Moving Beyond The Religious Wars

This audio interview is wonderful! It is one of the best interviews I've heard expressing emerging Christianity. Bishop John Shelby Spong presents a way to move beyond the war between secular left and fundamentalist right. He gives us a postmodern option for Christianity to emerge beyond this modern battle.

The first half of the interview is a biographical sketch of his experience, the second half contains one of the most clear and concise explanations of emergent faith that I've ever heard. Don't miss out on this gem. Many people discount Bishop Spong based on a few surface level prejudices. Evangelicals are scared of him because he doesn't use their canned terminology, but they should listen. There is plenty of common ground and opportunity to move beyond the modern construct that forced our division. I think something wonderful is emerging in Christianity and his voice is an important part of the process.

Rob Bell on Suffering

This clip is from the Seeds of Compassion Interspiritual Day.

Rob can occasionally come across as a bit sappy, but this response is wonderful. One of the things I really liked is how he used the metaphor of resurrection in the midst of a inter-faith dialogue. We often create a false set of choices. We feel like we need to loose our own religious identity in order to dialogue with others. That can leave us empty. He showed us how specific religious symbolism can work in a pluralistic environment. Rob demonstrated how the resurrection of Jesus can be a pluralistic symbol understood by anyone of any faith. You can easily adhere to your own symbols and metaphors while reaching out to others. The key is getting beyond the symbol and using it as a pointer to the deep meanings it is intended to represent. Those meanings are universal even if the individual symbols are not.

Beautiful response Rob!

Emergent Theology and Midrash

The term Midrash describes a library of ancient Jewish commentaries on the Hebrew Scriptures. One type of Midrash took the form of a collage. The creator of the Midrash might put one passage from the Bible on the center of a page. Then, he would surround the passage with a variety of commentaries pulled from different generations of rabbis. Each of the commentaries displayed a different perspective. Some often disagreed or challenged one another. It sounds like an Emergent Cohort!

This method invites the reader of Midrash into the process of interpretation. The reader can consider each commentary and allow the entire collection to speak. This act moves the reading of scripture from passive to active interpretation and from individual to communal meaning. It encourages the reader to wrestle with different perspectives. This visual form of exegesis allows meaning to emerge through the active dialog between the present reader, generations of ancient commentators, and the Biblical text.

Too often, our study of scripture devolves into a form of intellectual masturbation as we wrestle with texts on our own. Another common problem is when we let a single human authority dictate the meanings for us. Midrash combines generational wisdom, individual enlightenment, and a profound sense of community as we are encouraged to work together through the historic and present meanings. I appreciate this Midrash form of communal and inter-generational interpretation. Midrash forces us to move from a blind allegiance towards a holistic understanding of deep meaning. It helps us see the Bible as God's living Word not simply God's words.

Emergent communities are becoming more aware of the transcendent in popular culture. Music, art, poetry, and even movies are all thin places that allow us to glimpse the transcendent. One Emergent use of Midrash techniques is to borrow this notion of surrounding a passage of scripture with a collage of poems, lyrics, and pictures. I can imagine how effective that might be as a group activity. Combining ancient writings with layers of historical and current voices allow us to connect to our sacred texts.

Read more posts about Midrash

Emergent Midrash

I’ve recently become more aware of the Jewish Midrash tradition. I’ve heard a few of these Midrash stories in the past, but until recently, I didn't know much about this intriguing world of literature. From what I’m learning, it seems to me that this is exactly where the Emergent movement could find both its roots and its voice.

Midrash is the rabbinic tradition of interpreting the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible). These ancient Rabbis have been doing this much longer than modern Christianity and there is a huge library of Midrash texts to prove it. One of the most common styles in Midrash tradition is explaining sacred texts by creating more stories about the stories. These highly creative stories and poems draw out the meanings in more detail. They fill in the gaps in all our favorite Bible narratives with dramatic creativity. Midrash is the place where minor Biblical characters get their very own fully developed stories. The serpent in the Garden of Eden is more developed as the storytellers speculate about the source of his motivation for tempting Eve. The details about Adam and Eve's adventures east of Eden and Noah's difficult journey come to life. Even the words written on Moses’ two stone tablets become a living mythical character. The actual text (the very words of God) written on these two stone tablets is what lifts the heavy stones and allows Moses to carry them down the mountain. When the words see the golden calf at the bottom of the mountain, the words become angry and they fly off the tablets. Moses can no longer support the tablets void of God’s powerful words and he drops the meaningless stones to the ground. I think that is an amazing creative statement about the power of those words.

