Thoughts on “Flickering Pixels”

I spent yesterday afternoon relearning the implications of the G.K Chesterton quote that this blog takes its name from:

Poetry is sane because it floats easily in an infinite sea; reason seeks to cross the infinite sea, and so make it finite. The result is mental exhaustion…The poet only asks to get his head into the heavens. It is the logician who seeks to get the heavens into his head. And it is his head that splits.

Oh to be able to let an unformed thought remain unformed without regret! I had many of those yesterday afternoon as I worked my way through Flickering Pixels: How Technology Shapes Your Faith by Shane Hipps on my way home from London. Every page blew my mind in a different way, and the book’s intimations have huge implications for my dissertation, my personal projects, my creativity and even my very theology. It threw up some thoughts I’d already been chewing on for a while but mixed them in with other insights I would NEVER have come up with on my own, and cohered them in fascinating ways. As a result, I had random thoughts popping up all over the place at random, the majority of which I was unable to capture.

Here is one particular gem, talking about the repercussions that the invention of the printing press had on Christianity:

The impact of the print medium is nearly endless…It even reshaped the gospel. The values of efficiency and linear sequence, which became more entrenched in the Western world with each passing decade, changed the way the gospel was conceived. Under the force of the printed word, the gospel message was efficiently compressed into a linear sequential formula:


Such a stunning compression of the gospel would not have been possible prior to the age of the printed word. Medieval cathedrals told the stories of the Bible in elaborate stained-glass windows. They presented the seeker with a vast array of vague impressions representing the grand sweep of the biblical narrative – the message was far from distilled. But this new, abstract, linear formulations gained ascendancy in a culture that increasingly communicated via the abstract, linear nature of the printed word…

The printing press not only resuscitated the letters of Paul, it also helped cultivate the reasoning skills necessary in culture to comprehend his message…Problems arose, however, when linear reasoning was pushed to the extreme. The medium reversed, as all media eventually do when overextended. Linear reasoning became the primary means of understanding and propagating faith. This led to a belief that the gospel could be established and received only through reason and fact. Printing makes us prefer cognitive modes of processing while at the same time atrophying out appreciation for mysticism, intuition and emotion.

[P]erhaps the most damaging effect of suppressing the heart is that it deadens desire. That deep longing for life, love and God fades. Insteadm we come to expect less from life. We acquire the bland taste of a domesticated god who resides somewhere in our head.

The book goes on to make all sorts of different connections about various technologies and their impact on our faith, such as how the invention of the telegraph and the resultant overabundance of information dislocated from context led to relativism’s denial of absolute truth, or how image culture has, amidst other more negative consequences, restored the importance of the right brain and “serving as a helpful corrective to the tyranny of fixed categories”.

This all raises interesting questions about the nature of belief in Jesus – at what point does a person become “saved”?* When did the disciples become “saved”? I think the notion of a continuum is more helpful than that of an on/off switch – is your trajectory pointed towards Jesus or away? I’m a big believer that you can’t lose your salvation because you didn’t earn it in the first place, but at what point do you receive it? A lot of Kingdom theology (about prayer, healing, supernatural things etc) depends on the concept of someone being “in Christ”, and rightly so. Simply put, if someone is a disciple of Christ, they have authority (like when Jesus says to his disciples that he has given them the keys to the kingdom). But surely that means there must be a point at which you are given this authority which you did not have before? Plus, Pauls letters seem to echo this “one minute you’re an unbeliever/next minute you’re a new creation” thinking. But, Hipps rightly questions the way this mode of thinking has been pumped up on steroids since the print age:

Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if Thomas had died just seconds before his finger touched the wound. his man followed Jesus faithfully for three years as a friend and a disciple, but in that last moment before touching Jesus’ wounds he didn’t truly believe. Thomas was a follower of Jesus who wasn’t a believer. What do we do with this category with people? What does that mean for his eternal destiny?

I’m definitely not against linear categories. I think that sometimes you have to understand principles rationally before you understand them in your heart through God’s revelation. That’s how it’s often been for me – I understood the concept of grace by reading the last few chapters of Tim Keller’s The Reason for God in my head before I really got it in my head. Likewise, when my church were doing our “healing on the streets” training, where we learned about praying for the sick, it was vital that we understood our authority as children of God in a concrete way. Emotions and right-brain experience wouldn’t have taught us this on the same level, I don’t think. This is the approach employed by Jesus himself in this case – while he often spoke in cryptic parable form, thus inviting people into a deeper way of being rather than simply transmitting information, when he was teaching his disciples about practical things like performing miracles or mission, he always spoke with clear instructions.That said, understanding is not enough. I understand the principles of my status in the Kingdom of God as a believer (I have the authority to “heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers and cast out demons”), but am in need of ever-greater revelation from God of the depth of this authority so I can actually walk in this reality. Sometimes you need to understand things on a head level before your heart kicks in.

The way Shane wraps the book up is the best bit. He goes on to relate the whole “medium is the message” thing to Jesus (message+medium inseparable) and the church (we are the medium, therefore God’s message is transmitted through us as we try to be Jesus’ hands and feet in the world. If we, the medium, suck, the world doesn’t get the message, it’s as simple as that). Aaand that totally doesn’t do justice to how well he wraps up the book.

