on knowing and understanding

Well, I don't really believe in absolute objectivity, perhaps we are still "objective" when we are babies. The entire world was still new to us, thus we could take everything at their respective "face values."

However, as we grow up, the way we see the world will be heavily influenced by our own perception and ideas which we have gathered about the world. Everything is subjective to one's own mind, one's own value, and one's personal world view. Judgments that a rationalist make will be different from what a post-modernist will make.

In knowing another person, our "subjectivity" will play the role as well. What we had experienced in knowing other person before, our first impression, and things can't go rational anymore. Oh now I'm talking like an empiricist. Although there's no absolute objectivity in the way we perceived our environment, there's still a certain degree of it. Through the process of knowing another person, we could into a certain degree of "objectivity" perceive whether any further relation is possible. However in this process knowing each other, mutual openness is necessary.

The door was open but now it seems to be closing.. or I don't know, it's just too hard to comprehend one's mind, or perhaps it's just now my cup of tea? If the human brain were simple enough for us to understand, we would still be so stupid that we couldn't understand it.

agora, on freedom of faith and on women

Rachel Weisz who came into fame after "The Mummy" and "The Mummy Returns" played the role of Hypatia of Alexandria (ca. 360 AD - 415 AD) in this movie. Hypatia is a philosopher, astronomer and mathematician living in Alexandria at the time of the rise of Christianity in the Roman Empire. She might have been the last pagan philosopher in the west.

I was a bit disturbed after watching this movie, perhaps due to several facts which was depicted there. I came to know that the idea of heliocentrism has long existed before Copernicus. At that time, Ptolemaic model has widely been accepted as the universal model of the universe. However Hypatia found several difficulties reconciling the motion of the planet with the geocentric model of the universe. Hypatia then investigated the heliocentric model which was first proposed by Aristarchus of Samos in the 3rd century BC and found herself to be in opinion with him.

I'm interested in discussing two aspects which was shown in this movie, the first is on freedom of faith, and the second is on the role of women in the church. I shall start with the historical background of events happening around that time.


Historical Background

Alexandria, the city where Hypatia lived, was the capital of the Diocese of Egypt (Dioecesis Aegypti) and ruled by a praefectus augustalis ("Augustal Prefect"). The Church of Alexandria was traditionally believed to have been established by Mark the Apostle in the year 42 AD. The Septuagint translation of the Old Testament was started in Alexandria. The Church of Alexandria was led by the Patriarch of Alexandria, at the time of Hypatia the Patriarch was Theophilus which was later succeeded by his nephew Cyril.

Christianity has become so widely spread within the Roman Empire. The last great prosecution against Christians happened at the time of Emperor Diocletian which lasted from 303 AD to 311 AD. In 311 AD, Emperor Galerius who succeeded Diocletian as the Roman Emperor in 305 AD, issued an Edict of Toleration in 311 AD, ending the persecution. Two years later, Emperor Constantine I issued Edict of Milan (Edictum Mediolanense) which again asserted the religious toleration and the return of all confiscated church's property. Constantine was baptised before his death in 337 AD and Christianity became the Empire's preferred religion.


On Freedom of Faith

Hypatia lived at the time of the Emperor Theodosius I. The Emperor was facing several conflicts with the pagans throughout the empire: Syria, Egypt, Greece, and even in Rome. Theodosius I asserted the ban on other religion other than Christianity:

"It is our desire that all the various nation which are subject to our clemency and moderation, should continue to the profession of that religion which was delivered to the Romans by the divine Apostle Peter, as it has been preserved by faithful tradition and which is now professed by the Pontiff Damasus and by Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, a man of apostolic holiness. According to the apostolic teaching and the doctrine of the Gospel, let us believe in the one diety of the father, Son and Holy Spirit, in equal majesty and in a holy Trinity. We authorize the followers of this law to assume the title Catholic Christians; but as for the others, since in out judgment they are foolish madmen, we decree that the shall be branded with the ignominious name of heretics, and shall not presume to give their conventicles the name of churches. They will suffer in the first place the chastisement of divine condemnation an the second the punishment of out authority, in accordance with the will of heaven shall decide to inflict." (27 Feb 380 AD) -- Codex Theodosianus Liber XVI.1.2.