Once a canon (i.e., approved scriptural text) is closed, the problem facing the community is the problem of "searching out" the canon…The ultimate goal of Midrash is to "search out" the fullness of what was spoken by the Divine Voice.
- Dr. Charles T. Davis, Appalachian Statue University, Philosophy and Religion Department, NC

The thing I’ve learned most is that these rabbis loved to tell stories. This is how they capture and transmit meaning. I think it's beautiful. Not everyone communicates in three point sermons or PowerPoint lists. These artists created poems, narratives, symbolism, and myths that invoke our imagination while bringing out the deep meanings of the Bible. Doesn’t this sound like a postmodern concept? If Emergent Christians are seeking a return to the hermeneutics of story telling in place of our flat modern systematic theology, then Midrash may be an important model.

Tony Jones Rocks!

After seeing this clip of Tony discussing the term "born again" with a reformed pastor and critic of Emergent, I'm more convinced that I like Tony Jones. He just made my list of top 20 people I'd like to have a beer with. Not only does Tony make wonderful points about some big problems with reformed theology, he also managed not to be an asshole in the process. That really earned my respect. I wish I could do that. I'm simply not an effective communicator and I am not nearly as cool as Tony in the heat of a debate. I have this type of conversation all the time and it never ends up this cordial. Maybe having a camera in the room helps keep the conversation more civil. Then again, maybe I'm just an asshole.

The clip below is part 3 of 3. The first 2 parts have some better debate and you can find those other clips on YouTube if you are interested, but I thought Tony's answer about being born again at the end of this clip is an Emergent classic. Rock on Tony!

Is Emergent Christianity DOA?

Bishop John Shelby Spong’s makes an important observation about our faith in the title of his best selling book “Christianity Must Change or Die”. Emergent could be a catalyst for the change that saves our religion. On the other hand, Emergent could become a fleeting fad if it refuses to make real change due to our apprehension about asking hard theological questions. I have a few questions for our movement. As the Emergent movement dips its toe in the water of higher biblical criticism, will we stand shivering on the shore in fear of taking the big plunge? If Emergent begins this journey by marking certain topics out of bounds based on the fear of going too far, will we be destined to fizzle like a flat bottle of soda?

I’ve been involved in this emergent conversation for several years, but I’m constantly learning more about the movement. Recently, I’ve had an ongoing debate with Emergent Village national coordinator Tony Jones. Tony has publicly voiced his criticism of scholars, like Marcus Borg, who are open to questioning certain traditional dogmatic beliefs, for example a literal interpretation of Jesus’ resurrection narratives. In addition, Tony criticized Jack Caputo for being too specific about his own personal theological and political positions in the book “What Would Jesus Deconstruct? The Good News of Postmodernism”. Tony would prefer to keep the conversation at 30,000 feet rather than being specific and landing the plane. I understand Tony’s apprehension and I totally admire what he has written and said, but I disagree with this implication. If we can’t share our deep theological and philosophical views in detail, then what kind of shallow conversation would that create? Have we lost all hope of civil discourse? Should we enter every conversation with a fear of saying anything specific just because it might mean we will need to live with diversity? Isn't there a better alternative?

I hope Emergents are not afraid to move from the sidelines and develop independent opinions even if we all disagree. A generous orthodoxy does not mean our individual orthodoxy should be MIA. I also hope we will take specific actions. The idea of keeping the conversation ambiguous seems horribly doomed to fail. I agree that the conversation should be inclusive and generous, but we should not ask people to be intentionally vague in order to avoid criticism or conflict. That is sick! At some point, someone has to land the plane. It might mean we get called a liberal. Worse things could happen. The apostle Paul had a different metaphor. Paul suggested that at some point we must take up our cross and die. If Jesus had stayed at 30,000 feet, then he would never have marched to the capital and said the very liberal things that got him killed.

