St. Anne's on the Hill

Blog "Death by Ministry"

2007-07-19T11:20:00.000-07:00

Apparently, the links to Driscol's series on "Death by Ministry" has not inspired conversation, but killed it instead. Maybe we're all just too busy...

If you want to watch the rest of them, you can find them here.

But, for the sake of a "jump-start," Josh, didn't you have an article for discussion?

Good hang time last week, too, thanks for that all around.

Death by Ministry (4 of 11)

2007-07-03T13:48:00.000-07:00

Count the number of "things that cause stress" you have...we could probably add a few to the list...like working with Colmery...

Death by Ministry (3 of 11)

2007-06-25T15:23:00.000-07:00

Here is the third installment.

Top quote goes to Spurgeon: "Fits of depression come over the most of us, usually cheerful as we may be, we must, at intervals, be cast down. The strong are not always vigorous, the wise not always ready, the brave not always courageous, and the joyous not always happy."

Death by Ministry (2 of 11)

2007-06-19T10:32:00.000-07:00

Since part one elicited such an overwhelming response (got your email Josh...thanks), let's move on to part 2.

I just don't want any of us to have to prematurely preach one another's funeral. Give it a 10 minute watch, and let me know what you think.

Death by Ministry (1 of 11)

2007-06-14T09:07:00.001-07:00

Well, I hope everyone's beginning to enjoy their summers. Walker's ignoring my emails, so I'm assuming he's on a beach in Mexico somewhere "recuperating" from the school year.

So, I've got an idea for the next month or so of St. Anne's discussion...Driscoll is posting an eleven part vodcast series on his blog entitled "Death by Ministry." While my initial reaction to the whole "be careful...lots of pastors burn out" warning is usually: "That's just for guys who don't really love Jesus, and I love Jesus!" I'm starting to realize that that statement really is as arrogant and ignorant as it sounds. I don't feel any imminent danger of burning out at the moment, but I also know that as young pastors we are getting into habits now that will either allow us to have a long and fruitful ministry or destroy us in about 20 years.

My proposal: Let's take the 10 minutes or so minutes and watch each of these as they are released and discuss the implications and our own reactions here...what do you think?

You can watch Death by Ministry (1 of 11) here.

more evidence

2007-05-29T08:14:00.000-07:00

Not that anyone would question or even begin to disagree with anything Andy observed about the signs in Israel...here is one more to add support.

not really sure what this word is...but it communicates a whole lot.

The Gospel Coalition

2007-05-27T12:50:00.000-07:00

Have you guys been paying attention to "The Gospel Coalition"? I didn't know anything about it until they held their conference last week. It sounds like some great stuff. Their web site isn't up with all the documents yet, but Justin Taylor and Justin Buzzard both blogged pretty extensively about it. Their "foundational document" contains some great stuff.

Hollaback from Israel

2007-05-26T03:05:00.001-07:00

Hey guys. A special St. Anne's bonus from Israel. The topic: the people who make signs here need to learn English. It's not quite as entertaining as Japan, but there's some good stuff. For example:

Scotch-taped to a phone booth in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City Jerusalem. Would you rent a room from this guy?

You see these at many of the archaeological sites. I love the graphic on the right - it definitely communicated to me.

Jewish marketing. Brilliant.

At McDonalds by the Dead Sea. Come get your McKabbab.

Mazel Tov y'all...

Thoughts for Colmery and Kottre

2007-05-23T19:23:00.000-07:00

So Biblical Ethics and "The Entertainment Industry" eh? A friend was recently quoting from David Wells in Above All Earthly Powers (I don't actually read books, I just pick up quotes from other people) where he (Wells) talks about the results of nihilism. He says that while in Europe the loss of purpose essentially led to suicide, in America it lead to distraction and consumption (I think the person was referring to pp. 184ff "Suicide to Snickers" c.f. 192ff; you can view the pages online through amazon if you "Search Inside" for the word nihilism) I thought it was a rather astute observation. It seems that those two concepts are intimately tied with the Entertainment Industry in many diverse ways (from its purpose as 'entertainment' to advertising that accompanies it). It also seems that these two concepts are the ethic of the new Empire (i.e. America) and are part of the myth perpetuated by that empire (i.e. The American Dream). Maybe you can make something out of that.

Another idea: I've been pushing the idea that "Funny is the New Ethic." It seems that everything is ok with people as long as it's funny. This pervades the Entertainment Industry too. Why would you put that on tv? Well, it's funny. You get my drift.

