Posts Tagged ‘McLaren’

Beautiful Ambiguity

Posted October 3, 2009 by Charles
0

I wonder if God left us the ambiguity of John 3:16 — that is, whether they are the words of John or Jesus — as a gift. It would be a strange gift, but God does that from time to time. It’s a strange gift that I love my son even when he is blatantly disobedient. It’s a strange gift that my wife puts up with me day after day. The platypus. That’s a strange gift.

The ambiguity of this verse reminds us that it doesn’t matter if the words are black- or red-letter, they are still the truth. The red-letter movement of McLaren and others has always bothered me because of just this problem. They have decided that the words of John, Peter, and Paul are less important than the words of Jesus. But all Scripture is God breathed—wait, Paul wrote that, it doesn’t matter.

Not knowing who said it is much more valuable to us in our approach to the Bible than knowing would be, because we are forced to admit that those black letters are important to, and that if we leave them out, we don’t have the Gospel.

Five Theological Turnings, 2

Posted December 2, 2008 by Charles
0

I finished the second McLaren session from the ACU Lectureship, and he was again fairly interesting in his diagnosis of a number of problems within the church, but his read on them exposes some antipathy to conservative viewpoints.

He talks some about atonement, and describes penal-substitution this way: “God needs to destroy us and torture us forever in Hell. And God can’t vent God’s anger unless there is someone to vent the anger on. And so God decides to send his son…and God vents his wrath on Jesus instead of venting his wrath on all of us.” He immediatel admits that his didn’t describe it “gracefully”, but that he was “being very crude”.  But that doesn’t wash off the uncharitible, and truly misleading explanation of penal-substitution. He just left it there, and moved on.

He was quite generous to the other three atonement theories he described…none other got this type of treatment, so his disdain for it is clear, if you’re listening.

One of the things that bothers me, aside from this type of thing (which he does several times), is that one of his major points is that a problem we suffer from is trying to fit all of God, Jesus, and the Gospel into one metaphor.  But his decision is that all the metaphors are bad, and we need a new one, rather than using these metaphors like Jesus’ parables: all are true and descriptive, but none is all encompassing.  Read more

Five Theological Turnings, 1

Posted December 1, 2008 by Charles
0

I wrote a while back about Brian McLaren speaking at a conference at my alma mater. Today I’m listening to his first session, called “Five Theological Turnings” (1 of 2). I’ll be posting my thoughts here as I listen.

So far he’s said a lot I agree with about the problems with the church as it stands today, and has stood for the last hundred years. His comments about paradigm shifts, and the need to recognize that there is no single Biblical worldview or correct human perspective, are very true and important to acknowledge. He also cites Barth in saying that theology is not something reserved for a small group of academics.

He’s bothering me a bit, because, while he’s not  adding anything to the discussion, the way he describes situations, and characterizes people’s beliefs – he claims some believe God “created the world, then hated it, and can’t wait to destroy it so he can suck all our souls up to heaven”, and that those who believe that the Father is above the Son or the two are above the Spirit will go around saying that women are superior to men or that their race is superior to others – in a way that just doesn’t gel with the concept of a “generous” anything, let alone orthodoxy.

We’ll see where he goes from here.

————————————–

Segment one was quite interesting. A lot of strong ideas about the breakdown of modernity, not in the form of deconstruction, or an eschwing of concrete truth, but in the form of worldview shifts.

At one point he talks about the discovery of subatomic particles, and the idea that if you start looking at things that are small enough, there’s nothing there; that everything we call matter is “a distortion in the fabric of space and time”.  Much like the idea that in any “solid” object there is more space than matter, if you look closely enough.

“In the beginning was the word.”

What is the word? In human terms it’s a vibration…a distortion and an interruption in the normal pattern with a meaningful purpose.

He also talked about meeting with a group of Kenyan yuppies (young urban proffesionals, for those who don’t know), one of whom mentioned that she’s the only one in her office who goes to church.  The others call themselves athiests and agnostics. She says they “are not athiests”, they’ve “just rejected the God of Kenyan Pentacostalism.”  That is so true.  So many times I find myself arguing talking in a reasonable and measured tone with people who are angry at a god that I don’t recognize, and is certainly not the one I find in Scripture.

Part two is next. He hasn’t added anything to the discussion, but only described some situations and cited others.  I’m interested in his own ideas.

B-Mac at ACU

Posted August 31, 2008 by Charles
2

I’m contemplating heading down to Abilene in a few weeks for Lectureship, since I have some vacation days available (it’d be short notice for my boss, so I don’t know if it’s possible at this point).  I checked the speaker list today to see who would be there, and I found the name of my favorite writer and preacher: Brian McLaren.

Right now I’m not sure what to think.  I’ve resolved (more than once) over the last year to dig a little deeper into McLaren’s beliefs than the blurbs, blog postings, and sound bites I’ve typically seen.  I do remember actually liking More Ready Than You Realize.  So I bought A Generous Orthodoxy, and I’ve tried to listen to some lectures/sermons, with my mind as open as possible. Read more

Brian McLaren’s Bad Logic

Posted August 16, 2008 by Charles
0
"How do I get elected with only one voter?"

"How can I win with just one voter?"

Some subpar reasoning from one of the prominent leaders of Emergent and progressive evangelicalism:

“I’ve only met one person in my travels in recent months who has said he is voting for McCain, and that was because he was an admittedly single-issue voter,” Mr. McLaren said. “Nearly all the vocal people I’ve met are enthusiastic about Obama. Based on the people I’m in front of as a speaker, I’d never guess the poll numbers are as close as they are.”

This is a pretty limited perspective. It would be like me saying, “I’ve only met two people in all my travels who were actually born in China.  Based on the people I talk to, I’d never guess there were a billion Chinese people walkin’ around.” Unfortunately for me, there are, in fact, a billion Chinese people.  And unfortunately for Mr. McLaren:

While national polls show Mr. McCain to be neck and neck with Mr. Obama, a survey from the authoritative Barna Group shows that Mr. McCain holds a commanding lead among evangelicals, with 61 percent to Mr. Obama’s 17 percent.

I find it hard to believe that he thinks he’s speaking in front of a representative sample of evangelicals.

Washington Times via Between Two Worlds

Power of Suggestion is proudly powered by WordPress.org and whiteboard

© Charles Jones 2006-2009 // pos51.org