Comments for Becoming Creation http://becomingcreation.org Exploring and promoting the scientific, theological and personal meaning of creation. Tue, 02 Feb 2010 06:16:28 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 Comment on Becoming Unwanted, Part 3 by Kevin Kramer http://becomingcreation.org/2009/12/becoming-unwanted-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-195 Kevin Kramer Tue, 02 Feb 2010 06:16:28 +0000 http://becomingcreation.org/?p=242#comment-195 Doug, I thank you for sharing your story. Unfortunately, I know several people with similar stories. As I read your <b>Becoming Unwanted</b> posts, I grieved for you and your family. I also grieve for the church, which should be a place where we <b>Are Wanted</b>. You state in your second conclusion/assumption that most Christians have an outdated view of epistemology. Is it also fair to say that most Christians have an outdated view of ecclesiology? Just as positivism affects the modern’s understanding of knowledge, does our culture equally affects our understanding of the church? Perhaps contemplating the following questions may help you answer your questions. What is the purpose of the church? What does it look like in our culture? Does the church's purpose and/or contextualization depend upon the individual's personality and history? I’ll attempt to answer my questions in the near future with a follow-up comment. For now, I will conclude with another question. Is the evangelical church obsessed with didacticism. Doug, I thank you for sharing your story. Unfortunately, I know several people with similar stories. As I read your Becoming Unwanted posts, I grieved for you and your family. I also grieve for the church, which should be a place where we Are Wanted.

You state in your second conclusion/assumption that most Christians have an outdated view of epistemology. Is it also fair to say that most Christians have an outdated view of ecclesiology? Just as positivism affects the modern’s understanding of knowledge, does our culture equally affects our understanding of the church?

Perhaps contemplating the following questions may help you answer your questions. What is the purpose of the church? What does it look like in our culture? Does the church’s purpose and/or contextualization depend upon the individual’s personality and history? I’ll attempt to answer my questions in the near future with a follow-up comment. For now, I will conclude with another question. Is the evangelical church obsessed with didacticism.

]]> Comment on Becoming Unwanted, Part 3 by steve martin http://becomingcreation.org/2009/12/becoming-unwanted-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-193 steve martin Fri, 01 Jan 2010 19:22:01 +0000 http://becomingcreation.org/?p=242#comment-193 Hi Doug, Happy New Year! Thanks for that summary. To really respond to this fully probably requires a long discussion over a coffee (or several dozen!) rather than brief comments on a blog. On your conclusions and assumptions, I’ll just say that my own list may be somewhat different but that we share a similar trajectory. The more urgent response you are seeking is to the “Next Steps”. The answer to this is of course, very personal and will be different for different people in different situations. But maybe other accounts of people in similar situations will help. So here is mine. About a decade ago, I came to the point where I said “I’m never going to another Evangelical church”. No need for the whole story, but our family decided to attend one “mainline” church (your option #1) for a while. However, after about 8 months my wife and I decided that just didn’t work for us; my hasty “no more evangelical church” was easy to say from the inside, but once outside I came to appreciate the incredible strengths of the evangelical tradition (which explains my now somewhat unrelenting advocacy of evangelicalism on my own blog). Then some friends of ours invited us to their Anglican church (yes another “mainline” church) and we instantly loved it. True, this was a mainline denomination with deep roots in the reformation and one that contains some very unorthodox leaders & congregations - with a diversity that is truly shocking (I’m now part of the same denomination as Shelby-Spong???!!!). But, this denomination also has a very strong evangelical wing (eg. John Stott, Michael Green) and some really great science / faith thinkers (eg. Polkinghorne, McGrath) and the church we found was not only evangelical, but didn’t carry the baggage of the evangelical church (or a lot of the Anglican baggage for that matter). This particular local church combines the strengths of strong orthodox Christian belief & a high view of the scriptures without any of the disadvantages of the fundamentalist bibliolatry that often goes with it. And it is also evangelistic & welcoming to many who may not have been in a church “for several generations”. So we are somewhat “fuzzy on the outside” (a good chunk of congregation probably wouldn’t have a clue on how to start to define “evangelical” – some pretty interesting discussions in the Christianity 101 and 201 courses we offer) but solid at the leadership level. As I probably don’t need to say, our church is far, far from perfect (we have exactly zero perfect members) but for my family, it is probably a perfect fit. Where does that leave you (given you may not have a choice like I did?). Not sure. Some quick answers to your other points: On #6, not a chance – simple read through your series demonstrates this. On #4, my inclination is no. Yes, I too have seen people do this but don’t think it is healthy in the long run. I think the most important question is #5 – what is best for your family. Hi Doug,

Happy New Year!