Theodosius I also banned the practice of blood sacrifice, visits to pagan temples and the worship of pagan images:

"No person shall pollute himself with sacrificial animals; no person shall slaughter an innocent victim; no person shall approach the shrines, shall wander through the temples, or revere the images formed by mortal labor, lest he become guilty by divine and human laws." (24 Feb 391 AD) -- Codex Theodosianus Liber XVI.10.10.

One disturbing scene in that movie is that when the Christians (Parabolani monks) started to attack the Jewish populace in a theater. The Jews didn't do anything to defend themselves because it was Sabbath. The Jews then took a revenge at the Christians by making a false rumor that the Church of St Alexander is on fire. The Christians came in and the Jews locked them inside the church and started to stone them. The crisis didn't end there as after this attack, Cyril set to take revenge against the Jewish populace. The movie depicted the Christians went into rampage in the city streets and slew all the Jews that they found. The rest of the Jewish populace who survived the massacre were ordered to leave Alexandria at once.

A historical account from Socrates of Constantinople didn't mention about the first event of the stoning of the Jews inside the theater. He also didn't mention about the massacre of the Jewish populace by the Christians after the crisis at St Alexander church:

"The Jewish populace on hearing these menaces, instead of suppressing their violence, only became more furious, and were led to form conspiracies for the destruction of the Christians; one of these was of so desperate a character as to cause their entire expulsion from Alexandria; this I shall now describe. Having agreed that each one of them should wear a ring on his finger made of the bark of a palm branch, for the sake of mutual recognition, they determined to make a nightly attack on the Christians. They therefore sent persons into the streets to raise an outcry that the church named after Alexander was on fire. Thus many Christians on hearing this ran out, some from one direction and some from another, in great anxiety to save their church. The Jews immediately fell upon and slew them; readily distinguishing each other by their rings. At daybreak the authors of this atrocity could not be concealed: and Cyril, accompanied by an immense crowd of people, going to their synagogues— for so they call their house of prayer— took them away from them, and drove the Jews out of the city, permitting the multitude to plunder their goods." -- Historia Ecclesiastica, Bk. VII Ch. 13.

Oh well, this depiction pictures an image that the Christians at that time are no better than the pagan Romans who once did the same bloody persecution against the Christians from the first to the third century. At the time Christianity was venerated as the state religion in the Roman Empire, many men rushed to get themselves baptized, and one of the reason is to ease their path into public offices in the Empire. In the Bible itself, we see that the idea of religious freedom is already inherent because faith is a God's given grace on His chosen people on earth. We must go and spread the Good News to all the nations on earth, but it doesn't mean that the whole world will turn to Him after hearing the Good News. In the parable of weeds (Matthew 13:24-30), God allows weeds to grow in the field of wheat and let both of them grow together until the harvest (v. 29).

Perhaps it's better for the Christians to stay as a minority or prosecuted rather than being venerated as the state religion and a majority because it promotes corruptions rather than real growth in faith. We have seen instances when the church grew so powerful and corrupted, the day which we now remember as the Dark Ages. Indeed, an absolute power corrupts absolutely.


On Women

Another disturbing scene is when Cyril confronted praefectus augustalis Orestes with a passage from the Bible. It was from 1 Timothy 2. Orestes was heavily influenced by Hypatia, and Cyril saw Hypatia as a dangerous force which create tension between him and Orestes and Cyril wanted to have this influence eliminated.

"I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God. A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety." -- 1 Timothy 2: 9-16.

Specifically Cyril asserted that "women are not permitted to teach and to have authority over a man," which directly cornered Hypatia and Orestes. I was quiet surprised to find this (well, I haven't read the entire New Testament) and was looking for why did Paul write this way to Timothy. I found a similar words from Paul in the 1 Corinthians 14:

"women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." -- 1 Corinthians 14: 34-35.

Does it really mean literally that all women are prohibited from the office of teachings? If yes, how could we then explain that today many women became evangelists, give sermons and teachings? However in the earlier part of this epistle, which is in 1 Corinthians 11: 5, Paul stated that "every woman who prays and prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head," which seems to be different from what is written in 1 Corinthians 14.

αἱ γυναῖκες ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις σιγάτωσαν, οὐ γὰρ ἐπιτρέπεται αὐταῖς λαλεῖν: ἀλλὰ ὑποτασσέσθωσαν, καθὼς καὶ ὁ νόμος λέγει. εἰ δέ τι μαθεῖν θέλουσιν, ἐν οἴκῳ τοὺς ἰδίους ἄνδρας ἐπερωτάτωσαν, αἰσχρὸν γάρ ἐστιν γυναικὶ λαλεῖν ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ -- 1 Corinthians 14: 34-35.

