comm 494 - ethical credo

8/3/2019 COMM 494 - Ethical Credo

1/8

Adam Behnke

COMM 494

Dr. Kenneth Chase

21 November 2011

Ethical Credo

All life, breath, thought, relationship, and communication is possible only in and through

the Word, Jesus Christ. This reality must flavor all communication. If we forget all things have

been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold

together (Col. 1:16b-17, NIV), we implicitly come to believe words and meaning originate from

us, and, we subsequently use our communication practices to serve ourselves. Not everyone

needs to think of ethical communication in as broad and sweeping a manner as this, but it is

extremely helpful and pertinent for me. The following ethical credo weaves deep truths and

specifics together in hopes of producing a communication guide rooted in a need for Gods

presence and the truth only found in the Word, Jesus Christ.

Genesis implicitly tells of the relationships between God and creation, more specifically

God and humans, humans and the rest of creation, and humans with other humans. The purpose

and character of communication as God intended it is especially poignant from the beginning,

and these chapters inform my first formative belief.

One: My communication stems from the Word and I am free to name the outside world because

of the imprint of the Word on me. God spoke and created everything, He made me to use my

words to create and give the outside world its being, but this work is as it should be only while in

the fullness of His presence and at least another person.

Behnke 1


2/8

All of Gods speech is and has an effect in and through Jesus Christ, the Word: In the

beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (John 1:1).

Therefore, when the earth was formless and empty, God with and as the Word spoke light,

animals, humans, and life itself into existence over the course of six days. Interspersed in here,

the first few chapters of Genesis explain the conditions of communication as God intended it.

Unlike everything else, humans carry part of the Words nature in them -- God created

man in his own image (Gen. 1:27). God placed Adam as caretaker in the Garden of Eden and

Adam named all the animals. This action was not simply something Adam wanted to do: [God]

brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each

living creature, that was its name (Gen. 2: 19). God initiates the confirmation of the image of

Himself in Adam when He brings the animals to Adam. Just as Gods speech brought being into

that which was formless and empty, Adams naming of the animals defines and controls their

existence (Ellul, 1985; Schuchardt, 2010). Genesis 3:8 talks of Adam and Eve hearing God walk

in the garden, and the reader gets a sense that while they were in the Garden of Eden, God was

near them in the same way Jesus was physically and humanly near His disciples. Out of this

close presence, Adam freely uses his speech and words as the man who has dominion over all the

earth and the animals. God sets Adam the human over and above everything else, and Adams

relationship with all of creation is full and perfect when in the presence of God.

Curiously, even in the fullness of His own presence, God saw the need for Adam to have

another, a woman to accompany and be Adams helper. This is the second major descriptor of

Adams life before the Fall. . God observes Adam in and around his work, remarks, It is not

good for man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him (Gen. 2:18), and makes a

Behnke 2


3/8

woman out of Adams rib. In his apparent happiness, Adam names the woman, and the text says,

The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame (Gen. 2:25). These are the last

words to describe the interesting life in the Garden of Eden before Eves conversation with the

serpent and Adam and Eves bites from the fruit of that fatal tree. In the beginning, God made

Adam to name and define the world and God sees that is good for him to be with at least one

other person.

My second I-believe statement is rooted in the Fall, Adam and Eves first sin against

their friend and Creator. It is man and woman -- not animals, plants, mountains, light, or any

other creations -- that jar the world out of dynamic equilibrium with God and itself. The primary

characteristic of Adam in the first few chapters that delineates him from the rest of creation is his

ability to speak in the way God speaks. Humans are not superior to animals because of their

appearance; just like animals, they are not ashamed of their nakedness, and this is an indicator of

the rightness of that time. The image of God in them was enacted through their ability to

communicate on a higher level than any other of Gods creations. Further, Adam and Eves

dominion over the earth and their rebellion against God is only possible through this ability to

speak, name, and communicate (Ellul, 1985; Schuchardt, 2010). As they eat the fruit and

become aware of their own nakedness, the second fundamental truth about communication

comes into view:

Two: Through my communication I can either define existence towards full and God-guided life

or towards brokenness and me-controlled death. The former happens when I am filled with

Gods presence, but the latter happens when I establish myself independently and outside Gods

presence and desires.

Behnke 3


4/8

While Adam was naming the animals, it was as if God looked fondly and eagerly over his

shoulder. It is interesting to note that God is not immediately present in this way while Eve

speaks with the serpent, eats the fruit, and gives some to her husband. This is not prompted by

God nor do Adam and Eve eat under Gods delighted supervision. The result of this prideful and

disconnected action is Gods wrath on the entire world. Adam and Eves sin -- not an animals or

the seas or a trees sin -- caused the earth to run off-kilter. Their rule of the world was perfect

and good and formative when they were intimately connected and responsive to Gods

prompting, but when they acted on what they they independently wanted, everything changed.

Adam and Eve became ashamed of their nakedness while with each other, woman experienced

excruciating pain in childbirth, and man struggled to cultivate and rule the earth. The initial

perfect relationship between God and man changed to less direct means; God does not assume as

recognizably near a relationship to humans as in Genesis 1 and 2 and the human heart is altered

by the knowledge of good and evil.