Anyway, I was going to list a few of the unformed thoughts that my brain spewed up while reading Flickering Pixels, but those last few paragraphs were actually several of the aforementioned nebulous thoughts and I can’t remember any of the rest of them. But maybe I should start collecting and celebrating my unfinished pensées, a bit like Mr Oizo:

*I actually really hate this word…

Here we go…

I don’t like doing blog round-ups as a substitute for content (okay I secretly do but let’s pretend I’m above that), but here’s some interesting stuff I’ve been reading lately…

It’s OK patriarchy, I understand Adam Lambert made you feel funny.

Little Bird has some excellent advice on getting a tattoo, from start to finish (I’m considering one or two)…

Kate Townshend writes about gender in the playground.

Jon at Stuff Christians Like has written a handy guide to understanding how metrosexual your worship leader is. An oldie but a goodie.

This is a lovely post from Hacking Christianity about how grace is present even in Genesis 3.

This, this and this arrived from Amazon today, and next on my list is this.

By the way, 24-1 went spiffingly. Am currently writing a report for the 24-7 prayer website.

UPDATE: Two wonderful posts I happened upon yesterday –

Firstly, Jeremy Camp posts an excerpt from Frank Viola’s From Eternity to Here. Viola is an author I can’t recommend highly enough.

Secondly, Jason Coker posts about, well, a lot of things. The post’s title doesn’t do it justice.

Thoughts on evangelism part 1

My whole life I have been an avid reader; from the fantasy books of my childhood, to the feminist writers of my late teens, through a brief blogs-only phase, right up the the present day and my theology-book addiction. I’ve devoured Christian book after Christian book in the past year – so much so that I have learned to love the Faith Mission bookstores I used to scorn, and I could probably single-handedly keep Amazon in business. I mostly pick my reads based on topics of interest (such as postmodernism, sexuality or church leadership) or friends’ recommendations, but every so often I’ll be strolling around a bookstore and something will just catch my eye. Normally, I’ll pick it up, peruse it, then put it down again and go on my merry way. A few hours or days later I’ll remember the book and think ‘hey, I wish I was reading that right now, it looked interesting’. Then the next time I see the book I’ll feel an urge to pick it up again, think ‘naw, girl, spend that cash on groceries or something’, flip through it again, think ‘oh hell, why not’, and buy the stupid book.

Now, there could be some sort of divine whisper guiding me through the process, or it could be that I’d put a bit too much cheddar on my pasta the previous evening, but pretty much every time this has happened, the book has been exactly what I needed at that time. The most recent book I purchased in this way is Brian McLaren’s ‘More Ready Than You Realise: Evangelism as Dance in the Postmodern Matrix’.

There are two things I love about this book. Firstly, it’s drawn together a lot of disparate thoughts I’d been wrestling with over the past few months on the subject, and given a lot of shape to my otherwise disorganised hypotheses. Secondly, it has not only given voice to a few of my intuitions, but it’s provided me with challenge, encouragement, ideas and plenty of ‘woah, why have I never thought of it like that?’ moments.

From the first chapter –

Evangelism in the postmodern world has to be less like an argument. This is not to say it will not be logical, but rather that it will not be about winning or losing, which is why I think the image of dance works so well. Dance is not about winning and losing. When the music ends, you do not sneer at your partner and say, “Gotcha! I won that dance, 7 to 3!” And if you try to pull someone into a dance against her will, the term we use to describe that behaviour is not “bold dancing” but rather “assault”.

…Kirkegaard also uses the metaphor of being a midwife, a metaphor borrowed from Socrates. The evangelist is never coercive, pushy, combative; rather, she is patient and gentle like a midwife, knowing that the giving of life takes time and cannot be rushed without potentially lethal damage.

The whole book is worth a read, but I wanted to highlight a few points that really stood out to me.

1) In chapter 18 (some chapters are quite short), McLaren talks about ‘the communal factor’ – how conversion and discipleship normally happen in the context of a community acting as a portal into the Kingdom of God:

You are part of something bigger, something Paul called “the body of Christ”…So one of the best things you can do for your friends who don’t yet know and love Jesus is to introduce them to your other friends who do…In the context of imperfect but vibrant Christian community (even just two or three of you!), the message of Christ will come alive in a way that a disembodied book or lecture never could convey.

This is one of the aforementioned ‘why have I never thought of that before?’ moments. Of course! Any friends I have who don’t know and love Jesus, I’ve been expecting them to get curious just by witnessing his work in my life. But why would they? I’m just one little (lousy) example. If I really want the Kingdom of God to become vibrant and 3D and attractive to others, they need to see a few more pieces of the puzzle.

2) One big thing I’d been struggling with this year is having to have answers, or to ‘win the argument’, which is something this book addresses. On one hand, I think it’s important to know why you believe, on the other hand, it’s just not my thing. The reason why I’ve been thinking about it is that a big reason why I believe is Tim Keller’s book The Reason for God (which is spectacular, by the way) – it’s a well-written book on apologetics that helped me enormously at a time when I was confused about what *exactly* Christianity was. But in the book Keller shares stories of times he’s challenged someone’s belief system in a very pithy way, and indeed that’s exactly what the book did for me, so I’ve been feeling some pressure to be able to ‘defend’ Christianity in much the same way…which is something Keller does extremely well, but is really not my style. This book helped me realise what I’d kind of been intuiting – that keeping the conversation going and being a safe person to talk to is much more important than being able to make a sales pitch.

3) This is definitely a topic for another post, but somne stuff he said helped me flesh out some ideas I’ve been wrestling with on apologetics…again, topic for another post…

All in all, the book has inspired me in many many ways, and made me want to start new discussions on ‘do-able evangelism’ with my peers…

I’ll post  more thoughts at a later date on why I am interested in evangelism – something I used to consider a four-letter word.