This was originally posted on Griffin’s website, Contra Mundum (griffingulledge.com). It is reposted here with permission.
Disclaimer: During my time in Louisville, Denny Burk was the associate pastor of the church where I was a member. We maintain a friendly relationship to this day, and this post should be read as no exception to that.
I spent some time yesterday reading and thinking about Denny Burk’s recent reflections posted on his blog entitled “The Dead-end of Research Justice.” Burk can always be relied upon to interrogate the demands of an ever-secularizing culture on Christians. Secularizing is perhaps not strong enough a word for the idealogical conformity demanded by some sectors of the American left. In this case, Burk is concerned by “research justice”, also known as decolonizing, approach to academia. I share his concern.
Just this past week I saw a completely absurd post from a student attempting to put her professor on notice publicly for failing to meet whatever arbitrary standard the student thought was acceptable. This is a real problem in academia and in our culture writ large. It needs to end.
Burk writes, “Research justice requires racial preferences for authors from marginalized groups and racial discrimination against authors from privileged groups. When you add to this standpoint epistemology (which is also a favored tool of Critical Theory), it’s not difficult to see why the racial identity of the author outweighs reason and evidence as a criterion for excellence.”
So what then? What should professors do? For Burk’s part, he says that he has never screened potential textbook authors with consideration to race. He only screens them for excellence of content and assumes all person of any race or culture can produce such work. Burk writes, “Racial identity just doesn’t figure into that calculus, nor do I see why it should. It is certainly no failure of justice to leave it out of the calculus.”
This is where I want to push back on Burk. First, let me agree with him. I do not think it is wise, correct, or helpful to label Burk’s standard as racist, xenophobic, or unjust. I asked Denny for clarification on this on twitter and he gave it: “Racial identity is not a category that either commends or condemns a prospective text.” It would be fair to say that he takes a “colorblind” approach to text selection.
I want to put forward disagreement with Burk here. While I do not believe racial identity or cultural identity condemn a prospective text (e.g. “no white male authors!”), I do want to offer some reasons that I believe they may commend a text. In sum, I want to argue for the inclusion of diverse voices in theological reading. I believe it would be good for theological educators and Southern Baptist ones in particular to strive towards this sort of intentionality.
The lack of diversity in reading for theological education is a real issue of debate. During my time in seminary, countless students of colors expressed their dismay and frustration to me that in 3-4 years of theological education, every single author without exception was a white man of European descent with the possible exception of Augustine. How can this be possible?
Why Does This Matter?
First, we have to ask: does this even matter? Yes, it matters. Diverse perspectives are meaningful and worth intentionally including in our theological work. For this part of the discussion, I want to draw off of David Clark’s excellent book To Know and Love God: Method for Theology. This is one of the standard texts in Evangelical theological method. In his book, Clark makes a distinction between the sort of postmodern deconstructionism that Burk is concerned about and the value of different perspectives for doing theology. Clark writes, “One’s perspective always forms the grid out of which the world is interpreted and life is lived” (100). To borrow the old phrase, to a hammer everything looks like a nail.
Clark wants to balance the importance of diverse perspectives with evangelical truth. Culture can not determine truth. He says that Christians must adhere to the universality of the gospel as true for all people and totalizing as a worldview. He writes, “The gospel is true for all peoples in every culture… perspectivalism, however, must deny this is so. Therefore…evangelical theology must reject the current rampant perspectivalism.” This perspectivalism is the belief that cultural/racial/social perspective determines meaning, and therefore, truth itself. This is what Burk is rejecting as well, and rightly so.
However, we should not suggest that we are utterly objective in how we approach theology or exegesis. We all come to the text with presuppositions, both conscious and unconscious, which shape our views. Clark writes, “Evangelical theology at its best will acknowledge that perspective influences all thinking. And a modest deconstruction of overly assertive modernist claims is all to the good. But proper evangelical theology also realizes the need for deliberate strategies to prevent cultural and historical location from imprisoning theology in the though of a particular time” (144). What should we do then? We should a) interrogate our own assumptions, and fight their influence over our interpretation and theological method and b) refuse to allow our culture to imprison our theology.
