- All isn't lost - at least my body shop guy has a sense of humour. What an experience for 10 seconds of stupid driving. 22 minutes ago
- Great, just found out my car apparently has hail damage too. 1 hour ago
- Ugh, getting my car appraised for damages at SGI is nerve-wracking. 1 hour ago
- Help make it happen for Atheists Unite on @indiegogo http://t.co/fCAskOo5cM 13 hours ago
- Teaching with Online Collaboration Tools: U-M Faculty Examples | CRLT
- Sample Learning Objectives - Enhancing Education - Carnegie Mellon University
- Public Speaking: An Idea Focus
- Public Speaking: The Virtual Text
- educationalwikis - Articles and Resources
- Social Learning Online: What Do We Know So Far? « the Bok Blog
- On Constructive Alignment by John Biggs-1.pdf (application/pdf Object)
- Teaching with Online Collaboration Tools: U-M Faculty Examples | CRLT
Ask Me Anything
recent comments
- Bob on grrrl meets mosque
- Rebekah on grrrl meets mosque
- Carl on grrrl meets mosque
- Rebekah on grrrl meets mosque
- Carl on grrrl meets mosque
categories
tag, you’re it
activism altruism atheism blasphemy books cartoon Catholic church censorship charity Christianity debate Democrats Emma evangelicalism evolution feminism friends fundamentalism funny-haha gardening healthcare reform heresy history hypocrisy language LGBT rights Maddow mamahood my life Obama phew politics PZ quotable reproductive rights Republicans rhetoric Saskatoon Freethinkers science separation of church and state social justice summer teaparty US YouTubemy past rants
- April 2013
- March 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
- September 2003
- August 2003
- July 2003
- June 2003
- May 2003
- April 2003
- March 2003
- February 2003
- January 2003
- December 2002
- November 2002
- October 2002
- September 2002
- August 2002
Monthly Archives: February 2010
‘A New Kind of Christianity’ stirs up the same ol’ same ol’ Christianity
February 24, 2010 – 11:53 pm
So, Brian McLaren has a new book out on the shelves: A New Kind of Christianity: Ten Questions That Are Transforming the Faith – and boy, is it ever causing waves in the religious blogosphere.
Now normally I wouldn’t care so much about this kind of thing — because, well, I left the “emerging church” movement years ago, and now I don’t even think there is a god — but for some reason, I’m fascinated by watching the fury unfold over McLaren’s latest theological work.
Maybe it’s because I’m still holding onto good memories of McLaren. 5 years ago, when I was backing away from the church and my faith, it was his books (specifically his “A New Kind of Christian” series) that gave me some hope that maybe I could stay in the church, despite my nagging (and growing!) doubts. His series and theological approach really shook my evangelical upbringing, in good ways. Of course, we know what direction I took when it came to my religious beliefs — but I still deeply respect McLaren as a communicator.
So you can maybe imagine my surprise when I started reading some of the religious community’s FURIOUS responses to his latest book — throwing around accusations such as: “a true son of Lucifer”, “False teacher“, “arch-heretic”, “outright, rank, unapologetic apostasy. He hates God“, etc.
As sorry as I’m feeling for these slams against McLaren, I have to admit I’m enjoying what his book and proposed theology is forcing to the surface in his dissenters. I haven’t yet read McLaren’s book, but I’ve watched several clips where he describes some of its contents, and I’ve read many book reviews that quote huge chunks of his text. So far, I really don’t understand where all the sound and fury is coming from — if anything, McLaren’s theology seems downright reasonable (so says the godless atheist, which to some who are reading this post automatically disqualifies me from having a worthwhile opinion on such matters).
Here’s a video of McLaren, discussing his new approach to understanding the authority of the Bible — see if you can pick out what is causing so many religious folk such conniptions:
- McLaren advocates seeing the bible as a “library, a collection of documents” as opposed to considering the bible as a go-to “constitution,” a text that people can refer to it as a lawbook, citing article/section/subsection (or book, chapter and verse)
- I love how he says that the church’s struggle over biblical authority comes down to POWER — “it’s really about the authority of people interpreting the bible” (yes!!!)