What do you think?

Brian McLaren Is Changing Things

I'm blogging from my hotel room in Charlotte after the first session of the "Everything Must Change" book tour. This is the first time I've heard Brian McLaren speak in person. He is not an overly charismatic figure, but I do love what he is doing. It seems that his goal is to wake up Evangelical Christians to the idea of progressive political views. His stump speech is very good. He also does a wonderful job of keeping the conversation out of the "left vs. right" and "democrat vs. republican" mode. Obviously, it IS about being progressive and that means being democrat on most issues, but he frames the discussion without making specific party statements. So many young people are completely turned off by politics. Brian is a master of connecting the dots for people who have yet to see the connections. There isn't much "new" here, but I'm sure it will be new to some. It is the right message at the right time.

There was some interesting music and art presented. Evangelicals can't talk without singing coombiyah a few times and praying first, so this was no different. I wasn't particularly impressed with the trimmings, but only because trimmings not are my "bag". After the first session, we had some small group discussions. Holly Rankin Zaher lead our group in a discussion about anti-consumerism. I know Holly's sister from way back, so it was good to meet her. She has made some amazing changes in her life including using many homemade products, using only vinegar and water to clean instead of chemical cleaners, and no longer shopping at big box stores like Wal-Mart. We had a good discussion even if it was cut short. I hope tomorrow will allow more time to get connected. There seems to be an eclectic group here this weekend.

The New Christians

I was recently asked to review Tony Jones' new book for the Academy of Parish Clergy. His publisher was kind enough to send me an advanced copy. I loved the book. It will be available in March 2008 but you can pre-order it through Amazon.com. Here is the short version of my review:

---

The Emergent Church is a hot topic. Its critics have been struggling to nail down its definition and paint its leaders into a corner. Discussions about these new Christians are full of rumors, misconceptions, and urban legends. However, many people feel this movement could be the future of American Christianity.

Tony Jones is the national coordinator for Emergent Village and a doctoral fellow in practical theology at Princeton University. He lays everything about the Emergent phenomenon on the table in his new book “The New Christians: Dispatches From The Emergent Frontier”. For anyone interested in the Emergent Church, this book is a must read. Giving the reader an inside scoop on the origins of this movement, Tony Jones has taken a big step toward answering many questions of participants and critics alike. I’d like to thank Tony for sharing his journey with us.

These new Christians began as small group of Evangelicals asking a few deep questions. As the answers produced more questions and those questions took on a life of their own, it became obvious that their friendships were much more important than their agreement on all the details. These questions are not new. Most Christians have struggled with questions of faith at some point in their life. Churches of all varieties have to deal with questions regarding leadership structure, facilities, worship models, and culture, but something different happened in this conversation. Where past generations of Christians had often come to irreconcilable differences that severed relationships and fragmented Protestantism into a million pieces, these friends found a way to see past the division and savor the conversation.

The Christian community has been watching intensely as these new Christians have held a public brainstorming session for the past decade via blogs, magazine articles, and even a few controversial books. Few concrete answers have crystallized but publishing your work for the world to see makes you very vulnerable and vulnerability creates fertile ground for change. Most pastors and executives would rather iron out all the details, conduct a few market tests, and debug all the programs before going public. These new Christians resisted that temptation and dared to take another path. The result is not simply a new denomination or a different doctrinal statement, but it is a different kind of process. They have created a theology and ecclesiology developed through collaboration and community rather than any claims of divinely appointed superiority or exclusive access to tradition. Tony Jones compares Emergent to an open source software product or an online collaboration tool such as Wikipedia.com.

“Like Wikipedia, emergent churches harbor no great fear of failure. In fact, failures are a natural consequence of innovation and adventure”
…
”However, when emergent churches open-source their worship environments, all sorts of people make themselves heard, leading to a richer experience for all, albeit one with some serious mistakes.” (p.193)

This book doesn’t gloss over the problems. Not all of the relationships made it through undamaged. For some, the questions were out of bounds and many answers spelled heresy. For the critics, the concrete answers were not materializing fast enough.

