Comments on: Can you feel the Nooma?…

By: btd

btd — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 11:35:50 +0000

oh course it’s important to begin somehwhere with your “own sin” but I think a healthy dose of humility in our own theologies is integral to following Jesus. I mean, we all believe lots of things, spoken or not. And who of us, when the day arrives, supposes to have everything, every detail, correct? Seriously. Take communication between two people, for instance, I can say something and mean it- but the essence of communication is that no message may ever be precisely understood exactly as it was intended to be. we are all interpreting. So for the dude who says the bible is not open to multiple interpretations- I would ask the following question: Do you and the people you respect, even in your own camp, agree on your understanding of EVERY detail? My assumption, humbly, would be that you do not. And that’s okay. Perfectly devout and thoughtful people can continue to disagree on theological points. It’s inescapable. But can YOU deal with that tension? Because THAT is what we must all do. And there is humility in doing so.

By: kairos

kairos — Thu, 07 Dec 2006 09:54:34 +0000

Cheers, WhitemoonG. Thanks for stopping in.

By: WhitemoonG

WhitemoonG — Thu, 07 Dec 2006 09:51:51 +0000

Of course you don’t get any of this directly from his videos, etc. Like the frog that jumps if tossed into cold water, but doesn’t if the temperature is reduced by one degree every 5 days, sincere well meaning dedicated people have been excited/enamored with his schtik/ministry only (in some cases) to later one day pause and have their “wait a minute, how did we get to believing this?,” moment.

How quaint that many in the “expanded conversation,” don’t feel their result is complete relativism. It would be interesting to have McLaren or any of them explain just how any other logical conclusion/extrapolation is even possible.

Cheers Done for now.

By: kairos

kairos — Thu, 07 Dec 2006 09:16:43 +0000

I look forward to reading both, and I’ve heard positive reviews from people whom I respect and whose faith I trust.

FWIW, the connection of authentic human sexuality and God goes way back. That doesn’t worry me, really.

And I’m not sure what either has to do with your rather strong claims about Bell’s use of, fidelity to, or dedication to Scripture.

On your second comment: This is really what a lot of people are concerned with, I think. But apophatic theology, again, is nothing new. Bell’s concern with postmodern thought, as that of others in the emerging community, is often met with the kind of concerns you raise; but his “deconstruction” (your word) of Christianity doesn’t mean “anything goes.” I posted about this recently with regards to Scot McKnight. (So, suffice it to say that I’m not convinced that the emerging conversation allows pure relativism). Again, this is more your reading into, your eisegesis, of his work than anything about what I see on Bell’s videos, or the previews from his books. But I’ll read them to get more of an idea for myself.

Again, though, this is getting repetitive. Those reading this thread will catch your concerns, and can go reading about concerns with emergent/emerging as they wish.

By: WhitemoonG

WhitemoonG — Thu, 07 Dec 2006 09:03:17 +0000

My apologies, another comment. Like other emergents in the “expanded conversation,” he is deconstructing Christianity into just about whatever any individual wants to think it means, the meanings du jour. That’s why he and others are championing everything as being hidden, mystic, and shrouded in hopeless ambiguity, and are so “humble” as to state that one can’t really be sure about anything or what anything really means. In his very interesting “cool” and “refreshing” new stuff, the only thing you can say about Bell’s theology is that at the end of the day, he DOESN’T HAVE ANY THEOLOGY. As one person put it, it’s a lot of intriguing, thoughtful, eastern sounding fluff covered with Christian spraypaint.

By: WhitemoonG

WhitemoonG — Thu, 07 Dec 2006 08:54:07 +0000

Dig deeper. Read “velvet elvis.” Check out his interfacing with the “Porn Sunday” Wally Wiener exhibit, or whatever it was called. Read the promo for his upcoming book “Sex God.” Sex and God are completely spiritual, completely interwoven and inseparable. Can’t wait!!! Eat your heart out Hef!

Wake up.

By: kairos

kairos — Thu, 07 Dec 2006 00:48:54 +0000

Welcome, WhitemoonG. Thanks for your thoughts. I’m glad you came by and offered them. However, I think we’re just getting repetitive.

Look, I think this hubhub about Bell offering a libertine interpretive message is just not borne out by these videos. I don’t know him; I’ve not yet read his book(s) (though I’ve got time soon to start), and I’ve not been to his church, but from my judgment there’s nothing in these videos to even remotely support what you or the others have suggested. You’re free to demur, of course. You don’t have to appreciate him or his theology. But I’m concerned that these comments are either misguided or you’re bearing false witness, which if it is the case would be quite unfortunate.

If there is nothing new to be added on this score, lets not add it. Fair warning: I’d hate to have to close comments, but I will. Peace be with you…

By: WhitemoonG

WhitemoonG — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 14:30:24 +0000

I haven’t seen yet where Bell flat out states that “anything goes” as far as interpreting scripture, but it seems he suggests, leads, implies, and excites one into thinking that; just about everything short of stating it as such. Contrary to all the excitement about this “refreshing” approach to a supposedly staid and stale old religion, it’s nothing new.

There was a guy dressed up as a snake who suggested looking and thinking far beyond what we were told, also advocating the amazing witheld benefits of chomping on apples. And there was a guy who debated face to face with Jesus Christ what scripture actually meant, and without blinking ,quoted other scripture to try to win the argument.

Mick Jagger wondered if we’d guess his name.