Warning: include(/home/nascent/public_html/wp-content/themes/organic_structure/sidebar_left.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/nascent/public_html/wp-content/themes/organic_structure/tag.php on line 5

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/nascent/public_html/wp-content/themes/organic_structure/sidebar_left.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php') in /home/nascent/public_html/wp-content/themes/organic_structure/tag.php on line 5

Questions, more questions…

So, tonight I was going to write a post on why we find it so easy to write on hell, and so dif­fi­cult to write on heaven (with the help of C.S. Lewis). How­ever, I became entan­gled in a ques­tion which has cap­tured my inter­est, and for the last few hours I’ve been seek­ing an answer. The ques­tion I’ve been con­sid­er­ing goes some­thing like this: what do you do with a teacher (or a leader) who per­son­ally affirms the foun­da­tion of the Chris­t­ian gospel, but simul­ta­ne­ously ques­tions and implies that this foun­da­tion is in some way not essen­tial. What do you do with a teacher who affirms the “essen­tials,” but teaches that they aren’t essen­tial? Now per­haps I’ve answered the ques­tion in the phras­ing (If they don’t believe the essen­tials are essen­tial, then they don’t believe all the essen­tials!), but there are a lot of ques­tions in this that I’d … (Read more)

People who hate questions

I’ve always known that there was a cer­tain — and most assuredly, unrea­son­able — offense in ask­ing ques­tions. Not so much that the ques­tion itself was bad. I cer­tainly don’t want to say that at all, there is much good in questions–much to learn. Socrates, I think, was right for the most part, “the unex­am­ined life is not worth liv­ing”. And it is here that we find our prob­lem, and also the answer to why so many peo­ple find ques­tions offen­sive: they don’t exam­ine any­thing, least of all “their life”. I’ve come across a great major­ity of peo­ple who don’t know why they believe what they say they believe. They’ve never con­sid­ered the “great ques­tions” (I don’t think many mod­erns do) and if they do, they don’t get very far. They spend far too much time read­ing recent books filled with pop-psychology and second-rate philo­soph­i­cal dis­courses (if you can even … (Read more)

Unable to Prepare for the Journey?

TRUTH
It’s an Adven­ture, Not an Axiom.
A Story Unfold­ing, Not a Tale Already Told.
The Jour­ney Counts, Not the Destination.

Right?

I came across this col­lec­tion of (emer­gent) catch­phrases dur­ing a forum dis­cus­sion which hap­pened this past week­end. There is a visual which goes along with it, which you can find here. The visual itself is, I think, self-evidently bril­liant (I highly rec­om­mend you look at the visual). The atti­tude towards truth that these catch-phrases con­vey is one I can never seem to take seri­ously. If I have a desire, or a thirst, to know the truth, then it seems to me obvi­ous that my ulti­mate end is the des­ti­na­tion. For how can we truly be pre­pared for the jour­ney when we neglect the fact of where we’re going, or hope to be going ? It’s a casual atti­tude, fatally flawed.… (Read more)

Truth as a symptom

“The pre­oc­cu­pa­tion with ‘truth’ among emer­gents has often been pushed on them by their con­ser­v­a­tive crit­ics, pri­mar­ily because truth is a cen­tral con­cern of theirs. And their pre­oc­cu­pa­tion with truth is a symp­tom of their mod­ernism. They want the Bible to be unswerv­ingly fac­tual (here, truth equals fact), for if it is, then its claims about eter­nal sal­va­tion can­not be ignored. So they pub­lish books against emer­gents titled Truth and the New Kind of Chris­t­ian and The Truth War, and blogs exco­ri­ate the emer­gents on the issue of truth.“[1]

The above comes from Tony Jones book The New Chris­tians: Dis­patches from the Emer­gent Fron­tier. What Jones says wor­ries me, not least because this is yet another blog ‘exco­ri­at­ing’ him and by prox­im­ity emer­gent Chris­tians on the truth question.