As more than a biographical sketch of Emergent, the book discloses the core values of these individual communities and provides a healthy dose of the terminology with in-depth definitions. Any attempts to heal the wounds of conflict would be futile without addressing the deep theological differences. When theology and practice become disconnected, there is a big problem.

“The emergent movement is robustly theological; the conviction is that theology and practice are inextricably related, and each invariably informs the other.” (p.104)

I suspect that this Emergent conversation may be the first glimpse into modern mainline theology for many Evangelicals. It might be fair to suggest that these young Evangelicals are just now catching up with scholars like Marcus Borg, John Dominic Crossan, and Walter Brueggemann who have been willing to tackle tough theological questions and create dialogue for a long time. There is ample evidence of that trend. His friend and fellow Emergent author Brian McLaren, credits both Brueggemann and Crossan in his latest book “Everything Must Change”. However, Tony Jones is a bit critical of these scholars. He suggests that Borg, in particular, has missed the mark by rejecting orthodox beliefs in the resurrection and interpreting the bible’s miraculous stories as symbolic parables. (p.148, p.156) I feel Tony might have been too quick to make that judgment. Mainline scholars have long been the champions of fresh theological perspectives and he might be overlooking some worthwhile advocates in the journey ahead.

This conversation is happening all around the world in homes, coffee houses, bars, and maybe even a few Sunday school classes. Something wonderful happens when people are willing to become vulnerable, share their incomplete stories, doubts, and questions. These new Christians realize that the gospel is so much more than bulletproof answers to questions. The gospel comes to life during the process of accepting people who have questions to ask. For those of us interested in the Emergent journey and even those wishing to cut them off at the pass, this book offers much to learn for us all.

Ready for Change

Brian McLaren's "Everything Must Change" tour is coming to Charlotte, NC Feb 1-2. I'm going to attend along with a few friends. We have been discussing this inspiring book for the last few months and it has been a catalyst for several very deep conversations. The conference is shaping up to be an exciting moment in the life of the Emergent conversation. I'm ready!

After the conference, Brian will be involved in an interfaith dialogue on Saturday Feb. 2 at 5:30 PM with local Jewish, Christian, and Muslim communities. This dialogue is open to the public so if you can't make the whole conference you may want to check out this special event.

Emergent Change

I really enjoy the podcasts presented by Emergent Village. I highly recommend the latest podcast with Don Heatley of Vision Community Church. It's a message that many in the emerging conversation will enjoy.

“I find it so sad that this beautiful elegant universe that physicists are discovering is unfamiliar to so many Christians. There is a cruel irony that the reason for this ignorance is that so many Christians are still struggling with the discoveries of science in the 19th century – people like Charles Darwin – that they are not even up to the 20th and 21st century yet. All because their allegiance is to the words (small “w”) and not to the Word of God (capital “W”).”

This echoes my own personal view that Christianity cannot become post-modern until it first becomes modern. I think many people in the emerging conversation mistakenly assume being post-modern means returning to an ancient worldview and rejecting modern science and theology. Actually, being post-modern means we embrace and come to terms with the discoveries of modernity. Once we've done that, then we are free to move past the ancient vs. modern fights that developed as a result of modernity. Now we can rediscover how the deep truths wrapped in our ancient stories, myths, symbols, and rituals can still enrich our lives in a post enlightenment world with the realization that these stories are not literally true but eternally truth-filled.

Change Is Not Easy

In his book “Everything Must Change”, Brian McLaren gives a great example of how Jesus’ political statements have too often been shaped to fit modern middle-class suburban life. He makes the point by looking at Matthew’s account of the Canaanite woman and Jesus (Matthew 15:21-28). Many people look at this message as an example for how modern individuals should treat other people. We should resist the urge to make it easy. This message is bigger than a third grade Sunday school lesson about being nice and letting your neighbors borrow a cup of sugar or an occasional power tool. This message is political and it foreshadows Jesus' critical message about the balance of power in Israel and its political relationships with its neighbors.