That's it. Those are all my ideas. I'm plumb out...so onto more important things:

Hey Kottre, which team has the lowest ERA in the Major Leagues? Lowest WHIP? Gonna win the NL West? Yeah, you got it - they're all the same answer, The San Diego Padres.

See, not one fat joke.

Oh, and Brian, thanks for the Pandora reference. Very cool.

So...

2007-05-22T20:26:00.001-07:00

I hope everyone's doing well. Two things:

1. I've got a Biblical Ethics paper to write on "the Entertainment Industry." Seriously. That's it. Anyone got any ideas for a focus, or any questions they want to ask seeing as how I'm going to be studying it?

2. Anyone who wants to groove while they work should go to Pandora.com and start a station on "the Gotan Project." No words, just some weird/vibey/cool/lounge-ish music that I think increases your output by at least 15%. And it makes you feel really, really cool.

Right now I'm listening to some instrumental track that randomly throws in audio clips from what sounds like a driver's education video in French. Awesome.

Why I Don't go to the Gym

2007-05-17T07:43:00.000-07:00

I don't go the the gym because I don't have the time...but, of course, that's not the issue. It would not be an acceptable excuse to say that I don't pray because I don't have time, or that I don't give my wife attention because I don't have time, or that I don't disciple other men because I don't have time.

So, the real reason that I don't go to the gym is because I don't see it as a necessary priority. While it is important that, as stewards of our bodies, we take care of them and pursue a healthy lifestyle, it seems like we have to weigh the cost/benefit ratio in order to pursue exactly what that healthy lifestyle ought to look like. Over the past year I have pursued eating much more healthy and have made it a point to give up many of my dietary vices (I have even adopted a "Diet Coke" policy...oh how I miss the sweet nectar that is "Coca-Cola Classic"). I try to workout (play basketball, etc.) at least a couple times a week, but beyond that I don't feel any conviction to sacrifice any of the other priorities in life to be more "in-shape." There is actually a part of me that would be tempted to question the motives of a ripped pastor in addition to those of a fat pastor. Is there any situation in which a pastor ought to have his priorities set in such a way that He could justify enough time in the gym to
maintain a cut frame with bulging pecks? (I just wanted to write "bulging pecks") Most people in our churches (ok...at least in West LA) already probably spend more time working on their bodies and primping their appearance than they do working on their hearts and developing their "spiritual clothes"...what kind of example should we set them? At the moment, there are definitely a few more ways I could improve my physical health, but I'm generally ok with my "soft" frame.

Am I wrong?

Fat Pastors

2007-05-14T15:38:00.000-07:00

As the big boy on the hill, I will be the first to take a crack at this.
I think a lot about this, and have been working hard at changing the patterns in my own life; in fact Brian and I had a long talk about this very issue on Friday (before going and chowing down on Chicken Parmigiana and bread).

Let's be honest, most people are overweight because they lack discipline in some area (controlling what they eat, getting regular exercise). While there are people who struggle with hormone issues, metabolism and other medical issues; most overweight people just consume more calories than they burn.

As pastors, we should be concerned about this. If people look at us and see evidence of a lack of discipline; they will be less apt to follow us.

Honestly, this is a big reason why I have been pushing myself hard to get my butt in the gym and eat less carbs, sugar, soda and fats - I woke up one day and thought "this is wrong." I would never be flippant or unsympathetic to anyone who struggles with their weight - because I realize how hard it is to lose it - but to the pastor who is overweight due to his undisciplined life, there is something that needs to be said (not fat jokes, Josh).

So...

2007-05-14T14:16:00.000-07:00

How is everyone? Josh, Kottre, any baseball feuds that need to be aired?

Also, a much simpler question than that whole covenant theology thing...what's the deal with physical fitness? I've got books like "What Would Jesus Eat?" on one side and then pastors who pound the pulpit about self-control right after they pound a few big macs without intending to get off the couch. Or out of the study. Or whatever.

What's the biblical line in terms of personal fitness? I know body image can get worked into the conversation, but I'm more interested in the role of stewardship as it applies to our bodies. How much effort should we be putting in, and where should it fall on the priority list?

Fun Day!

2007-05-11T07:57:00.000-07:00

Today is the big day...after a few morning meetings, I'm going to head up to beautiful Moorpark, CA and hang out with the infamous Chris (or, as he's known at the Shepherd's Conference, "Christ") Kottre. Houseboats trip planning, stuff like that.

Somehow this post doesn't carry quite the same weight as those quick T4G posts where Mahaney announces that he has a two hour layover in D.C. and so he's going to grab lunch with Mark Dever. Then again, I suppose there's good reason for that.

You know, mainly because D.C. is much cooler than Moorpark.