Is a reading of Genesis in this way depressing or hopeful? How then shall we live, if the

immediately recognizable presence of God regular to Adam and Eve is gone? If God no longer

participates in our lives like He did with Adam and Eve in the Garden, how can our

communication fulfill its function to define the world towards God-guided life? A quick look at

some distinctives of Jesus Christs life as told in the Gospel of Luke reveals strikingly similar

characteristics to the chapters in Genesis. Though it is tricky and a mystery but Jesus spent

immense amounts of time in prayer with God. Whether simply doing it as a model for us or

because He truly needed it, Jesus Christ sought out the presence of God in prayer routinely

(Wilhoit, 2010). The fully-God and fully-man Jesus Christ went into the desert for 40 days, He

Behnke 4


5/8

often sought out solitary places, He prayed all night before He chose the twelve disciples, He

took some disciples with Him to pray on a mountainside, He prayed fervently in the Garden of

Gethsemane. Even for the perfect man and savior, the principle is the same as it was in the

beginning: communion with God is the wellspring of life. Jesus is prime example of one of the

largest themes in the Bible: humans praying to God and seeking Gods presence because that was

the most direct and poignant loss in the Fall. All of this forms my third fundamental principle:

Three: Gods presence is still the wellspring of life. If Jesus oriented His life around prayer and

the presence of the Father, than I definitely need to develop and maintain a habit and desire to

pray and be in the presence of God.

In life now, post-Fall and post-the death and resurrection of the Word Jesus Christ, our

status to the Father is righteousness through the blood of Jesus Christ, who is putting us through

the process of sanctification. We have sinned and are guilty to a holy God, but His Sons life,

death, and resurrection allows us to be righteous before Him. Though we were and are

responsible for the Fall in Adam and Eve, the purpose of our lives and communication remains

the same. As N.T. Wright reminds us, The abuse of Human Authority, then, doesnt abolish its

proper use. It doesnt cancel out the vocation (2010, p. 75). This presents a grand tension or

divine comedy, as Chesterton and Buechner routinely calls it.

There are a couple different phrasings that I find helpful to tease out the exact nature of

how we fulfill our vocation as image-bearers now, in a much different, complex, and comedic

world. To tweak Parker Palmers thesis from To Know As We Are Known (1993)and combine it

with Bonhoeffers concept of spiritual versus human love inLife Together(1954), here is the

fourth fundamental principle:

Behnke 5


6/8

Four:God calls us to the deeper work of creating a space in which the community of truth is

practiced and to the hard work of meeting others with the love of Christ rather than the love we

can muster up from ourselves.

Seemingly inherent in the crop of humans on the earth -- or at least around me -- is a

frustration at not being able to feel Gods presence or hear His voice. So much has muddled the

perception and the way we live: various devices, business, the absurd amount of information we

consume, etc. The words of God rarely reach our ears or our minds clearly and unencumbered.

Much is disjointed and communally we sin against God through the ways we treat the

environment, entire people groups, and whole segments of Gods creation. To counteract these

holistic issues, we need active openness and a pursuit of deep relationship inside our complicated

and fragmented lives. When we take part in silence, listening, vulnerability, and this deep

relationship, we develop the I-Thou relationship that Martin Buber speaks of and many others

elaborate on. When we allow something to take us and we receive are are affected by that

something, our broken relationships begin to mend and the channel towards Gods voice and

presence starts to unclog. This takes time and can only come through the reality that any and all

truth and restoration comes through God and His divine Word (Palmer, 1993).

Although we may believe we know what is best for others, if it is not rooted in what

Gods will is for them, it is an offspring of independence, selfishness, and control. In our

communication with others, our desires for them will dictate how we treat them. If we truly

want what God wants for them, Bonhoeffer suggests our love and communication will not be

human, but spiritual love:

Behnke 6


7/8

This spiritual love will speak to Christ about a brother more than to a brother aboutChrist. It knows that the most direct way to others is always through prayer to Christ andthat love of others is wholly dependent upon the truth in Christ. (1954, p. 36-37)

Because she wants for the other what Christ wants for other, she prays to God for the other. This

is perhaps the most challenging two sentences I have encountered, because it directly embraces

the reality of our need for Gods presence as the only source of truth, relationship, life, and love.

It pronounces the goal and climax of this credo for me and challenges my future communication.

This credo has focused less on specific communication practices and more on where

virtue, ethics, and right communication come from. My past demands this approach of me in the

present because I have experienced the truth of, For out of the overflow of his heart, his mouth

speaks (Luke 6:45). Regardless of specific surface rules, if my heart is independent of God

when I communicate, He does not receive glory, I take part in the Fall once again, and my

communication fails. As this credo is to guide my future communication, I only want it to lead

me towards towards being deeper rooted and built up in Christ Jesus (Col. 2:7). I want it to

lead me to Gods presence and only from there towards full and God-guided communication.

Any other ultimate goal is rubbish and leads to my and others destruction. In concert with the

way N.T. Wright explores Christian virtue, I hope this ethical credo melds the truth of Gods

creation and salvation narrative into my communication for His glory, no matter the location or

vocation. To quote Wright, who paraphrases Jesus Christ: we are to seek first Gods kingdom

and his justice and then everything else will fall into place (2010, p. 70).

Behnke 7


8/8

Reference List:

Bonhoeffer, D. (1954).Life together(1st ed.). New York: HarperOne.

Ellul, J. (1985). The humiliation of the word. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Palmer, P. J. (1993). To know as we are known: education as a spiritual journey. San Francisco:

HarperSanFrancisco.

Schuchardt, R. (Professor) (2010, Spring). The word and the image of God . Media, Religion,

and Society. Lecture conducted from Wheaton College, Wheaton.

Wilhoit, J. (Professor) (2010, Fall). An examination and study of Jesus' prayer time in the gospel

of Luke. Christian Spiritual Practices. Reading and activity conducted from Wheaton

College, Wheaton.

Wright, N. T. (2010).After you believe: why Christian character matters. New York, NY:

HarperOne.

Behnke 8

comm 494 - ethical credo

Documents