CharlesJones

Writing Down the Jones

Posts Tagged ‘progressive’

July 22
Teaching as a Subversive Activity
Tagged

No. 13: Teaching as a Subversive Activity

My Review

I came to this book with high expectations. I was first introduced to Postman through a series of posts at Don’t Eat the Fruit called “Five Things We the Church Need to Know About Technology”, and shortly there after read The End of Education, which was one of the first books I read on the subject, and one of the best. I immediately felt those expectations would be well-met when I read the title of the first chapter: “Crap Detecting”.

The phrase was borrowed from Ernest Hemingway, and is described as “an essential survival strategy and the essential function of the schools in today’s world.”

One way of looking at the history of the human group is that it has been a continuing struggle against the veneration of “crap”. Our intellectual history is a chronicle of the anguish and suffering of men who tried to help their contemporaries see that some part of their fondest beliefs were misconceptions, faulty assumptions, superstitions, and even outright lies. (3)

The task of the schools, according to the authors is to produce students who can tell the difference: “experts at ‘crap detecting.’”

Read more

August 15
Posted in Politics
Tagged

2000 Verses

There’s a movement afoot (how often do you get to use that word?) whose leaders like to repeat a particular statistic over and over.  I’ll pause and let you try to figure it out, as you list everyone who fits this description in your head.  Okay. Here’s a smattering of statements from the group in question:

“…there are more than 2,000 verses of Scripture that call us to express love and justice for those who are poor and oppressed.” Tony Campolo

“The religious right wants to say there is only one or two issues that reflect our values, but as Rick would say, I’m sure, poverty, if there is 2000 verses in the Bible about the poor, that becomes a religious issue, as well.” Jim Wallis

“He [Rick Warren] became fond of repeating that the Bible has 2,000 verses dedicated to the poor…” Time Magazine, link via GetReligion.org

I’ve always been a bit skeptical about this.  I’ve heard this stat repeated dozens of times, but never have I found any references to accompany it.  I’ve actually been searching the internet for it periodically, with no luck.  If anyone has the list, let me know.

Off the hook?

My issue isn’t that I don’t think caring for the poor is important.  It clearly is.  The problem I have is that these leaders are making care for the poor through politics the focus of the Christian mission. But that’s not what the Bible is about. As Gary DeMar said in The American Vision, the philosophy “takes verses that are directed at individuals and turns them on their head and gives them a political twist.” Read more

February 23
Posted in Words
Tagged

They’re Only Words

webster-american-dictionary.jpgI recently met Mike Todd, sole proprietor of Waving or Drowning, in the comments to my post Mark Driscoll and the Progressive Double Standard. We had a hearty disagreement, but Mike seemed to be interested in actually talking to me, rather than just tell me my modern theology is worthless in the postmodern world, then scurry off into the night. We went back and forth a couple of times, and I thought that it might be worth it for us to talk more, and on more subject. So, today we are launching our semi-official semi-dialogue.

It’s semi-official because we want to see if it will work before we go full-bore. It’s a semi-dialogue because at first it won’t be a “dialogue” at all. We’re going to start with dual monologues; we’ll each answer the question, and the other will offer no response. This will be building a basis for our conversation so that we can understand each other. Then we’ll get to the back-and-forth.

The monologue questions will be in the vein of our prompt today; they are simply setting the table for the deep discourse that will happen later. I hope you enjoy this discussion and return for our future interactions. Read more

February 16
Posted in Words
Tagged

Common Ground

common-ground-diner.jpg[Disclaimer: This post may make me seem divisive, but I don't intend it to.]

Why is the progressive Christian movement – led in part by Brian McLaren, Doug Pagitt, Tony Jones, and others – so obsessed with finding common ground? I’m hearing it everywhere.  Common ground between Christianity and Islam, between evangelicals and “post-evangelicals”, orthodox and neo-orthodox, traditional and emergent…. It seems to be the answer to everything.

But is common ground really that important? In a lot of situations people say, “the things that unite us are greater than those that divide us.”  But is that really true?  Are the things that unite Christianity and Islam greater than the things that divide us?  Are the things that unite the theologies of Mark Driscoll and Rob Bell greater than those that divide them?  I guess it depends on your perspective.

If you feel, as some do, that the heart of Jesus’ message was changing this world in the here-and-now, the answer is yes.  If you think of salvation as liberations from physical constraints like poverty, oppression, and emotional scars, the answer is yes. But if you think that the message of Christ is bigger than here, and more lasting than now, the answer gets more complicated. Read more

February 16
Posted in Words
Tagged

Mark Driscoll and the Progressive Double Standard

e-s_038.jpgAs I thought a little bit more about the tendency I discussed in my last post, other instances of the progressive double standard came to mind.  The most glaring is all the flack Mark Driscoll has taken for pointing out bad theology, particularly at last year’s Convergent Conference (my thoughts here).

It seems that every time he steps out and tries to speak the truth about the poor theology of Emergent leaders, he gets chastised.  The sentiment seems to be along these lines: Who are you to say what is good and bad theology?  To many this sounds righteously indignant.  Unfortunately the people who say it are often doing the same thing themselves.

I keep mentioning McLaren’s new book, but it fits here, too. It seems to be nothing but a treatise on the invalidity of the “conventional” (read traditional or conservative) view of Jesus, and the truth of the “emerging” view.  He mocks traditional doctrines and sets them up with language that we can generously call “unfavorable”.  He is committing the same social crimes that Driscoll seems to be guilty of.  Pagitt is no different.

But Doug and Brian’s behavior will never be acknowledged as akin to Mark’s, because their follower’s believe them to be right, therefore they have the authority to correct and mock other theological positions.