2007-05-09T11:03:00.000-07:00

So I haven't figured out the whole dispensationalism/covenant theology thing yet. I think my time at seminary was too "survey"...not like it could be anything else given the breadth of the subject matter. Thing is, most of the dividing lines we learned to walk were pretty easy because everyone with a half-decent set of hermeneutics walked them with us. Then you get to this covenant thing, and all of a sudden a lot of guys who are serious, biblical scholars are having some strong (though irenic) disagreements, and that leaves me in a funny place. The way it was presented to me, it seemed like being a covenant theologian was a dozen yards shy of being an open theist. But apparently that's not the case...

I agree with Andy, though. I can already see the distinction coloring some of my messages, though I've been intentionally avoiding it as much as I can (without doing injustice to the text, of course). And then there's the whole amillenial thing that MacArthur threw down on a few months ago. Good old eschatology...I never thought I'd care as much as I do now.

On a personal note: Kottre and I are taking a half day together on Friday. I'm not sure (keep your fingers crossed!) but he might be making me a picnic. If anyone knows any worship leaders that would gel with our two personalities—a tall order, I know—let us know, we need a guy for his high school houseboat trip in August.

Defections and the whole counsel of God

2007-05-07T09:44:00.000-07:00

I read Beckwith's post and part of Trueman's response. With regard to ETS, what caught my eye was Beckwith's affirmation that he could still be a member of ETS because he could still sign the doctrinal basis. This gives me a chance to reiterate that ETS must change its doctrinal statement to include a basic statement of the gospel - it seems perfectly reasonable to me that a society whose first name is "Evangelical" should be at least partly defined by the evangel. Am I missing something here? I realize that in 1949 when the thing was started this may not have been completely necessary, but times have changed. Either change the name to Inerrantist Theological Society or change the definition to suit the current name. For the record, I prefer the latter.

But I digress...

Yes, I think it "matters" to my relationship with Christ and my pastoral ministry whether I believe there's a future for ethnic Israel (broadly, "dispensationalist") or whether I believe that the church is that future (covenantalist). Both systems affirm God's faithfulness and sovereignty (or can), and neither one is necessary in order to believe the gospel. But shepherding a flock is something that happens over many years and involves the whole Bible. Therefore, it is reasonable to think that the glory of our faithful, sovereign God will be interpreted differently over the long term depending on the system one ascribes to. If you try to avoid this, you won't be able to teach the "whole counsel of God" as you are required to. Scott's example of baptism is a good example.

Well, time is dwindling for me this week. I probably won't post again until July. I've got 3 weeks in Israel starting next Monday (I'm hoping to blog the experience, so watch for it), then 4 weeks back east with my family. I'm back in the office July 5. I'll drop in for a snide comment here and there if possible, but no promises.

Catholics, ETS, and John Frame

2007-05-05T22:08:00.000-07:00

Only the first two go together. Read here a letter from Francis Beckwith explaining that he is stepping down from being president of ETS because he's returning to the catholic church. Read a response from Reformation21 here.

In terms of our fun dispensationalism conversation, I hit a chapter in Frame's Doctrine of God where he outright dismissed it (with little to no explanation, depending on how you look at it). It came along with his assertion that Christ is the "remnant of Israel" in terms of OT prophecy, and because of our union with Christ the church and Israel are essentially the same. Or something like that, I need to go back and read it again. But it was interesting.

On top of that, he went on to make a big distinction between "eternal" election and "historical" election (Israel was elected historically, but not all of them were elected eternally...kind of like how all khakis are chinos but not all chinos are khakis, I think). Anyone ever heard of that before?

Update on Martyrs in Turkey

2007-05-03T13:23:00.000-07:00

Apparently the story posted earlier had some serious exaggerations. This post, from the same site as the earlier one, contains a letter from people close to the martyrs concerning their deaths. The site is also the best place for updates and some very interesting fallout from the situation in terms of the media, etc. (HT: Justin Taylor)

Oxford, Baby

2007-05-03T13:14:00.000-07:00

This article is worth its read just because the guy can write really well. Plus, he's funny. Plus, the topic is absolutely hilarious.

Lost

2007-05-03T10:08:00.000-07:00

Yesterday was a crazy day, and I was really tired at the end of the day. I collapsed on the couch and my roommate was watching the show Lost.

Man, that stuff is crazy. As tired as I was, I got totally into it. But they give you nothing, it's like you're wearing a hat that hangs a carrot out in front of you and so you just keep running. Either way, I'm trying desperately not to be hooked right now.