- Rather than being “over the bible interpreting it” or “under the bible submitting to it,” McLaren thinks we should instead be “in” the bible, with conversations being open and questions being unanswered.
I think I’m so attuned to what McLaren is saying here because I can see a confluence between his theology and the lectures I heard a couple weeks ago from the religious scholar, Timothy Beal. In his talks, Beal also pushed his audience to see the bible not as a book of unchanging moral guidelines but as an “inconclusive process we’re invited to join” — a book that “resists conclusion and univocality”, but instead “canonizes contradiction.”
What a liberating way to see a book that can be so oppressive! No wonder so many pastors and theologians are foaming at the mouth over what McLaren has to say in this new book. It’s revolutionary! Both McLaren and Beal are advocating a true Reformation — putting the bible back into the hands of the people, giving everyone the chance to struggle and work through it, eliminating the need to have prerequisite degrees in Greek or pedigrees of systematic theology that enable the “one meaning” of the text to be revealed. The answers aren’t restricted to biblical scholars anymore.
Now I don’t necessarily agree with the new biblical paradigm that McLaren is posing in his book — but I do appreciate how he’s challenging the static doctrines of the church and forcing his audience to see the bible in a different light.
And what do his critics accuse him of? Of being “liberal.” According to one critique of McLaren’s book, here’s a list of the damnable qualities of liberal belief:
1. Liberals believe doctrine needs to develop to meet the needs of contemporary thought.
2. Liberals emphasize the need to reconstruct traditional beliefs and reject the authority of tradition and church hierarchy.
3. Liberals focus on the practical and ethical dimensions of Christianity.
4. Liberals seek to base theology on something other than the absolute authority of the Bible.
5. Liberals drift toward divine immanence at the expense of transcendence.
Is this list supposed to inspire shudders down the spines of anyone who doesn’t identify themselves as liberal? Again, this list seems *perfectly reasonable* to this atheist — in fact, I would want the people who consider these qualities to be detrimental to admit holding onto their opposites.
So, instead of the liberal belief that doctrine “needs to develop to meet the needs of contemporary thought,” these conservatives/evangelicals/fundamentalists (pick a label) should admit to believing doctrine “needs to remain static and not meet the needs of contemporary thought.” Likewise, if liberals supposedly “focus on the practical and ethical dimensions of Christianity,” to be not-liberal means you “focus on the impractical and unethical dimensions of Christianity,” and so forth. Bring it, I say!
Anyway, part of me is really proud of McLaren stepping up and vocalizing his views, despite the piously-righteous backlash he’s receiving from his fellow believers. Who knows, he may even have an atheist pick up his book and give it a read — heck, if more Christians were willing to challenge dogmas like this, I wouldn’t have nearly so much to rail against.
p.s. I’m now a member of the Facebook group “Going to Hell with Brian McLaren.” Come join us!
What a difference a year makes…
February 14, 2010 – 10:59 pm


Yeah yeah, I’ve done 2 kid posts in 24 hours — but lately when I look at Emma, I’m just stunned at my big little girl.
Hallelujah
February 14, 2010 – 10:44 pm
All weekend long, I haven’t been able to get KD Lang’s cover out of my head — watch and see why:
I was quite proud of the show Canada put on for the Opening Ceremonies — well, until the malfunctioning lighting-of-the-torch bit!
Happy V-D
February 13, 2010 – 12:53 pm

Thankfully the biggest question I’m facing this weekend whether it’ll be Pride & Prejudice (Colin Firth version!) or a Cary Grant-a-thon. (there will be no consumption of any Nicholas Sparks books or movies in this household, rest assured)
This weekend find someone you love and let them know it, preferably in a non-commercialized way. Happy Valentine’s!


