Community Development 101

Larry James will change your mind right here.

Huh?

Below is an e-mail survey I received today. Can you please tell me what the author of this survey is trying to get at?
-----------------------------------------------
PLEASE GIVE ME 5 MINUTES OF YOUR TIME – THIS COULD BE VERY IMPORTANT:

I’m wanting to do some simple research and I want to see how far this can go via the internet. I have the addresses of a couple of hundred preachers – if you have even one that I do not and that person responds and has even one – this could go qui t far.

Here is what I need: 1. Answer the questions below. 2. PLEASE Forward this to all the preachers on your e-mail list. Do it now. 3. Let me know if you want the results. (respond to dale@edge.net).

I am sending this out on 3/31/06 and will accept responses until 4/22/06. Let’s see how many preachers we can get to respond. The results could be very interesting.

1. What is the primary translation of the Bible you preach out of?

2. Does the congregation where you preach have pew Bibles? If “yes” what version??

3. How many adult classes does the congregation there have?

4. What Bible study material do your adult classes use:
a. Just the text.
b. A quarterly type material (which one? GA, 21st, Lambert, other)
c. “Book” type studies.
d. Video materials.
e. PLEASE answer for each adult class.

5. What is your name?

6. What is the name/city/state and Sunday morning attendance number of the congregation where you serve?

Thank you and may God richly bless your work.


And now, for something really different, the flea circus. (HT Believing Thomas)

Asking "Why?" and then looking to the Bible

Malcolm Gladwell, thoughtful author and columnist, reviewed the book, "Why? by Charles Tilly. Since Malcolm went ahead and read the book, now I don't have to. He boils down the book to this:

We employ four kinds of explanations, he says: conventions (social formulae), stories (common sense narratives), codes (legal formulae) and technical accounts (specialized stories). And we get into trouble when we use one kind of reason in a context where another is necessary. (I added all of the special effects here)

Now, let's take a look at Wade Hodge's brief review of Scot McKnight's categories of viewing scripture below:

Sacramental: the Scripture leads us to the Beyond as we read it; heavily shaped by community; not always true. (Marcus Borg) Clarification: “true” in this statement refers to historical accuracy.

Inerrant/Infallible: the Bible is never wrong about anything (science, too); always true.

True: you simply confess the Bible to be true and don’t care to say any more than that.

True Christian story, still ongoing: you see Scripture as Story, and it is God’s true Story, and the Scripture prompts the re-use of that Story in our world today in various ways. (N. T. Wright)

True in matters of faith and practice: the Bible is true on these issues, but can be wrong about science or history or other matters.

Infallible, with Tradition: Scripture is infallible; God’s Word, but it is in need of authorized interpretation and the Church’s Tradition is the work of God.

Historical origins: you see the Bible to be the historical foundation of the Church; it is simply historical; not inspired in the traditional sense that it lifts it out of the norm of writing; Scripture is as human as anything we experience, even if God uses it to lead the Church today.

Let's go back to what Gladwell says is the problem in knowing why? He said:

And we get into trouble when we use one kind of reason in a context where another is necessary.

• Don't we get into trouble when we believe the Bible to written in one and only one genre?
• Don't we get into trouble when we ask the Bible questions it isn't even trying to answer?
• Aren't we skating on thin ice when we believe the Bible was written for me in my time and my social context in my language?
• Can we really let anyone get away with saying, 'it says what it means and means what it says?'

What we have in the postmodern world that we did not have much of in the modern world (physics, sociology, politics, religion etc) is a deepening awareness that all of life is contextualized within something else - something that, in way or another, is fleeting. Furthermore, not only is everything within a context of something else, which has implications for meaning, everything is context for something else. I am your context and you are mine. I contribute to your meaning and you to mine. And even beyoond that, there is mystery. Where intelligence in modernity strove to eliminate mystery, intelligence in postmodernity seeks out thos places where mystery exists.

Now, certainly there is the construct of power which usually imposes itself and forces its desired meaning here and htere, but where there is power asserting itself, there is usually a countercurrent working in the opposite, or perhaps just another, direction.

This is important for understanding the Bible because denominations are "distinct" because they, as a collective who agree to support similar views, view the Bible differently than each other. They have to do this or else they would not know who is in and who is out.

With the advent of the emerging church, the denominational power structure is (very slowly) feeling the pressure of the emerging countercurrent, which amazingly does not rely upon one or even a few ways of interpretting the Bible. Now, should emergent become a denomination, which some fear that it it will, then there will be a power problem again and they wil have to find ways to figure out who is in and wh is out. That just can't happen. My point is this: emergent makes space for new and different ways to interpret that same Bible and there doesn't need to be conflict in disagreement.

Finally, and I know that this is getting long and boring and I am on a blogmania roll here, it is important to learn how other people interpret the Bible because there is going to be a whole lot more understanding when we know the rules everyone is playing by. You can't just play ball. You have to learn basketball, baseball, cricket, polo, ping pong etc.

The Gospel Of Judas

I'm not going to write anything about this Gospel of Judas, but I would like to share with you what I am reading about it.

John Alan Turner takes an admittedly novice, but thoughtful, view of the TGOJ.

Messy Christian takes a journalistic perspecitve and wrote a piece about TGOJ in her publication. She actually interviewed someone invovled in the National Geographic research.

Scot McKnight of Jesus Creed takes a scholarly perspective starting here, and then going on to here, here, and here.

Elaine Pagels of Princeton offers another scholarly perspective.

Finally, Out of the Depths is just a little disappointed with TGOJ.

Does the church really need to emerge?

So, what do you think, is all of this talk of emergence really necessary? Does there need to be change in the church? Isn't Christianity right where it needs to be?