In terms of dispensationalism and covenant theology...I get what Scott is saying. I guess I need to do more research on the topics. Even with Theo IV at school, I never really engaged the topics. What kind of strikes me is that in my bible reading, preaching, and everything else, I've never run into a situation where I've been pushed to research that stuff. Baptism, sure; faith and culture, sure; spiritual gifts, sure; but dispensationalism? Not really. Which makes me wonder if either I'm too young/inexperienced to have run across it yet or it legitimately is that peripheral.

Dispensational-ish-ment-arian-ism-ly Discussion

2007-05-02T10:26:00.000-07:00

I guess I'll take the first stab at this, since I had a conversation regarding this exact topic last night with one of the "lay people" in our church. It seems like the most basic question on the table is: Does the difference between positions such as dispensationalism and covenant theology "affect my relationship with God and therefore will be taught to my congregation"? The tag-line of our little blog here mentions that "theology, life and church...[are] all really the same thing," and I think that that is the first place we need to start. Our theological framework affects who we believe God is and how He works, and therefore, absolutely affects our relationship with Him. It changes the way we view Him, it changes the way we relate to Him, it changes the way we worship Him.

But, the more important question (assuming that we are all on that page...and to even hearken back to our previous discussion, in a way) is: "How much of that should be taught to my congregation?" It seems a little inappropriate to drag your entire church into a debate like this when most of them are oblivious to the fact that it is going on, and honestly don't have any concept of the implications. However, it is something that needs to be addressed in some fashion, because people will have questions and will start to wonder why different churches do things differently, and many of them will be very educated theologically and will desire guidance as they think through the issues themselves. It may not seem like something that needs to be addressed up front, but for a church like ours that requires a believer's baptism for church membership, any explanation of why being baptized as an infant is not acceptable dumps us right into the midst of this larger hermeneutical discussion.

Just some rambling thoughts...but hopefully it will help get us started.

We have a reader!

2007-04-30T18:32:00.000-07:00

So, weird enough, there are more than just the six of us obsessively checking this site for more breathtaking news on the Padres. Or the Giants. Or whatever.

Back when we were embroiled in our deep discussion of culture, I posted a quick note about how I tend to solve the "theology is dry" thing with direct application of the topic at hand to a worshipful encounter with God. (Which is in no small part a result of a small booklet by John Frame that Andy had us all read when we got to seminary. The full booklet can be found here).

Anyways, our one reader asked a question in the comments section that I thought was interesting. For those of us with a cynical side (Josh, Spencer, I'm looking at you...) we're going to put a cap on dark sarcastic remarks at 4. Fair warning.

Here's what Becky wrote:

question from a random reader - do you think broader hermeneutics - like the differences between dispensational and covenant theology - would ever make your list of "things that affected my relationship with God and therefore will be taught to my congregation?"
those issues may not be relevant to you guys at all but i've been in churches (very recently) on both sides where the debate is a hot topic. i was wondering if the laity really needed to know all that stuff when I came across your "Theology and Ministry" post.

Have at it gentlemen.

Implications

2007-04-30T15:24:00.000-07:00

This article created quite a discussion last week, regarding implications of worldviews...A muslim is willing to give his life for the death of many for his own benefit...A Christian should be willing to give his life for the many for their own benefit. Perhaps the only way to reach the muslim world is to out die them.

Martyrs in Turkey

2007-04-30T14:47:00.000-07:00

Seeing as how our blog activity has devolved into a flurry of baseball smack talk in the comments section (which, seeing as how the baseball season is practically year round, seems a bit premature), I figured I'd add a bit of a somber tone.

I ran across this article online concerning the recent killing of three missionaries in Turkey. It's an incredible read, but very graphic, so consider yourself warned. Puts things in perspective really, really quick.

A quick link for josh

2007-04-28T11:51:00.000-07:00

Scoreboard.

Ok, let's get back to the heavy stuff...

Chicken Vs Egg

2007-04-27T22:47:00.000-07:00

Is this a chicken/egg thing in regard to BT vs. ST? or is there a definite starting point? Should we start with BT...or do we even approach BT with certain presupositions (which may be shaped by ST)
No more thinking just tell me the answer!

Method / Message and the RIGHT way

2007-04-27T20:26:00.000-07:00

I'm not sure where to begin. I'm wary of this too easily turning back into the big / long posts that are too elaborate to answer and ultimately make going up the hill way too tedious. Can't we just go back to banal? It's more fun.

First, "method is not message" may be true, but (the ever present but) I don't think that completely answers the issue. The question should be "Are there methods that enhance or detract from the message?" and we should also ask why God chose to communicate His message in the method He did. Are we really saying that He could have communicated the truths of scripture in any way and it would have been equivalent?

