two passages. Interestingly, people are guilty before God not first because they are immoral but because they erred in their thinking- imaging animals to be God. From a sinful human perspective, the gospel is foolishness but objectively speaking (that is, from God’s perspective), it is the other philosophies are foolishness.

Colossians 2: 8

This leads on well to the second common objection some Christians raise, “What about Colossians 2: 8? Doesn’t it teach us that we should not study philosophy or even that secular studies itself is useless for our Christian walk?”

However, if we were to look at the passage itself closely, the objection is not on philosophy itself but on a particular type of philosophy- those that are hollow and deceptive. Paul was warning the Christians not to fall for the false teachings (especially the Gnostics who claimed special hidden knowledge). Throughout Colossians, we can see that Paul himself was familiar with the teachings of the Gnostics and was able to recognise the falsehood in them. In Acts, Paul was also familiar with the pagan philosophers (Acts 17: 28). How many of us can truly say likewise as Paul did?

CS Lewis once said that good philosophy must exist, if for nothing else, because bad philosophy exists.

In the coming next few months, I offer some practical suggestions of what we can do. In the meantime, it will really be good if you could grab hold of the 4 books below especially the one by JP Moreland. (You should be able to get it from the Navigators or SKS or other bookstores).

For further reading:
Moreland, James Porter. 1997. Love your God with all your Mind. Navpress
This should be essential reading for all Christians! Moreland has been largely responsible for challenging me out of my complacent slumber.

Macaulay, Ranald and Jerram Barrs. 1998. Being Human. Inter-Varsity Press
A warm book that is careful to show the balance in our Christian lives. See especially chapter 7 on the “Mind.”

Stott, John. 1973. Your Mind Matters. Inter-Varsity Press
A small readable book.

Monroe, Kelly. 1997. Finding God at Harvard: Spiritual Journeys of Thinking Christians. Zondervan
This collection of articles on the spiritual journeys of some of the alumni of Harvard should serve as an inspiration to many.

Reading Genesis

Haven't updated the blog for a while- have two drafts waiting. Thought I would copy and paste part of an email that I sent to some friends earlier. Given that our Bible study group is studying the book of Genesis, I have included some suggestions on how to approach the study of the book of Genesis.

The book of Genesis is particularly challenging given the longer historical and cultural distance for us in the 21st century. While most of us would be familar with the gospels and epistles, we might not be as familar with the culture of the Near East thousands of years ago. Moreover, there are also the usual issues (for some) such as the relationship between science and Christianity, mythology and Genesis account, Christian (New Testament) theological understanding of Genesis vs Jewish interpretation of the passage, source theory ( i.e.questions of authorship of Genesis...

Coincidentally, my Bible study group is studying the book of Genesis. As would be expected, given the different disciplinary backgrounds that we are from, some of the questions that one group faces (e.g. scientists) are not the main concerns for others ( e.g. humanities) and vice versa.

Some book recommendations if you want to read more :) I have divided it into different levels with Level 1 being the most accessible and introductory guide to how to understand the Bible in general and Level 3 to more advanced understanding. For specific issues e.g. original sin or flood, etc, other books might be in place.

Level 1:
"How to read the Bible for all its worth"- Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart
This is the probably one of the best introductory guides to understanding the Bible according to different genres e.g. poetic, historical narrative, epistles.. However, one ought to read this with another book say, Vaughan Roberts' "God's Big Picture" which provides you with a holistic understanding of the Bible. While being sensitive to the different genres, one should not forget that there is a coherent thread running across all the books of the Bible and Vaughan's book is probably helpful in reminding one.
(PS: I haven't read Vaughan but have flipped through it- it's very thin and accessible).

Of course, both books do not address Genesis specifically but are helpful in laying out the broad principles in understanding the Bible. (Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart have another book- "How to read the Bible Book by Book" which has a chapter on Genesis but I think it too basic for moderate serious use).

One book that explicitly talks about how to read the book of Genesis is "How to read Genesis" by Tremper Longman III. Longman III has also written 'how to read proverbs'. (On a tangential note, I'm curious as to why IVP UK didn't buy over the rights for this book which is a IVP USA title. Instead, this book is distributed by Authentic in the UK). (Well, since I'm thinking about it, why did IVP UK give up the rights to Goldingray's Old Testament Theology, giving it to Paternoster. Goldingray's book also addresses some issues in reading Genesis but I suspect it's too thick for most readers. It's however a very engaging read).

Level 1 for Genesis- especially for scientists (or those who want to fit the account of Genesis into the debate between 'intelligent design', 'young earth creationism', 'old earth creationism' and theistic evolution.