We are people who are not inherently objective working to interpret Scripture which is absolute. This is a difficult task. D.A. Carson tells us that there is something to learn from this view of different perspectives. He says, “…gently applied [this] rightly questions the arrogance of modernism… ruthlessly applied [this] nurtures a new hubris and deifies agnosticism.”
Clark is insistent that we not give into these cultural forces. What Burk, and the sources he cites, calls “standpoint epistemology”, Clark calls “epistemic relativism” and says it is “deeply flawed” and self-defeating. He says that this view is that “all truth depends on the knower’s viewpoint” and that this is utterly inconsistent with Christian belief.
Commending Diverse Perspectives
Why then would I argue against Burk’s point? Simply put, it’s because there are significant benefits that commend diverse perspectives in curriculum without giving an inch to critical theory, intersectionality, epistemic relativism, or any other secular theory that contradicts the gospel as a totalizing worldview. As such, we should consider works by scholars from the majority world, as well as minorities in our own spheres when we decide which resources to use.
Clark gives an example of why this is valuable. One day, teaching a 90 minute class on divorce and remarriage a student approached him to tell him how the lecture did not relate to his needs. Why? Because he is the eldest son of his father’s fourth wife. His father is a polygamist. In that moment Clark realized that culture had affected his approach to theology, his emphasis on teaching, and his application of Scriptural truth.
I am decidedly NOT saying that there is truth that is inaccessible to white men and therefore we need BIPOC to interpret Scripture in a way that we can not understand as white men. That is some weird form of ethnic Gnosticism. I am purposefully NOT saying that culture should determine theology.
What I am saying is that we should read diverse perspectives to prevent undue influence from one culture over a theology or exegetical task that should speak universally. The issue is not the Scripture. The issue is us.
The church is diverse. Evangelicalism and the Southern Baptist Convention are diverse. We need each other. We need to hear each other and balance each other. So then I want to conclude with a list of reasons that commend an intentional effort to include diverse voices and perspectives that are not beholden to worldly approaches. Every point below assumes that diverse perspectives and cultures does not mean divergent views about the gospel and assume a refusal of secular worldview; diversity in perspective and background, unity in common confession and a common gospel: “One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all.”
- Preventing bias. We need diverse readings to prevent a single culture from having unchecked cultural influence over our study of theology. We have blind spots. By their very nature, we can not see them. Diverse perspectives will challenge us on our assumptions, some of which we may find to be less biblical and more cultural.
- It’s who we are. We need diverse perspectives because we are diverse. The SBC repented of racism in 1995. Since then, the number of black churches in the SBC has increased significantly. It should not be the case that our nearly 4,000 black SBC churches can send their students to seminaries that they fund and their students basically never read a scholar that looks like them or shares their background. Their tradition is loaded with great resources. That is not even to speak of contributions from Asian scholars, Latin American scholars, and others. Why are we not drawing from them? This brings me to the next point.
- There’s no good reason not to. We should intentionally consider diverse perspective because they are not hard to find and countless minority scholars are producing excellent work. It speaks to our blind spots that this requires effort! There are many, many faithful scholars of color who far surpass our standard of excellence in Christian scholarship. Sometimes we saying we are only choosing the “best stuff”. What are we communicating to students who are non-white if the “best stuff” is always from white scholars? This does not reflect the reality of many scholars from diverse backgrounds producing great work. Unintentionally we may be communicating that only we are capable, or that all are capable but culturally we are simply better. Representation matters for precisely this reason.(I do not believe Burk, or other scholars believe this. I am speaking here of the kind of communication between a husband and a wife when she is sharing about her day, and he won’t look up from his phone. He may be listening, but is communicating something different. This may not be conveyed in one class, but perhaps over the course of a whole theological education without any minority authors.)
- We would benefit. We need to include diverse perspectives because it would be beneficial to us. Diverse perspectives have given us countless insights about honor-shame culture, sacrifice, etc. Asian and African Christians do not help us read the Bible by eisegeting their culture into the text. They have helped us see things we otherwise might not notice, because of the assumptions we bring to the text without realizing it.