Brain highlights the unusual use of the word “Canaanite”. This word was a word of hostility towards a people that had been a long time enemy of Israel. These people had been defeated in order to settle the Promised Land and many border wars continued long after. Israel looked down on them and the way he addresses her at first was a type of racial slur used by the story teller to present the history backdrop for the punch line. In this story, Jesus rejects the woman then he later embraces her to suggest that the way these people were being treated was wrong and that those old divisions and wars are now over. Instead of conquering Canaanites, this Jew will feed her. The parable may or may not have been a literal conversation of the historical Jesus, but the symbolism does reference a real historical system of injustice. The scene foreshadows what Jesus told the authorities in Jerusalem about their treatment of people and how the violence of their past could only beget more violence in their future. I guess Jesus was hip to the concept of Karma.

The point Brian makes is that Jesus is suggesting an entirely different way of dealing with political divisions and settling tension on a global level. This “other way” is justice and forgiveness rather than violence, prejudice, and holding grudges. Jesus' storytellers craft this event in a way that challenges the politics of their leaders who must have cringed at the thought of Jesus' actions toward this long time enemy. It is unfortunate that stories like this have been domesticated and stripped of their power to change the world. The domestication of these stories is what allows our leaders to claim Christ in name, but ignore his message. One solution is to free our stories from their domesticated prison. That won't be easy.

Imperial Domestication of Jesus

Like most Evangelicals, I was taught a very specific technique for looking at scripture. You pick out a verse and think of ways that the verse can be applied to your personal life. You let the Holy Spirit guide you and reveal the meanings that are intended as a fix for the issues in your own life. There is no doubt that this can “work”. Many lives (including my own) have been blessed by this method and the Bible can be an extremely transformational and comforting book when read this way. However, what happens when we take some of the most profound social and political statements ever written and domesticate them by reducing them to truths about our own personal relationships and private needs? Is there a downside to this approach?

Christians often complain that our religion is loosing its position of influence in the world. I believe that Christianity got what it has asked for when it domesticated the good news of Jesus. When the message of Jesus was skewed toward merely another personal message about private issues of piety, self-help, and the eternal salvation of our souls, then Christianity became a private religion with private results. Let’s face it - it is easier to focus on ourselves because it can often feel like we just don’t have any control over our city, state, national, and global issues. I think this is exactly what the Empire wants us to think. The imperial forces that acquired and institutionalized Christianity needed to domesticate its radical anti-imperial message by shifting its emphasis and that shift has huge psychological effects to this day. We have been told that those big issues are “in God’s hands” and therefore out of our hands. We have lost hope in the ability to make big changes and when hope is lost then the battle is over. We feel a lack of power so we focus on what we can control, then we disconnect from the system and lose more power so we focus more on ourselves. This vicious cycle continues until all hope is lost and all power has dissipated.

Brian McLaren is challenging this domestication of Jesus in his new book “Everything Must Change”. He is challenging Christians to look deeper at our sacred texts and recover its message of hope for big changes and its lost challenge to be more than a religion of personal piety. Jesus’ critique of the Pharisees was not a criticism of their “Jewishness”. His message was not about being less Jewish. Jesus’ message was about returning Israel to its full sense of being God’s people and it’s calling as a radical catalyst for global change.

[in this book]We have raised the possibility that Jesus’ message might be seen as an alternative framing story that, if believed, could save the system from suicide. To test this possibility, we will need to consider the possibility that “Jesus” as we have understood him has himself been domesticated and made part of the dominant framing story. For Jesus to save the system, we must first, in a sense, save Jesus – by reframing him outside the confines of our dominant and largely unquestioned assumptions. (p. 73)

The conventional view, however, is more dualistic, with human souls and other “spiritual” things in one category and human bodies and other “secular” things in another. This dualism conveniently keeps faith a private and personal “spiritual” matter so believers see themselves as “just passing through” this world, steering them away from “worldly” social engagement beyond their personal, family, and church-related concerns(p.81)

Domesticated Jesus

More good stuff from Brian McLaren whose new book "Everything Must Change" is making a big splash this month.

