Godscrum: Episode 14 is Live
Yes, Episode 14 is live! Brian McLaren, Enron, and those annoying Reformed types on their mound of truth--can you handle it? Truth-seeking and truth-telling in the post-congregational narrative (HT: Craig Bob). Thanks to Magnatune.com and Drop Trio for the groovy tunes.Stay tuned for the upcoming interview with Eric from Two World Collision, plus more Mrs. Zeke...
posted by Zeke @ 12:06 AM
8 Comments:
Right now, at this present time, there is a this voice speaking to me, and it sounds like YOU!
I am perplexed, or rather intrigued, by your idea of Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter. The reason I am so is because I do view Ann Coulter's way of expression as something that is actually needed within Christianity.
I'd also like to talk with you more about Reformed Theology.
Needless to say Adam, I couldn't disagree more that we need more Coulter-style polemic in Christianity. That's more heat than light. Sounds great to those that already agree, and like clanging gongs to everybody else.
We can talk about Reformed theology, but I'd rather talk about Reformed praxis. There's just something about Reformed theology that turns what are otherwise nice people into arrogant jerks.
The thing I wanted to simply point out is that you can't necessarily judge a doctrine or system of thought based upon the controversy or heat surrounding it.
In your podcast you said something about Reformed people constantly on the defensive. You made regards to the fact that they have constantly to defend themselves against those that are constantly attacking it.
But I couldn't help but see the parallel to Christianity. Christ said specifically that we will suffer persecution. The world does not necessarily agree with the major tenents of Christianity.
If we are going to judge Reformed teaching by the fact that it is constantly on the defense, shouldn't we likewise judge Christianity by the same standard?
You misunderstand me, Adam. My beef with Reformed types is that they appoint themselves defenders of the faith and busy themselves with defending against perceived assaults on the faith and doctrinal purity. They take "contending earnestly for the faith" like a call to arms, and all too often end up going postal on people like McLaren.
Perhaps so, but don't discredit the other. I can speak from experience that I needn't always look for a fight to find one. Simply expressing my views (God's election, predestination, limited atonement) are enough to raise up disagreement and people that try to attack my views.
But, I likewise find sites that I disagree with and attack them, so it is fifty-fifty.
Do you think that perhaps the reason so many reformed do in fact find ways to 'defend the faith' (the faith being reformed teaching) is because they believe it to be true?
I don't think apologetics or polemics is supposed to be entirely defensive in nature. Paul did say to cast down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the image of God. Therefore, if the Reformed Christian views a universal atonement (let us say) as something that is anti-Scriptural or that presents itself against 'the image of God', they naturally will pick up arms and wage a fight before the fight is brought to them...
How often do you do your podcasts?
Do you think that perhaps the reason so many reformed do in fact find ways to 'defend the faith' (the faith being reformed teaching) is because they believe it to be true?
Cynicism is not something I would assume of any believer, so of course I'm sure that Reformed believers are coming from a sincere place.
Paul did say to cast down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the image of God.
Too often, they employ slash-and-burn tactics and feel entirely justified in doing so. After all, if McLaren "exalts himself against the image of God," why not tear him a new orifice?
Go back to the Out of Ur blog and read it dispassionately, simply comparing the responses of McLaren and his supporters and those of his opponents with regard to how they treat each other. I've found that Emergent types are far more likely to handle themselves with aplomb, and critics (usually coming from a Reformed perspective) taking a lot of license in how hard they hammer their point home.
How often do you do your podcasts?
Used to be weekly, now it's when I have enough time and inspiration.
You can assume me to be cynical. I have no qualms with admitting that I am. I don't always see it as wrong, mostly, but not always.
Also, I did not read the entire discussion on 'Out of Ur'. I am speaking from experience that I have had in discussing with non-Calvinist, and in seeing non-Calvinist and Calvinist discuss. From my experience it has usually been the opposite. It has been the Reformed who are cool and level headed gentler people, with the non-Calvinist being emotionally driven and for the most part rude.
I have always assumed that it was because Reformed theology is so logical and concise, that its adherents are normally the logical type. The cool-headed kind of logicians. Whereas their opponents were normally the emotional ones.
But, we each have our experiences. Perhaps I should walk in your shoes a little and see your interactions with Reformed, and you in mine.
I can say though that I have never had any experience in a Reformed/emergent debate. Perhaps I should read 'out of ur' more often. I have found some new site (tallskinnykiwi), that I will be visiting more often.
Less politics, more religion.
On that note, I'd appreciate if you shared with me a list of blogs or sites that you visit frequently. You can email them if you find the time
sofyst@gmail.com
OK Adam, I'll think of you as a "high cynic" then rather than as a low one. After all, this is what Wikipedia has to say about cynicism:
Presently the word generally describes, somewhat pejoratively, the opinions of those inclined to disbelieve in human sincerity, in virtue, or in altruism: individuals who maintain that only self-interest motivates human behavior. A modern cynic typically has a highly contemptuous attitude towards social norms, especially those which serve more of a ritualistic purpose than a practical one, and will tend to dismiss a substantial proportion of popular beliefs, conventional morality and accepted wisdom as irrelevant or obsolete nonsense. Many cynics do not like the way the world really is, however, and wish it could be changed. They want to see the world for how it is (or how they perceive it to really be) rather than delude themselves.
I can certainly see how one who ascribes to Total Depravity would also be "inclined to disbelieve in human sincerity, in virtue, or in altruism". So I can see how one might be a cynic about the affairs of man and an optimist about God's ability to redeem them.
With regard to Out of Ur, it really is just a blog/discussion area for Leadership Today, and as such is broader-based, so I wouldn't read it thinking to get the Emergent perspective. For that matter, I wouldn't be an authority on where you should go to get "the" Emergent perspective... I have a few sites I visit, but they're by no means exhaustive.
But if you want an example of what I mean by my frustration with how uncharitable Reformed argument can be, see this guy's blog. He was prominent in my mind when I was talking on the podcast about how arrogant Reformed types can come across as. BTW, he's a former serviceman so I respect him for that much. Jollyblogger is more charitable, but he can be pretty snooty and dismissive at times too.
I'm due to update my blogroll; there's a few sites that I visit regularly that are not up there yet. I'll let you know when I bring that up to date.
Post a Comment
<< Home