"The Briefing"- Issue 337, October 2006
This is a magazine published by Matthias Media. This particular issue is titled "The Design of Genesis" and has a number of articles addressing the issue of "intelligent design" (e.g. whether it's good science and what it is). It's quite helpful introduction for those who are not familar with the debate. It's obviously just a taster.

"Can we believe Genesis Today? The Bible and the questions of science"- Ernst Lucas
Ernst Lucas writes well. Lucas has the advantage of both theological training and a scientific research background. He's thus sensitive to those who are concerned that there is a conflict between science and Christianity particularly when it comes to Genesis.
(If you want to have a sense of his argument, see http://www.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/faraday/Lectures.php and look for his lecture.)

Level 2/3
"In the beginning"- Henri Blocher
I just received this book recently and was ploughing through the first chapter before a friend borrowed it. Hence I can't say much about it but it does look promising. The book starts with the different approaches to Genesis. At least from the first chapter, Blocher covers a number of my questions about current appoaches as well as engages with a few others that I haven't thought about before!

In terms of Bible study and preparation, these commentaries are helpful. Walton and Hamilton are also helpful in answering some of the questions (on the earlier email) on what some of the Jewish interpretations of the passages of Genesis are.

Level 1- The NIV Application Commentary- Genesis- by John Walton
If you have not yet come across the NIVAC series, it's quite a good series. Each exposition starts with the 'original meaning' (of the passage), before moving to the 'bridging context' and then 'contemporary significance.' Preachers (in Singapore) often jump straight to contemporary application before explaining what the text meant to the original audience and how the passage fits in with the larger story line of the book (and with the Bible more broadly). The strength of the NIVAC series is that it works through the passages in a structured manner. The examples tend to be from the US and is quite American centred though given that Singapore is quite Americanised, we should be able to relate to many of them.
In the case of Genesis, Walton is good at reminding us of the difference between our contemporary (scientific) mindset (which is concerned with 'material structure' and 'natural causality') and the people of the ancient Near East (who are more concerned about function). He's also sensitive to some Christians who might be stumbled by the similarity (and differences) between the Genesis account and the Near Eastern accounts of Genesis.

"Genesis"- Bruce Waltke
Waltke is strong in showing the literary structure of Genesis as well as some exposition (explanation) on some aspects. I like to think of Waltke as a 'last minute revision guide'. If you're out of time and need to get a quick hang of the literary structure of the book of Genesis and some of the issues, Waltke is good.

Level 2/3- "The New International Commentary on the Old Testament- The book of Genesis Chapters 1-17"- Victor Hamilton
The NIC series is more technical than NIVAC. Although the series engages with the original language (Hebrew) much more than NIVAC, it does not assume that the reader has a knowledge of Hebrew. The NIC series is also good in that there is a continuous prose expounding on the verses (some commentaries do a verse-by-verse exposition, leaving one with a slightly fragmented sense of the book). The NIC writers also do their own translation of the passage from the original meaning as opposed to using NIV or other translations. Hamilton engages with the Semitic literature and is strong also on philology (sometimes too strong- after reading his exposition, I am ever more reminded of the weakness of my own grasp of the English language!) My wife prefers Hamilton since you can skip to the questions arising from the particular verse instead of ploughing through entire chapter from Walton but personally I think Walton is friendlier. :)

Level 3/4- Word Biblical Commentary- Genesis (2 volumes)- by Wenham
The Word Biblical Commentary series is scholarly. It assumes that you know the original language. Wenham is highly recommended by almost all the pastors and serious reader but after checking it out, I realise it's out of my current competency level (and financially, it makes less sense to get it since a very large chunk relates to the original language and a smaller portion is on exposition- unlike the other three commentaries).

On the specific issue of science and Christianity and creation and evolution respectively, if you want to save money and have all the people debate it out in a single volume check out these two books,

Level 1/2- Science and Christianity- 4 views (Wayne Grair & Gary Patterson, Jean Pond, Stephen Meyer and Howard Van Till)
I personally would prefer to recommend someone a book that he/she is likely to read cover to cover e.g. Alister McGrath's "Science and Religion: An introduction". But for those who like debate, perhaps this book is good. I haven't really gotten through it- each time, I get distracted by other books. McGrath's book however is much more accessible and it's better to read it first to get some knowledge before finding out the specific points in which people disagree.

Level 1- "Three Views on Creation and Evolution" edited by JP Moreland and John Mark Reynolds
Again, similar to the '4 views' book. A little more accessible than the '4 views' book.

A word of caution- some people like books to debate it out. Others prefer to have a strong line of argument running across the book. The 3 views and 4 views kinda of book will appeal more to people who want 'all the participants' to 'debate it out' but will not be pastorally helpful to those who will take the disagreement as an excuse 'not to bother about the issue since Christians disagree anyway.'