marriage equality

“I am not willing to choose one small part of the Biblical narrative that fits my political or cultural outlook to defend or defeat marriage equality”

false assumptions

Generalisations say, ‘I don’t care enough about you to get to know who you really are.’ By colouring others with our own tainted colour-coded system, we can categorise them in such a way that justifies ignoring them, devaluing them, and not listening to their ideas and perspectives.

emergent christianity

The following is in response to questions I have been asked as to a definition of the Emergent Church. It has been adapted from information found in many places on the internet now, but originally from Scot McNight, a professor at North Park University, Chicago. See his blog at: http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/

Dr. McKnight identifies eight characteristics of the emerging church. In condensed form I am sharing his observations:

First, emergents cannot accept the idea of Bible inerrancy. Verbal inerrancy will not stand modern critical examination in the study of languages. To assign fixed inerrancy to ancient documents written in the Hebrew and Greek used thousands of years ago stretches credibility.

Second, emergents have come to believe that the gospel that they have been taught is a caricature of the message of Jesus, rather than the real thing. Increasingly they are putting other Biblical writings in the background and have shown increasing interest in what Jesus said and did.

They ask “If we are followers of Jesus, why do we not live and preach his message?” In short, they are looking for a much more radical Christianity than they have found in the Evangelical (and mainline) churches.

Third, exposure to science in public education, universities and personal studies has led emergents to disown the conclusion that when the Bible and science appear to collide, science must take a back seat to the Bible.

In this conflict, emergents are not abandoning the Bible, but are raising critical questions about the Bible’s nature and content. This new bread of Christian remains quite committed to the Bible but they are very open to new ideas and understandings.

Fourth, emergents have become disillusioned by the clay feet of church leadership. It is not just the Jim Bakkers and the Jimmy Swaggarts, but the rank and file of church leadership.

Emergents compare what Jesus had in mind and what is going on in churches, and they see a need to start over. They want a fresh start with serious intent to follow Jesus.

Fifth, our public schools and our nation in general are insisting that we be truly multicultural. The churches’ teaching, that people not like us, are doomed, is not acceptable to emergents. They want a much broader definition of what it means to be accepted in the family of God.

Sixth, emergents are insisting that God be understood as totally gracious and loving. The angry, vengeful God that is sometime presented in both Old and New Testaments is not acceptable.

Seventh, acceptance of homosexuals in the family of God is common. Being pro-gay or anti-gay is not the issue. Emergents recognize that sexuality is far more complex than is generally recognized. To live in harmony with gay and lesbian friends and family members is a part of the emergent’s perspective.

Eighth, echoing the first named characteristic, emergents recognize the role that language plays in their understanding and practice of the Christian Faith. Theology is language bound. Language is a limited tool of communication.

If theology is language bound, it is also culturally shaped. To be rigidly exclusive does not make sense to emergent Christians.

While these characteristics may or not apply to any or all those who claim to be part of the Emergent Church (or Emergent, or Emerging Christianity, etc.), they are regarded by many as the distinguishing marks of the majority.

Personally, I would call myself ‘Emerging.’ I lean towards emergent theology in many ways but I’m still studying, learning, and growing–I’m in the process of emerging from the Christianity I once knew into the Christianity I believe is more real, honest, and closely aligned to the original intent of the Biblical text.

not another one!

It’s kinda like the BBC’s ‘Ladette to Lady’ approach to Christianity, huh? “You must have PROPER Christian behaviour now. None of that eMERgence stuff will do. You are a REAL Christian, remember?”

condescension

Their simple syllogism aside, it is obvious that I know nothing of Biblical theology and they are sorry about the fact that my reasoning isn’t in line with their evidently superior understanding of Scripture.

response: loving gays

By the way, When was the last time you put someone to death for partaking in an act of homosexuality? After all, if you claim these verses are written to us and speak truth for today, then you must, by reason, believe all of it applies. Huh?

schizophrenic god

Sitting in church today and it struck me how the pastor spoke about God being an avenging, wrathful being and Jesus being loving and begging God for mercy on our behalf. Is this Divine schizophrenia?

conflicted

I’m conflicted.