Thanks for that summary. To really respond to this fully probably requires a long discussion over a coffee (or several dozen!) rather than brief comments on a blog. On your conclusions and assumptions, I’ll just say that my own list may be somewhat different but that we share a similar trajectory. The more urgent response you are seeking is to the “Next Steps”. The answer to this is of course, very personal and will be different for different people in different situations. But maybe other accounts of people in similar situations will help. So here is mine.

About a decade ago, I came to the point where I said “I’m never going to another Evangelical church”. No need for the whole story, but our family decided to attend one “mainline” church (your option #1) for a while. However, after about 8 months my wife and I decided that just didn’t work for us; my hasty “no more evangelical church” was easy to say from the inside, but once outside I came to appreciate the incredible strengths of the evangelical tradition (which explains my now somewhat unrelenting advocacy of evangelicalism on my own blog).

Then some friends of ours invited us to their Anglican church (yes another “mainline” church) and we instantly loved it. True, this was a mainline denomination with deep roots in the reformation and one that contains some very unorthodox leaders & congregations – with a diversity that is truly shocking (I’m now part of the same denomination as Shelby-Spong???!!!). But, this denomination also has a very strong evangelical wing (eg. John Stott, Michael Green) and some really great science / faith thinkers (eg. Polkinghorne, McGrath) and the church we found was not only evangelical, but didn’t carry the baggage of the evangelical church (or a lot of the Anglican baggage for that matter). This particular local church combines the strengths of strong orthodox Christian belief & a high view of the scriptures without any of the disadvantages of the fundamentalist bibliolatry that often goes with it. And it is also evangelistic & welcoming to many who may not have been in a church “for several generations”. So we are somewhat “fuzzy on the outside” (a good chunk of congregation probably wouldn’t have a clue on how to start to define “evangelical” – some pretty interesting discussions in the Christianity 101 and 201 courses we offer) but solid at the leadership level.

As I probably don’t need to say, our church is far, far from perfect (we have exactly zero perfect members) but for my family, it is probably a perfect fit. Where does that leave you (given you may not have a choice like I did?). Not sure.

Some quick answers to your other points: On #6, not a chance – simple read through your series demonstrates this. On #4, my inclination is no. Yes, I too have seen people do this but don’t think it is healthy in the long run. I think the most important question is #5 – what is best for your family.

]]> Comment on Becoming Unwanted, Part 3 by John H. Armstrong http://becomingcreation.org/2009/12/becoming-unwanted-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-192 John H. Armstrong Thu, 31 Dec 2009 23:52:19 +0000 http://becomingcreation.org/?p=242#comment-192 Your honesty and integrity are what attract me to your insightful and honest struggle. You have provided some of the most thoughtful questions I have seen from an evangelical who sees the deep tragedy of what the church has become in America. Answers will not be easy, or even logical. They will come if you stay focused on Christ the Center and pursue the unity of the faith in the bonds of peace. The problem with your church experience, to this point, is that you have tasted the bitter water of sectarianism at its worse. At the same time the problem is personal because you are a person made in Christ's image and made for his kingdom. We must somehow get the personal and the community back together, not split apart as we are doing in the "emerging context" of so much we call evangelical today. Your honesty and integrity are what attract me to your insightful and honest struggle. You have provided some of the most thoughtful questions I have seen from an evangelical who sees the deep tragedy of what the church has become in America. Answers will not be easy, or even logical. They will come if you stay focused on Christ the Center and pursue the unity of the faith in the bonds of peace. The problem with your church experience, to this point, is that you have tasted the bitter water of sectarianism at its worse. At the same time the problem is personal because you are a person made in Christ’s image and made for his kingdom. We must somehow get the personal and the community back together, not split apart as we are doing in the “emerging context” of so much we call evangelical today.