- It’s another way to show how we have been reconciled to one another. Diverse reading is a picture of the gospel ministry of reconciliation. I am hesitant to put this only because I know of how some may represent it. What I am not saying is that those who assign reading from authors of a single cultural perspective are denying the gospel. I am not saying that the gospel requires my view here. What I am saying is that God in Christ has reconciled people from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation to himself. Diverse readings train students to see how God is working throughout all the world and all people so that we are not unintentionally convinced that God is only leading us to produce theology that is up to the standard of excellence.
I want to close by saying that I am grateful for Denny Burk. I don’t see him saying everything I’m pressing against here. We don’t always agree, but I have always found him to be willing to engage in a charitable conversation with me. I hope this brings far more light than heat to this conversation. I think Denny would agree with a lot of what I say here. I do not think he is guilty of intentionally excluding any authors, and he explicitly encouraged reading widely. I just wanted to go a step further and say that these reasons listed above commend diverse readings and should encourage us to intentionally shape our reading lists, within our confessional standards, in such a way. I am not condemning “colorblind” reading selection; I am attempting to affirm intentionally diverse reading as a better way.
Now, go read widely.
I think it is good to include in the category of “diverse reading” not only diverse in the sense of race but also diverse in the sense of theological views. For example, there are many “calvinists” that only read calvinists works. The same can be said of arminians, etc. When we only read from the people like us or read only from the perspective in which we are already in agreement, then we miss out on the opportunity to understand other views even though we may not agree. What I have found is that reading things I do not fully… Read more »
I agree with Tony on this. I would also add that our reading doesn’t have to be exclusively theology or “Christian books”. There is benefit in reading well selected works in history, geography, biography, business, fiction, travel, science, children’s books, and, believe it or not, sometimes pop culture.
In terms of translation and exegesis, the race of the translator or the person doing exegesis is irrelevant.
When we move toward more pastoral functions, diverse experiences can be helpful, but even that is not strictly race. It’s helpful for the person to be able to relate to a context.
In an academic setting I would think race would not be helpful except to assuage sensitized students. Concentrate on the classics first. If a student is training for a certain context, read those who lived that context, but not strictly based on race.
The USA is a country founded and grounded on Western Civilization. To expand and grow intellectually one must learn, understand and master the basics of their trade. For an educator that means learning the roots, the very foundation of what they believe. A baseball player spends years and then a life time to learn and keep the basics., same with a teacher. Western Civilization started with Greece and of course strongly influenced by Western Europe, including religion. A long way to say , when one is at a certain level then literature and books of different perspective can be included… Read more »
Did you read the article?
The article clearly points out the main problem in SBC theology: sufficiency of Scripture vs. syncretism. Note the lack of Bible verses in this article. Scripture says “there is neither Jew nor Greek”, gentiles are “grafted in” to one tree, and there is “one Lord, one faith, one baptism, . . .” In our culture, there is a title wave of postmodernism rolling onshore through Critical Race Theory, Standpoint Epistemology, Intersectionality, and more. Denny Burk boldly stands in the gap as Ezekiel 22 requires. This article muddies the water while failing to back up preferences with Scripture. Do we see… Read more »
And note that postmodernism always turns in on itself to destroy its progress. You see this with the student’s tweet to the teacher. The teacher is not “woke enough” to teach an LGBTQ class in the current climate.