Al Mohler, in dis­cussing the role truth plays within the emer­gent church, has warned that, “if you get the truth … (Read more)

Response to Postmodern Biblical Authority

derrida_with_pipe

Kurt Willems wrote an arti­cle on theooze.com regard­ing post­mod­ern bib­li­cal author­ity, this is some­thing of a response.

In his arti­cle, Willems exam­ines the decon­struc­tion­ist philoso­phies of Jacques Der­rida and Jean-Francois Lyotard and from this, attempts to show that within a post­mod­ern frame­work, the Bible can be viewed as author­i­ta­tive. Willems sug­gests we can claim an author­i­ta­tive view of the Bible as the Bible is not a meta-narrative in the mod­ern sense, but a col­lec­tion of smaller sto­ries.1 “Post­mod­ernists are suspicious of meta-narratives, but highly value the ‘small sto­ries.’ Your story mat­ters; my story mat­ters. The mod­ern meta-narrative of progress has turned out to be a lie, but the ‘small sto­ries’ are what is real in daily life.2

Willems begins by dis­cussing Derrida’s famous phrase, “there is noth­ing out­side the text”.3 He explains this mantra with the words of James K.A. Smith:

“Thus, just before mak­ing his famous … (Read more)

Truth and unbelief

John 8:45
But because I say the truth, ye believe me not.

I fig­ure more could be said about the verse above (the words of Jesus). Jesus isn’t speak­ing these words with­out author­ity (although I say the truth, ye believe me not), as if to say them with a hint of res­ig­na­tion (I’m assert­ing one truth of many pro­posed truths, none any bet­ter than the other that we could know). Jesus is speak­ing strongly, but because I say the truth, regard­less and in the face of his opposition.

If there are those who will not hear the truth after hear­ing it plainly, how much more for those who aren’t given the truth? It is a dan­ger­ous thing, equal­iz­ing Chris­tian­ity, turn­ing into a reli­gion for moral­ists and human­ists. Truth divides and the Gospel is offen­sive. How could any Chris­t­ian imag­ine them­selves enough of an author­ity to dimin­ish the truth of the … (Read more)

Fight fire with fire?

The sur­vival of the church is depen­dent upon the abil­ity of the church to engage in and relate to the soci­ety and cul­ture it finds itself in, regard­less of the soci­ety and cul­ture it finds itself in. The dan­ger is when church lead­ers pro­pose we become like soci­ety to engage in and become rel­e­vant to and impact­ing of soci­ety. In this we have taken the first step towards com­pro­mise and the unique voice of the church within the world dis­ap­pears. This, of course, being a dif­fer­ent approach than under­stand­ing soci­ety and engag­ing soci­ety where it stands with­out adopt­ing, nec­es­sar­ily, the pre­sup­po­si­tions of soci­ety. In this we under­stand there is a dif­fer­ence between under­stand­ing soci­ety, engag­ing with soci­ety and main­tain­ing the unique voice of the church and under­stand­ing soci­ety, becom­ing like soci­ety and los­ing the unique voice of the church. Para­dox­i­cally, the more rel­e­vant one wishes to become the less rel­e­vant … (Read more)

It’s spiritual, who cares about God?

It’s not meant to be a Chris­t­ian book any­way, its a spir­i­tu­al­ity book so who cares if its wrong about God, that’s not the point about it! Chris­tians can learn a lot from read­ing stuff about other aspects of spirituality…Open your minds people!

This was the sen­ti­ment I encoun­tered while dis­cussing the book The Shack with a few acquain­tances, well, more ‘friends of a friend of mine’. As far as I’m aware they are all pro­fess­ing Chris­tians which leaves me won­der­ing: what are they think­ing? Keep­ing in mind a Chris­t­ian world view and all that this entails, is it even pos­si­ble to cre­ate a dis­tinc­tion between ‘spir­i­tu­al­ity’ and ‘God’ and dis­cuss one with­out it impact­ing the other? I would haz­ard a guess and say no, not that I agree with the view that The Shack is a ‘spir­i­tu­al­ity book’ and not con­cerned with God.

Not that this is intended as … (Read more)