So, I was talking to a female teen (TeenZ) one day and here is kind of how the conversation went.

TeenZ: I gave my life back to God, you know.

Me: What'd you do that for? Trying to sound almost as if I were opposed to the idea.

TeenZ: Felt like it.

Me: Ok

TeenZ: Because I do whatever I feel like doing.

Me: Cool, how did it happen?

TeenZ: I went out into a field, looked up at the sky and I did it.

Me: Wow, right out there with no one else around.

TeenZ: You probably think it doesn't count becuase it wasn't in a church and I didn't get baptized. You don't have to get baptized you know.

Me: It counts.

TeenZ: I hate church and I hate my youth minister.

Me: Ok.

TeenZ: I play in the praise band at church, but not because I want to show off. Too many people show off. I hate it.

Me: Yeah, fakers are no good.

TeenZ: No one can answer my questions. They always say, "read the Bible." That's not good enough.

Me: What questions do you have?

TeenZ: Where did God come from? Do you know that? I'd really like to know. Don't tell me he always existed because how could that be?

Me: Wow, I really don't...

TeenZ: And how do I know the Bible isn't just a bunch of made up stories? I could have written them.

Me: Well...

TeenZ: How do we know all of the other religions are wrong and only Christianity is right? What if God just chose a different way to talk to Hindus and Jews and Buddhists?

Me: Do you have any easy questions?

TeenZ: Smiles and chuckles a little.

Me: I don't have any answers to any of your questions. I knew everyone else she had asked gave her pat answers that insulted her questions. I wasn't about to do that. I wanted her to know I didn't know.

TeenZ: Looks at me with anticipation.

Me: Look, I don't know about all this who is right and who is wrong stuff. I can't tell you who is going to Heaven, whatever Heaven is, and I can't tell you who is going to Hell, whatever Hell is. All I know is that Heaven is probably the place I want to go after I die.

TeenZ: Yeah, me too.

Me: Cool. You know, I'm not too concerned about being right about everything. All I know is that if I follow God in the same kinds of ways that Jesus did, then I am probably doing something on the right path.

TeenZ: What?

Me: Salvation is not the thing you find when you get all cleaned up and find Jesus. Salvation is seeking Jesus. It is following God in the same way Jesus did. Salvation is more like a direction than a one-timer, or perfection.

TeenZ: My youth minister tells me I don't get it.

Me: I'm sorry for that.

TeenZ: He's always on my case because I don't do everything he thinks I ought to do.

Me: Aren't you glad he's not in charge of your relationship with God?

TeenZ: Yes.


So, I ask you again, does the church need to emerge?

Good stuff on blogs

Preacher Mike addresses homosexuality here.

Brian McLaren has moved over here.

Radical Congruency made me feel good about myself.

At the speed of emergence

If you ask my mother, not only is the emerging church emerging too quickly, but it is emerging in the wrong direction. (So mom, do you really read my blog :-) ?)

If you ask me, what in the world are we waiting for? Let's get to it. Wherever this thing is going, let's get going before the church ends up like the survivors on LOST - isolated, scared, alone, bickering with each other - and sometimes really comfy with this little bit of power in the lonely forgotten place.

So what is the speed of emergence?

Some people have been emerging for 20 years, while others are just now sensing a shift in the wind.

From one perspective you might say the emerging church has run amuck with blogs, books, conferences, podcasts, personalities, worship innovations, and appearances on Larry King.

From another perspective you might say that it has barely scratched the surface. For all the talk of a deep ecclesiology, there is little movement in denominational cooperation, evangelicals are still carving out little fiefdoms, and a little handful of people who are in these denominations have caught the wind of emergent and it has only intensified their frustration. It's only a conversation for crying out loud.

Only the crazies who have gone off and planted their own churches have the freedom to emerge. Oh, and there is the handful of leaders who have lead their congregation through the painful controtions of emerging from within.

So here is my question, as the church emerges, is it going too fast or too slow, or (Deep, refreshing drink of Diet Dr. Pepper (which I will not have until Easter)) just right ? - ahhhhh

Oh, what ever am I going to do?

As many of you know I am entering into the doctoral program in Family Science at the University of Minnesota this fall. Can't wait. But I have this terrible problem: what area of research do I persue while I am there?

Family Policy?
Interpersonal Relationship Research?
Adolescence?
Stepfamilies?

Do I take psychological perspective or sociological perspective?

In light of my recent blog post, should I try to join this professor in her research on religion and the transition to adulthood?

I have a serious problem: I can do more than I can do. Wait a minute, that didn't sound right. I like doing more than I can fit into my life. There, that says it better. Every 'yes' is 'no' a hundred times. That is so hard for me.

Something's abrew

I get this way sometimes. I feel something inside of me - an angst - that is brewing, bubbling up. It feels like fear or anxiety, but I know that there is some meaning to it. It's a bother that won't go away.

I have been thinking about my children as of late, and maybe that is it. They are 6 & 8 years old. One of my fears is that they will grow up going to church and then dump it when they head off for college. Please understand that this is not a commentary on their character, nor is it a commentary on culture. Well, almost not a commentary on culture; it is a commentary on church culture.

When my children realize that some of what the church does is sinful, what are they going to do with that?

When my children ask me why no women are doing anything at worship service, what can I say?

When they realize that it is weird that at school there are children of various races, but there isn't at church, what answer do I have to offer?

When my children realize that time and money are mostly used to perpetuate a denominational structure and little is used to help the poor, what will I say?

Or worse yet, what if my children never ask these questions?

Westerhoff at Children's Spiritulaity Conference

June 4-7 in Chicago there will be a Children's Spirituality Conference. John Westerhoff to speak.