“neither Greek no Jew” Yet in only using theological resources by white men, it communicates that there is a better class – that others are not deemed as excellent. The OP is not aruging that substandard work be read (though I have read some excellent statements from authors whose overall work is not considered excellent), but to include the excellent work of authors who happen to not be white, western, etc. These resources do exist – but for whatever reason, have not been chosen. Scripture was not given solely to the West, America, first world etc. but to all Christians… Read more »
Hello BT, I appreciate your response. For the record, I am also opposed to a professor choosing books because the author is white. Skin color is a nonissue when choosing theology textbooks. Do you understand that your position advocates Standpoint Epistemology? You say that “our own culture can and does impact our exegesis”. Can you back this up with Scripture? The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. If anyone lacks wisdom, he should ask God who gives liberally. If culture was a key point in understanding truth, wouldn’t the Bible tell us to seek the cultural insights… Read more »
No, my position does not advocate for standpoint epistemology, just for the wisdom of seeking different viewpoints from differing scholars (be they academic in nature or lay) from different walks in life. If wisdom comes from God, and he uses all his followers, it is wise to seek as many as possible. Why are there four gospels? Differing viewpoints add clarity and color. I would not suggest one focus on a culture to gain truth, but rather focus on the truth that is often exposed by someone who reads scripture from a different lifeview than mine. And yes, while there… Read more »
Tim, I’ve got to call you out on the way you have allowed your own worldview, that has been invariably influenced by the culture you grew up in to creep not only into your Biblical interpretation, but also to your view of history. Celestial navigation was in use for thousands of years before “Christian” Europe learned how to do so from the Arab world. The issue of culture is our tendency to allow our worldview (coming from the culture we grew up in) to impact our reading of scripture. As much as you say that Western culture is impacted by… Read more »
Hello Steve, The larger debate is Standpoint Epistemology. This includes the idea that a person’s culture brings about unique insight into divine revelation. Wisdom comes from God, which is why we call it revelation. Better to seek Him than a Filipino or Caucasian person. We do seek out fellow Christians/the church for input and guidance. We seek them out because they have the Holy Spirit too. God has taught them as He has taught us. We do not seek them out because of their race or cultural background. We treasure their input because they know God. Do you see this… Read more »
Tim, Let’s stipulate — because I’m *fairly* sure you would agree with this — that there’s a large body of scholarship, by scholars of many different races, that meet your criteria for excellence. Under the present state of affairs, out of that entire corpus, professors are selecting *only* material from white authors. Two questions arise: first, isn’t this the /very outcome we would see if professors were, in fact, deliberately selecting only white authors/? Namely: excellent white authors have some chance of being selected for a course, and excellent non-white authors have no chance of being presented to the students.… Read more »
David! One of my favorite people on SBC Voices. Excellence naturally rises to the top. To value books because the author is a certain color is racist. The assumption is that there is some system that excludes minority authors. Such broad statements are unhelpful. A professor must choose books on very narrow subjects. Only by examining particular circumstances can judgment be made on minority authors exclusion. History also comes into play. Europe has been Christian for over 1500 years. This is not true for much of Asia, Africa, etc. This puts minority authorship of historical writings at a numerical disadvantage.… Read more »
“David! One of my favorite people on SBC Voices.“
Hang on, now — this is the Internet. You’re not supposed to say something /nice/. 😀
Academics is and has always been in competition with The Church. The Centrality of the Church, its life and mission, is really the strength of Baptist principles. It is impossible to dismiss academics but The Church must be central to God’s mission in the World. It is the community that is at odds with the world around it and the one and only community that has and lives the saving message for the world. An interesting interpretation I just came across about 2 Cor. 13:11 All that remains, my dear family, is this: celebrate, put everything in order,strengthen one another,… Read more »
I’m not a seminary student, professor or pastor. I read widely this summer, in order to know the culture surrounding my adult children and various friends. What are they hearing from the vast spectrum within and without the Christian community? I wanted to know the terminology, meanings, issues and frameworks of race-related divisions, so that I can listen and respond without adding heat. I have two cautions: Be well grounded in Scripture FIRST. When my mind is transformed by His word, I’m not alarmed by what I hear, I don’t react in anger, and I won’t be easily confused or… Read more »
To try to make Augustine into a woke patriarch would be like putting lipstick on a pig. In his day, the Circumcelliones roamed the North African country-side, telling people that the gospel required debts to be forgiven and slaves set free. Augustine wept for the poor slave-owners thus deprived of their property. He’s not your guy. You could add Donatist writings to your curriculum, except, oops, they don’t exist.
No one is trying to recruit anyone as a woke patriarch. You’ve missed the point it appears.
Point-missing can be an art form.
I’m glad to see we agree. Wouldn’t it be ridiculous to try to make Augustine into a spokesman for the global south, as if there were some sort of grid or something in which he became imprisoned by the happenstance of birth.