"We [Christians] have to ask ourselves some deep questions. To what degree have we lost the plot? To what degree have we ended up with a religion that talks about Jesus, sings about Jesus, but Jesus has just become kind of a hood ornament on our own vehicle that we're driving to our own destination."

"Do we really get the good news of Jesus or are we living out another story using a lot of Jesus talk plastered onto it."

Everything Must Change

I received my copy of Brian McLaren's new book "Everything Must Change". It started a bit slow and I was worried that it might devolve into a watered down form of environmental activism (not that there's anything wrong environmental activism) but thankfully it is so much more. Brian has a gift for articulating important elements of Biblical scholarship in a very digestible format for those who are new to theological discussions. In addition to being accessible, the book is organized with group discussions in mind.

I'm sure this book will offend some very conservative people (because everything does), but Brian has succeeded in presenting this material in a non-threatening manner that holds onto just enough traditional theology to entertain a broad audience. I understand why he was a successful pastor because he has created a perfect balance of prophetic critique, education, and inspiration. This message is right on target to make huge waves in the Evangelical Christian community where people like Marcus Borg and Dominic Crossan are not allowed. I hope it finds its way into that space. It is sure to open many hearts and minds.

Change is Coming...

I pre-orderd Brian Mclaren's new book "Everything Must Change" (I'm addicted to Amazon.com) and it should arrive at my door in the next day or two. As Brian says in the video, it's about two basic questions: 1) what are the biggest crises facing the world today, and 2) what do the life and teachings of Jesus have to say to those global crises? The early reviews say it will be even more controversial than his previous books.


I hope to find a few local friends that will agree to begin a discussion group. If you are in the Augusta area and would like to buy a copy and begin meeting to discuss the book then let me know.

Shame on me

In my last post, I implied that Mark Driscoll might be saying things that make him sound like a religious bigot. Actually, I must confess that I did more than imply that idea. I appreciate the many positive AND critical responses. I take to heart the fact that pointing out bigotry in others with provocative language may not be expressing the type of loving kindness I've written about on this site. Please note that I did express apprehension and uncertainty in my original post but I obviously didn’t make my concerns clear enough.

I’m sure progressive Muslims struggle with the same problem of discerning when to speak out against fundamentalism and when to stand by and watch it erode the reputation of your own faith tradition. Do we wait for religious exclusivists to become violent as they did in the crusades or Nazi Germany? You could argue that it is already happening today in our American Government. It isn't just the violence that is harmful. The shame and humiliation inflicted on Christianity by fundamentalism is harmful for all of us that value the good name of Jesus. I’m still considering how to respond to the people I’ve met who espouse that rhetoric.

However, I’m not willing to accept the idea that what I did was bash Driscoll for his theological differences to mine. I never said “hey, this guy is a bigot because his theology is not as good as mine”. I may disagree with his theology but that is not why I suggested his language may be a form of bigotry. He seemed to be rebuking the practice of religious tolerance and his specific language spreads the ideals of religious separatism. Maybe in my original post I should have used the term “seeds of bigotry” and I probably should have explained the specific details I was addressing rather than leaving the door open for others to connect my theological disagreements with the charges of bigotry.

Religious Bigotry

The type of Christianity that is in this video makes me sad. It isn't his specific theology that bothers me because he does have a deep faith that transformed his life. His views may work as well or better than mine, but Mark Driscoll's target is young Christians and he seems intent on creating yet another generation of fundamentalist religious bigots who feel their brand of faith is the only one of value. His words have a strong undercurrent of religious bigotry. Our Christian faith and religious tradition is beautiful but its value doesn't come from devaluing all other faith traditions. You don't need to create an atmosphere of artificial fear in order to protect your faith tradition or your family. We are already suffering because our society has a fear of people and traditions that differ from our own. Unrealistic fear and bigotry has cost millions of lives.


