Affiliation:
1. Cipanas Theological Seminary, Cipanas, West Java, Indonesia.
2. Department of Christian Religious Education, Christian University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Abstract
Few spiritual, philosophical, and theological concepts concerning the economy have emerged especially since the Middle Age. One of them centred on the Trinitarian God concept. The concept proposes mutuality, relationship, and unity based on love and grace as shared spiritual values. The question that arises is how to educate people in applying it. This study explores whether the Dakon game, a traditional game mainly used in Java, Indonesia can be used as a learning method to apply that theological concept and their spiritual values to economic concepts and practices. The study method is literature research. The finding shows that the Dakon game causes the players to acquire a tacit knowledge that includes skills, values, and spirituality obtained through the practices of distributing wealth, sensitivity to others, and unity combined with achieving economic objectives. Although various challenges in the Indonesian context need further study, the finding can contribute to the praxis of applying spiritual values to economic praxis in Indonesia.
Keywords: Trinitarian God Concept, spirituality, peace, economy, tacit knowledge, education.
Reference29 articles.
1. Birdsall, Nancy. ‘The World Is Not Flat: Inequality and Injustice In Our Global Economy,’
2. WIDER Annual Lecture 009, Helsinki: UNU-WIDER, 2006.
3. Bull, Paul B. ‘The Economics of the Kingdom of God,’ 8 May 2018. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203705339.
4. Chandra, Robby Igusti and Kristianto, Victor. Koinomics: An Indonesian Framework of Transformative Theological Education Based on Perichoresis in OCRPL Conference 2021. Accessed 16 April 2021. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/347488150_Koinomics_An_Indonesian_Framework_of_Transformative_Theological_Education_based_on_Perichoresis_OCRPL_Conference.
5. Cunningham, DS. ‘Participation as a Trinitarian Virtue: Challenging the Current ‘Relational Consensus’. Toronto Journal of Theology 14/1 (1998): 7–25.