Bro Griffin, good article and a lot of food for thought. If the intentional inclusion of diverse voices helps remove some of my blind spots, then I’m all for it. If that helps me read Scripture the way the writers intended me to read, then I’m all in. What dampens my enthusiasm, is that Scripture itself is not that diverse along racial lines. It was written predominantly by Jewish men. It’s never bothered me for a second that no white men had a hand in it. Nor does it bother me that everyone who will ever enter the… Read more »
These are also my thoughts. [Randall Seale’s post]
Most of the time, I have no idea of the skin color of the author I am reading.
Yes, they are probably light skinned men.
To those who have availed themselves of reading from non-light skinned people, what insights have you gained that a light skinned person could not, or hasn’t given you?
I’m talking Scriptural insights.
Certainly if one is writing about their different-than-mine culture, they certainly know more than most people who are not of that culture.
Women can tell me more about women than a man can.
Great article and discussion. I thought it was very gracious to Denny on a pretty problematic view. The view that race and culture have nothing to do with interpretation comes from a bit of arrogance that is in all of us. Have you ever been to a Bible study where someone said “We are not going to read any books or commentaries. We are just going to let Scripture speak for itself.” This is said, as if everyone else in the world has biases and lens, but that we alone sit in neutrality under the Word. If we have an… Read more »
Thanks for the comment. First I would reply by clarifying what I’m not saying: I’m not saying that diversity is required to understand scripture. I am saying that diverse perspectives make us more likely not to be influenced by our own biases as we try to understand scripture. It is true that all of the biblical authors are Jewish, but it is also true that what makes the holy scripture what it is, rather than just an assorted collection of random books across the life of a religious group, is the divine authorship. That is how we can account for… Read more »
As a question unrelated to the original article and that in no way is looking to provoke a quarrel, regarding the statement “all of the biblical authors are Jewish,” I always thought the gospel writer Luke was a gentile. Paul says in Col 4:11, “These (referring to the men previously named) are the only men of the circumcision among my fellow workers for the kingdom of God.” A few verses later he names Luke. I always took this to mean Luke was not Jewish. Perhaps I’ve misunderstood this?
Great article, and points well made. I have benefited greatly from the interaction with believers coming from other cultures as a missionary for the last fifteen years. It has revealed many cultural blindspots I had in my thinking, that forced me into the Word more deeply to find out God’s thinking on it.
The word diverse means showing a great deal of variety; very different. The Gospel is not diverse, there is no room for variety, there is not a different Gospel from one viewpoint to another it is the same from one generation to another generation, one culture to another culture intelligence levels no matter how high or low, black white red Jew or Greek the gospel is the same. This idea that mans understanding of people places or cultures is necessary to reach people with the gospel is mans way more often than not of avoiding the good news. Diverse reading… Read more »
I would say the Apostle Paul used what he had learned from “diverse reading” to witness to the people at Mars Hill in Acts 17:22-28. It is obvious from the passage that Paul does not change the Gospel in order to accommodate the lost. However, he does use his knowledge of their culture (in quoting one of their poets in Act 17:28) to carry on a conversation with them. I am not suggesting that “diverse reading” should occupy the majority of our time, reading the Bible should. However, knowing about other people’s background and culture may help open a door… Read more »
Tony – I agree. It is wise to know a people’s culture and customs to aid communicating the Gospel of the Lord Jesus.
But I don’t think that’s what the OP is about. The analogy would be did Paul think it necessary to know Greek poets so he could understand Leviticus and Isaiah and the Book of the Twelve? Or did Paul teach the churches to intentionally seek out diverse perspectives to mitigate their inherent biases?
Yours in Christ
I agree and did not mean to come across as if I believed one needed anything but scripture in order to understand scripture.
Sometimes culture gives us a bias in reading Scripture so that we miss certain truths. Example: Once in America, in many places, but especially the South, the culture defined a negro as less than human, and many if not most, of rather intelligent Bible scholars did not see anything wrong with that cultural understanding and even sought to defend it biblically. But it seems to me that if those scholars had read from different cultural perspectives, they more than likely would have NOT changed their minds, but rather simply disagreed with what they read. Learning of a different culture so… Read more »