In his book, Seriously Dangerous Religion, Iain Provan makes a clear distinction between the Judeo-Christian view of the world and the classical world from which Christianity emerged.[1] Furthermore, he contends that this view of the world was a key ingredient in the intentional drive to change the world for the better, that is, human agency.[2] Other scholars such as Edwin Judge and Mark Strom also support the following hypothesis: that Judeo-Christian thought was an overhaul of the Graeco-Roman conceptual nature of reality (cosmos) resulting in a new way of formulating society and of being human in the world (anthropology). Furthermore, this new way of thinking gave rise to greater human agency in the transformation of the world as well as the transformation of the self.
The idea that the Judeo-Christian heritage and scriptural worldview is the wellspring of human agency, innovation, creativity and design, and foundational for the modern world is a radical claim. Can this claim be supported? Little literature appears to address these claims or the topic of human agency directly. If you are aware of such literature please let me know.
Attached is a first pass literature review for research that is attempting to some extent address this gap.
Methodology
In reviewing the literature related to the hypothesis, one is struck by a common polarity of themes about epistemology. For Strom, it is the abstract (primary) reality versus everyday life. For Rowe it is encyclopedic knowledge verses lived tradition. Both point out the limitations of the first pole in each of these splits, and indicate that the early Christian epistemology falls into the second pole. To compare the early Christians and the Graeco-Roman world of the time, it would be tempting to adopt the abstract encyclopedic approach methodology that has been criticised as the problem with the Graeco-Roman mindset. Echoing Iain McGilchrist, in his famous book,[3] this will be to make the analytic and encyclopedic approach the master instead of the emissary. Also, any attempt to construct supposedly neutral criteria will inevitably incur D’Costa’s second axiom[4] and be far from neutral.
So, can we compare the early Christian and Graeco-Roman worlds? My proposed approach will be to analyse the two worlds through the lens of modern theories of neuroscience, design thinking and complexity theory.[5] These theories may be far from neutral, and may indeed spring from the Christian worldview as we suppose, but they are in current use and not specifically located to any particular tradition. If these modern theories reflect a Christian epistemology and ontology, which, if the hypothesis is true would be the case – so be it. My interpretation of them may of course be biased, but for the moment, this is the only way I can see to proceed. Not specifically to analyse the veracity or validity of these models, but rather to use them as a lens in which to assess our hypotheses.
The first step towards this will be to test our hypothesis against the identified literature; that is, drawing from them what they say about our study and their potential challenge or support for the hypothesis, and any other insights, signposts and markers for further investigation and analysis in the research body. This will reveal the dimensions and categories of our study, as well as document evidence for and against our hypothesis.
The next step will be to assess these dimensions and categories through the modern theories of change and agency. To support he hypothesis, I will need to show that essential components of transformation and associated agency effects are missing from the Greek world, but are present in the early Christian communities. Furthermore, I will need documented evidence for agency and development arising out of the Judeo-Christian worldview.
One possible conclusion of this research would be that agency could not have arisen from a mere cognitive or intellectual assent to an alternative cosmology and anthropology. Rather, it could only have arisen from a formative environment and complex interplay between narrative, relationships, empathy, trust, orientation to the other, and diverse gifts in service of the community. The research would need to demonstrate these traits as distinctive of the early Christian community.
[1] Iain Provan, Seriously Dangerous Religion: What the Old Testament Really Says and Why It Matters (Waco, UNITED STATES: Baylor University Press, 2014)
[2] Ibid., secs. 5278, 5856.
[3] Iain McGilchrist, The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World, 1 edition. (New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press, 2012).
[4] These two axioms, in relation to the criteria for judging between religions, are: “The first is that in relation to the increased specificity of an alleged neutral proposal its neutrality diminishes. The second is that in relation to the decreased specificity of an alleged neutral proposal its usefulness diminishes.”
[5] I am aware that applying these theories to the classical world is anachronistic. Therefore, care needs to be taken to understand the classical world on its own terms in this approach.