Biblical Critical Theory - Interview with Dr. Chris Watkin

In this video Dr. Mike Bird talks to Dr. Chris Watkin about
00:40 - Who is Chris Watkin?
01:40 - Is Derrida the bad guy?
04:00 - What is "Critical Theory"?
13:48 - What is "Biblical Critical Theory"?
18:58 - How does the Bible answer the questions of critical theory?
21:58 - The relationship between the gospel and culture
30:55 - How does the Bible speak to philosophy?
37:50 - What will readers learn from this book?
Please like, subscribe, and share!
Otherwise keep up with Mike on:
@mbird12
michaelfbird.substack.com
Find Chris' book and videos below:
About Chris: research.monas...
Zondervan page: zondervanacade...
Philosophy Channel: / @christopherwatkin9627
Christian Channel: / @thinkingthroughthebib...
#criticaltheory #augustine #christianity

[@shawnd04]

I heard of the book. I was skeptical. I really appreciate this conversation with Dr. Watkin. I really appreciate the style and approach toward philosophy and culture in the light of scripture

[@samuelboucher1454]

Have him debate James Lindsey.

[@OtomaEdje]

I’m REALLY looking forward to this book!! Thanks for this convo.

[@augustinian2018]

I’ll definitely be interested in reading this with regard to its engagement with philosophy as well as culture. In my own reading, I’ve been noticing some unexpected parallels between folks like William Alston’s work in the analytic tradition and Paul Ricoeur’s in the Continental tradition, which if I heard correctly might be explored in some fashion Watkin’s book (though perhaps not between Alston and Ricoeur in particular). As one who migrated from the Lutheran to the Anglican tradition some time back, I’ve also been trying to determine how to orient myself to Christ and culture questions, as there are still many ways in which I struggle to see things through anything but the two kingdoms model I was raised with. (I’m also a sucker for anything having to do with Augustine, since he was my gateway drug into philosophy in college.) Sounds like this book could be some great food for thought.

[@amyisham206]

Thanks Michael for this discussion, eagerly waiting this book and nice to have some Ra ra.

[@earlychristianhistorywithm8684]

Glad you liked it!

[@amyisham206]

Basically Chris says exactly what I surmised doing my PhD in critical ethnography. Like Freire's critical pedagogy that awakened the oppressed minorities in Brazil - the Bible awakens our outrage about what's wrong with the world, but it also explains why humans are corrupt, why injustice happens but that God is also angry at injustice with us. The Bible is inherently "critical" in the socio-philosophical sense. It cuts through outward appearances and reveals the true oppressor. Our true oppressor is Sin - but our salvation is not merely becoming "woke" and exercising our agency but in the person of Jesus - which is why it's such good news for the the oppressed. @@earlychristianhistorywithm8684

[@elliotwalton6159]

I'm not sold on Critical theory, at least not how it is manifesting itself in Canada, but I'm pretty sold on Prof. Watkin. Even if I have to read The City of God. Book ordered.

[@nathanketsdever3150]

Early in the interview around the 12 to 13 minute mark, Watkin makes an analogy between Christianity and CRT and post-modernism and CRT. The former, he neglects the ways in which we actually do have healthy conversations about using "Christianity" or at least particularly streams of Christianity as a basis. The unity founded on shared principle (based on creeds, organizations, communities, or rivers of thought and practice) is a jumping off point for conversation about real things. One need not narrow to a singular theorist of Christianity to have a meaningful discussion about it. Second, the parallel he draws between post-modernism and Marxism seems to hinge on that actually being a paralllel, but it's not the case. He never demonstrates that there is as much difference between the critical theorists or the CRT thinkers as there are between for instance Derrida and Foucault. One need not do thesis level research to understand the core themes and/or have intelligent conversation about critical theory or CRT. Notice, Watkin wrote a book about Fouault and Derrida, but he wrote one singular book about CRT, admittedly a rather long tome. I don't think you can make the case that post-modernism and CRT are so called "empty signifiers" which seems to be the requirement to fully advance the case that the labels or streams of thought aren't helpful. I will admit that he does make a case that it can be helpful to do so at a more micro-level, rather than the macro-level. Are there similarities among CRT thinkers? Yes, for a number of years they have yearly events in which they did Law Review round ups based the themes within CRT. So, this seems to significantly challenge the underlying principle that. CRT has self-categorized itself--no need to per se map that territory. There are also a number of CRT readers (two of which I've read), which have shaped the CRT canon if you will. I think the claim Watkin is making is "you can have more productive conversations at the level of singular theorist" but even this claim is founded on the larger parallels he's attempting to draw between post-modernism, Marxism, and CRT, which aren't sustainable comparisons when you view them in the light. The claims he's making in this area seems rather feeble, or at least much less strong that the more grandiose or robust level he is asserting them at. To be fair, I'm not sure why analogies that aren't analogies constitute legitimate argument. Perhaps this is my own desire to be transparent about analogies that are true analogies. I would be glad to hear a further development or more nuanced version of the original claims. It may indeed be the case that the underlygin advice is still true, but the argument doesn't seem to be much of an argument. All of that that said, I'm very glad he wrote the book and I hope it does well. Based on it's influece and sales to date, I would suggest it will.

[@thediamondcreeper7566]

Dr. Chris Watkin misses the point entirely! Critical Theory is literally a lens to ruthlessly and relentlesly critisize everything that is - including God and Christianity - nothing is holy to Critical Theory...except for Critical Theory itself.

[@earlychristianhistorywithm8684]

Watch the video or read the book. That's not what he's doing.

[@anhumblemessengerofthelawo3858]

Disregarding your first sentence, you have stated very well what is the case. "As this entity that is our visitor increases his power through these works, what is the power that he increases? Can you describe it? _Ra: I am Ra. The power of which you speak is a spiritual power. The powers of the mind, as such, do not encompass such works as these._ _You may, with some fruitfulness, consider the possibilities of Moonlight. You are aware that we have described the Matrix of the Spirit as a Night. The Moonlight, then, offers either a true picture seen in shadow or chimera and falsity._ _The power of falsity is deep as is the power to discern truth from shadow._ _The shadow of hidden things is an infinite depth in which is stored the power of the One Infinite Creator._ _The adept, then, is working with the power of hidden things illuminated by that which can be false or true._ _To embrace falsity, to know it, to seek it, and to use it gives a power that is most great. This is the nature of the power of your visitor and may shed some light upon the power of one who seeks in order to serve others as well, for the missteps in the night are oh, so easy."_ Ra Material (1981)