]]> Comment on Becoming Unwanted, Part 2 by Steve Allison http://becomingcreation.org/2009/12/becoming-unwanted-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-187 Steve Allison Fri, 18 Dec 2009 11:43:02 +0000 http://becomingcreation.org/?p=215#comment-187 It appears to me you have acted honorably and with patience throughout, showing a fine Christian spirit. I know something of what you are going through. I'm a Church of Christ preacher's son and have remained loyal throughout my life. But it has been hard. As you know, the CofC and the Christian Church have the same origin, the major difference being our insistence on only A Capella music. It, along with immersion baptism (and it has to be for the specific correct purpose) serve for boundary maintenance and identity markers. Fortunately I haven't had to fill out a questionnaire for teaching, a task I find enjoyable and meaningful. But one reason I've avoided becoming a Deacon is because a questionnaire has been required and is similar to yours. Have always tried to keep my opinions to myself on origin and inspiration matters. I'm hoping your situation finds a happy resolution. It appears to me you have acted honorably and with patience throughout, showing a fine Christian spirit. I know something of what you are going through. I’m a Church of Christ preacher’s son and have remained loyal throughout my life. But it has been hard. As you know, the CofC and the Christian Church have the same origin, the major difference being our insistence on only A Capella music. It, along with immersion baptism (and it has to be for the specific correct purpose) serve for boundary maintenance and identity markers. Fortunately I haven’t had to fill out a questionnaire for teaching, a task I find enjoyable and meaningful. But one reason I’ve avoided becoming a Deacon is because a questionnaire has been required and is similar to yours. Have always tried to keep my opinions to myself on origin and inspiration matters. I’m hoping your situation finds a happy resolution.

]]> Comment on Accommodating Accommodation by Douglas http://becomingcreation.org/2009/09/accommodating-accommodation/comment-page-1/#comment-185 Douglas Thu, 10 Dec 2009 20:50:29 +0000 http://becomingcreation.org/?p=144#comment-185 David, Thanks for reading and commenting about this post. Indeed, the NT interprets the OT, but it does so for the NT audience (according to the culture and worldview of the NT writer). Two thousand years later, we have no choice but to interpret the NT (even its view of the OT) for our culture and worldview. That is precisely Lamoureux's point in saying that Paul may have believed that Adam was an actual person, but that does not compell us to do so. Depending on your approach to inerrancy and inspiration, this may seem dangerous. In my own mind, however, it does not lead to any sort of slippery slope, such as doubting the physical resurrection of Jesus. I suggest that you read Pete Enns' book Inspiration and Incarnation. And, with regard to a historical Adam, there are a variety of plausible and defensible positions between Adam as the biological ancestor of all humans and Adam as a theological representation of the human condition. I won't stake my faith on any particular view. See my post <a href="http://becomingcreation.org/2009/08/adam-and-the-shack/" rel="nofollow">Adam and the Shack.</a> David,
Thanks for reading and commenting about this post. Indeed, the NT interprets the OT, but it does so for the NT audience (according to the culture and worldview of the NT writer). Two thousand years later, we have no choice but to interpret the NT (even its view of the OT) for our culture and worldview. That is precisely Lamoureux’s point in saying that Paul may have believed that Adam was an actual person, but that does not compell us to do so.
Depending on your approach to inerrancy and inspiration, this may seem dangerous. In my own mind, however, it does not lead to any sort of slippery slope, such as doubting the physical resurrection of Jesus. I suggest that you read Pete Enns’ book Inspiration and Incarnation. And, with regard to a historical Adam, there are a variety of plausible and defensible positions between Adam as the biological ancestor of all humans and Adam as a theological representation of the human condition. I won’t stake my faith on any particular view. See my post Adam and the Shack.

]]>