20050330

and they claim love :)

i have been reading and getting emails about this on going debate between mohler and mclaren. it is amazing to me how much the "mohler camp" twists what brain has to say, and takes a great deal of his voice out of context. sure, i nkw brian is a big boy and can handle the heat - and most of us are and can do the same. yet what i find hurtful is that the "leaders" of the sbc are so mean spirited, so angry, so out of touch with the world around them that they are missing the opportunity to be involved in the conversation. it is their call, and they can be in or out - i would never tell them they "must be involved." let me give a few of the points i find that the mohler camp is missing the point on:

they claim we are "painfully reductionistic:" oh, if that were only the case, life would be so much easier. i know of no one in the emerging conversation that holds to a reductive view of the world - in fact, i would say that we see things in multi-layers and shades of many colors. to think that anything in this world can be simple or "one sided." - we do not hold to a simplistic "dualism" that says "yes or no."

we are seeking to redefine christianity for a new age: yup, i agree with that one, we are. but what is the difference between what we are doing and what luther did? what calvin did? what wesely did? what brown did? did they not "redefine christianty for a new age?" over the past, this "redefining" has been the cause of the birth of denominations - today, in our post-denominstional world, this "redefining" gives birth to expressions of the faith that are dynamic, exciting and meaningful to a new people.

we refuse to answer "the hard questions:" not at all, but the answers are just not to the liking of some. i am willing to answer any questions placed before me, but that does not mean you will like the answer.

we are unwilling to proclaim a truth: this on is so old, it's funny that they are sill on this - and it seems that no matter how we answer it, they are un happy - so, it is best lot answered :)

for me, i am of the mind that for the conversation to move forward, and to trul be emerging we need to truly and openly be able to quesion everything, and the "mohler camp" would rahter we just accept their views and never question. they would rather we just "accept things the way they are" and strive to "fit in" with what they offer - but i think to truly be emerging we need to examoke what we do, how we do it, and what we believe - we need to be willing to open and exmaine our methology, philosophy and theology - if not, we will never meet the hearts of those we claim we follow - it is easy to say we are radical, but it takes the courage to truly be radical.

1 comment:

partial observer said...

John - My personal favorite is the claim that there is a "rejection of historic christianity". By which they mean of course the protestantism of the last sixty years or so.