γυνὴ ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ μανθανέτω ἐν πάσῃ ὑποταγῇ: διδάσκειν δὲ γυναικὶ οὐκ ἐπιτρέπω, οὐδὲ αὐθεντεῖν ἀνδρός, ἀλλ' εἶναι ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ. -- 1 Timothy 2: 9-16.

Paul addressed not only the Corinthian church but the churches in the sense of the "assembly of believers" as he used "ekklesiais" a plural of "ekklesia." The word "silent" in 1 Cor 14 is "sigao" which mean "silence or no sound" as opposed to "lalein" which means "to utter a voice or emit a sound", and in 1 Tim 2, the word "silent" which Paul used is "esuchia" which better to be translated as "quiteness," or "a condition of one's life who stays at home doing his own work, and does not officiously meddle with the affairs of others." The word "teach" in 1 Tim 2 is "didaskein" which means "to give a didactic discourses or teaching."

Perhaps Paul wanted to stress the role of man and woman, as in the relation of husband and wife, which is like the relationship between Jesus Christ and the Church as His bride. However the word "andros (plural) / aner (singular)" and "gunaikes (plural) / gune (singular)" may refer to husband and wife, but may also refer to the generic male and female. Well, anybody out there has any opinions?

knowing God

"The proper study of God's elect is God; the proper study of a Christian is the Godhead... There's something exceedingly improving to the mind in the comtemplation of Divinity. It's subject so vast, that our thoughts are lost in its immensity; so deep, that our pride is drowned in its infinity... While the subject humbles the mind, it also expands it... Whilst humbling and expanding, this subject is also imminently consolatory." -- CH Spurgeon

JI Packer starts his book by quoting from one of Spurgeon's sermon which he found to be a "fitting preface to a series of studies on the nature and character of God." Knowing God is at the very core of our Christian belief. It humbles ourselves, and provide the utmost consolation to us by knowing that our entire life is in the hand of God, a Spirit infinite and eternal, unchangeable in His being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth. However we need to be aware of the danger of falling into the pitfall of just "knowing about" God.


Knowing God vs. Knowing about God

A little knowledge of God is worth more than a great deal of knowledge about Him. Perhaps we already have a sound doctrine with us, but do we have the gaiety, goodness, and the unfetteredness of spirit which mark those who have known God? Do we have great energy for God? Do we have great thoughts of God? Do we show great boldness for God? Do we have great contentment in Him?

We need to humble ourselves and measure ourselves not by our knowledge about God, not by our gifts and responsibilities in our churches, but by how we pray and what goes on in our hearts.


By His grace, He has let Himself to be known

In order to be known, God has given us His grace by revealing Himself, He comes to you and begin to talk to you, through the words and truths which are written in the Holy Scriptures.

Knowing God is a matter of personal dealing with Him as He opens up to you, and being dealth by Him as He takes knowledge of you. Knowing God is a matter of personal involvement, in mind, will, and feeling, committing yourself to His interests and identifying yourself with His concerns. Knowing God is a matter of grace, the initative which is of God's.

Packer went on to describe each attributes of God: God unchanging, majestic, wise above all, His word, His love, His grace, His goodness, and His justice. I would like to highlight the part about God's wisdom here.


God's wisdom

"His wisdom is profound, his power is vast." -- Job 9: 4

"He has great power and mighty strength, ... His understanding no one can fathom" -- Isa 40: 26, 28

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways. As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts." -- Isa 55: 8-9

His way is higher than my way, and through what had happened in my life I started to understand this great truth. I had experienced a time when I thought I have a "perfect plan" for myself but in the end God thwarted everything and denied all the seemingly "perfect plan," made me to wait and only after some time do I get to understand that indeed His way is far higher than my way.

"We shall not grow weary of waiting upon God if we remember how long and how graciously he once waited for us!" -- CH Spurgeon

Through this perhaps He would like to strengthen us: in patience, good, humour, compassion, humility, or meekness. Perhaps He has new lessons in self-denial and self-distrust to teach us. Perhaps He wishes to break us from complacency, unreality, or pride and conceit. Perhaps His purpose is just to draw us closer to Him.

"Still He teaches believers to value His promised gifts by making them to wait for those gifts and compelling them to pray persistently for them before He bestows them." -- JI Packer

Short summary of "Knowing God" by JI Packer