I appreciate his desire to protect his daughter, but what is he protecting her from, a "liberal" husband that will value her as an equal person rather than a second class citizen? The worst thing he said was his aversion to studying the Old Testament in context of Israel. If he can't figure out why we need to understand Jewish tradition and context in order to fully understand the Bible then it is hard to take anything else he says seriously. Also, is he implying that the only worthwhile reason to follow Jesus is because he won't go to hell?

This video comes on the heels of Driscoll's recent critique of the growing Emergent Conversation which launched a wink revolution in his honor.

How does progressive Christianity respond to this? Is it hypocritical to point out the potential harm caused by spreading religious bigotry? Is that spreading fear of fear? Or by being silent would we be making the same mistake as progressive Muslims who have allowed fundamentalist bigots to become the face of Islam? I'm struggling with how to respond.

Postmodern?

Last Saturday night my home group discussed definitions of Postmodernism and its relationship to religion. I thought I would try to expand my views here even though I feel this topic has been beat to death. Most people define Postmodern thought as a rejection or reaction to modern scientific thinking. It is commonly viewed as a skeptical view of truth or a view that all truth is relative. I disagree with this popular definition.

First, we should note that modernism was the way people had come to think since the age of enlightenment/reason. It is a scientific view of the world. Modernity had a dramatic effect on religion since it was a time when science and religion fought for the truth about everything. Religion felt it was loosing its hold on truth (and therefore losing the battle for power) so it fought back with its own laws (doctrines) that looked and smelled just like science with all the trappings of rigid authoritative systems and theological claims. The modern mind thinks in terms of experiments, laws and repeatable patterns so the modern minds of religion in the last few centuries tried their best to build a case for religion on the same principles. The result was fundamentalist apologetics and that fatal flaw has led to wars, distrust, abuse, and may yet destroy religion completely.

In my mind, postmodernism is not the rejection of absolute truth. Instead, it is the full embrace of everything we learned during the modern era about truth. We have absorbed all of modernity's lessons about how to do science and how not to do religion. Both insights have been valuable and we learned from our mistakes. Rather than reacting to science with a fight for truth, postmodern people of faith no longer see science as something new, dangerous, or destructive to faith. A scientific understanding of the universe is now a normal part of how we think and operate. We’ve accepted modern science and its love of skepticism and questioning, and now we have moved on with the idea of finding a new place for religion. We realize now that every great discovery in life begins with the question "Is the current way really the best way?" The battle between religion and science for absolute unchanging truth is over and science has won! Science won precisely because it never claims to have the final answer. Science always questions itself and continues to learn while religions are built on the celebration of the way things were. Religion will never again be the holder of truth about how the universe works and God will never again be the unexplainable and shrinking gap in our current understanding of the universe. We may not have all the answers but science is the best tool for that job. Religion was destined to fail when placed in that role and during the modern era, religion lost its ancient job of holding truth. Now in a postmodern world, religion will no longer have any claim to knowledge of the creation of the world, the origin or man, or the ability to predict the future.

Does that mean that religions are finished and God is dead in post modernity? I don't think so. It does mean that we finally have a chance to put religion into a role where it can succeed and God is no longer held in a human box of understanding. In the postmodern world, religion is no longer where we look for truth about the universe but where we look for inspiration, critique, transformation, and motivation. That is where it has always served mankind well. In this place, religion is a big winner. In this place, God is not a shrinking set of truths but instead God is a growing source of transformation.

Well Said...

This is a great video clip by Brian Mclaren.

I grew up in a church that saw the Kingdom of God as something that happens in the future after we all die. Then I spent 10 years in a couple of churches with people that understood the "now" aspect of this Kingdom, but they thought it was mostly about learning how to perform miracles and telling the future. It is refreshing to finally hear someone within Evangelical Christianity talk about the Kingdom as something other than a fairy-tale, a supernatural phenomenon, or an act of military force. For me, it is all about real people making real changes toward peace and justice right now. I may disagree with Brian's decision to hang onto certain Evangelical beliefs, but I really like his approach to Jesus' message about the Kingdom of God.

Brian Mclaren's newest book...

Here is Brian reading a bit of his upcoming book. I thought it was relevent to my current frame of mind.