I have a yesterday where I was taught to believe a set of doctrines and to do certain things with regard to faith and life.

I have a now where I question many of those teachings and practices and where I am learning a new way of seeing faith and experiencing life.

Yet (and here’s the conflict) a lot of my thoughts and deeds are dictated by an sub-conscious, ingrained way of thinking which I have an extremely difficult time shedding in favour of a new understanding into which I have grown the past 5-6 years.

For example, I know deep inside my motivation to attend church each week comes from my childhood when my parents demanded we attend Sunday morning, evening, and Wednesday night as often as a service was held—even though many times the only congregation was our family. Today I will give verbal assent to the belief that I do not need to be in a certain building or with a certain group of people at a certain time in the week in order to worship God, but I am still compelled to be ‘at church’ every Sunday. This also carries over into my involvement in church ministry. I have always had something to do, been rostered on some activity or in some role every week as far back as I can remember. And even though, lately, I have relaxed and made sure I have some Sundays free to do other things with the family, there is a nagging feeling inside of me that I ‘should’ be doing something or ‘ought to’ have some input in the church service.

I was reading YSMarko’s (http://www.ysmarko.com) last blog this morning. It’s his last because he’s rethought his life and priorities and realised the season for busy-ness is passing and it’s now time to invest in his closer relationships. No more blog. No more Facebook. No more Twitter. No more long-distance travel.

I admire that.

I applaud a person who knows when to say ‘Enough.’ Possibly because that is a difficulty I face every day.

Specifically, I need to have the courage to say ‘Enough’ to my past and draw a line where living by unsound paradigm is no longer an option. I need strength to say ‘No’ more often. ‘No, I can’t do that shift.’ ‘No, I can’t be on that roster.’ ‘No, I can’t be involved in that service.’ And I need the wisdom to say ‘Yes’ to some more important things: ‘Yes, I will go to your game.’ ‘Yes, I will be home right after work.’ ‘Yes, please come over tonight and we’ll have a coffee and chat.’

And I know there are many beliefs and ways of doing things that I need to rethink. Maybe while I’m saying ‘No,’ this would be a good time to declare, ‘No, I will no longer believe this is the right way of doing things,’ or ‘No, I will no longer stand on the side of old prejudices and restrictions.’

And while it’s getting easier to say ‘No’ to some things, I am still conflicted. Perhaps I will always be to some extent. I’m beginning to think that’s part of being human.

Yet, in my conflict, I look forward to tomorrow and the hope that one day I may have peace.

the inerrancy pillar

An acquaintance of mine just launched his new book which looks at the Genesis creation account hermaneutically, supposedly proving a literal 6-day creation through an analysis of the words in the Hebrew Old Testament.

I’ve read one chapter but not the whole book, yet. But of what I see and what I know about this person I can tell you his book is based on the premise that the Bible is inerrant, that is it is without error in its original manuscripts.

But where are the original manuscripts? None are available. How close are our present-day published copies to these originals? We can assume a figure based on the agreement of a majority of existing copies, but it it only an educated guess.

My problem with my friend’s work is not his beliefs–I have decided there is room for differing understanding regarding Genesis. (And we need difference in our theology so we can challenge each other’s thinking–iron sharpens iron.) It is his basic assumption that everyone reading his book accepts that the Bible texts we hold in our hands today are inerrant and, since they are inerrant, they are even today ‘the very words of God.’

A few years ago I would have agreed with his presupposition. Now I’m not so sure. I see a fair amount of well-researched work by prominent biblical scholars–evangelical, Catholic, and otherwise–that cause me to rethink much of what I once held as gospel truth. (Is the Bible the ‘word of God,’ ‘the ‘words of God,’ the ‘message of God,’ or the ‘words of men’?) So when I see his book on Amazon, I cringe because I know many will be drawn into his arguments since they cannot refute his foundational premise.

I have a long way to go before I will be 100% certain of anything I presently believe. But at least I think I’m being honest in my study and try not to assume anything. I hope my friend will open up his mind to explore more possibilities than the narrow selection on offer.

we’re not guys like them!

Intersting blog on BaptEmergent blog about Jesus and the Pharisees. Thanks, guys, for reminding me who I am often. http://is.gd/yYqw