Second, "There is no right way to teach theology" also is missing my point a bit. I don't think we're talking about a right / wrong issue, but rather are there better / worse ways to teach theology. And when I mean better / worse, I'm talking in all contexts. For example, I would contend that it is always worse to start with systematic theology. That's not the same as saying it's bad. In fact, I think this point is supported by looking at Andy's definition: "It is the holistic interpretation of Scripture for the purpose of intimately knowing and rightly worshiping God." My issue is primarily procedural. If ST is to be 'holistic' then how can you do ST appropriately before you've interpreted the text in its context first (along the lines of Biblical Theology)?

Brian's comment about the "Best of Both Worlds" (The "I Agree with Andy" post) method is kinda what I was getting at with my 'chronic' discussion. Maybe only Andy understood that. Or maybe nobody. I guess you should just take it to mean whatever it meant to you.

I'll post some stuff on our curriculum discussion soon. I'll try and break it in a few posts so it's more easily discussed.

Hey, what's the deal with other people reading our blog? Don't they know this is our own private little discussion? Oh yeah, I wasn't originally invited either was I? Oops.

Awesome

2007-04-27T13:04:00.000-07:00

I knew I could get Andy out on the Hill if I asked the question poorly enough. (Also, Andy, well done on finding a legitimate answer. I though I might have asked it in such a way that there was no way to answer it.) But I had an ulterior motive: I wanted to get the method/message thing out in the open and, hopefully, out of the way. In a sense. While it might be fun to talk about that concept a little bit more, I think most of us here can line up right behind Andy in what he wrote. Plus, when it's not mentioned at the outset, it tends to muddy up the discussion.

With that out of the way, we're left with Andy's observation: there's no right way to teach theology. So, then, what are the principles that we should use in determining which method fits a given situation? Is it something that is flexible as long as we understand the inherent strengths and weaknesses of each method? Or is it something that is more formulaic (e.g., students + western culture + basic discipleship = narrative approach)?

I've got my own ideas, but it's much more fun to ask the questions. Which is what got my generation screwed up in the first place.

Method is not message

2007-04-27T09:00:00.000-07:00

I don't have much time right now, but I think this is the right time for a small step back. Brian correctly assumes that I'm going to wince and cringe at his "lowest common denominator" way of asking the question. Ewww. If forced to answer that question, I would have to say that the LCD for theology is the determinate (i.e. transcultural) meaning of Scripture.

Which leads me to a more important observation - there's no one right approach to teaching theology. The method serves the message and the purpose. Who are you teaching (age, culture, maturity, etc) and what do you want to accomplish (basic discipleship, correcting aberrant gospel, equipping for pastoral ministry)? Elements of narrative, system, and polemic will inevitably intertwine to accomplish the purpose at hand. Take a narrative approach ("and God said to Abraham..."), but questions will demand more systematic answers ("what is a covenant?"). Take a systematic approach ("now for the doctrine of justification..."), but questions will demand narrative answers ("what is righteousness?").

As for concerns related to colonialism, well, let's talk in Theological Method class next fall.

Taking a Vote

2007-04-26T16:44:00.000-07:00

I vote that Scott is actually quite funny.

Plus I checked out the site from that comment on his last post, The King's Abbey. They use way too many big words there. Though their love for single malt scotch almost makes it worth the finger cramps I got using my dictionary.

I think Scott's got an interesting question. What's the lowest common denominator for theology? I'm pretty sure between Andy and Josh that question is going to get torn apart, but it should make for something interesting. Maybe by thinking about theology in terms of people from all over the globe we can figure something out about how we think at home.

I'm Not Funny

2007-04-26T11:14:00.000-07:00

Just thought I'd make a disclaimer before I get ripped for any attempts I may make at humor again.

One aspect of the systematic theology discussion we've been having that Josh and I talked a lot about last November when we were in Uganda training pastors was, "How do we teach Biblical theology in a way that doesn't reek of colonialism to people of another culture. I know that this is an argument made in many liberal circles, but that's not where I'm going.

My concern is with how theology (and the heart behind it) is recieved by someone who has become a Christian, pastored a flock (metaphorically), led people to Christ, and developed their own belief systems based on their understanding of Scripture and experience. How does a person who has flown all the way across the world to spend a week teaching theology approach such an endevor? Laying out a laundry list of theological truths with Scripture references and then taking off will probably not be the most effective means of teaching theology. Hitting on a few "big issues" might completely miss the point because in their culture the "big issues" might be completely different. It seems like you start with hermeneutics and Bible survey (which we've done), but where do you go from there?

Maybe you just grab a rocking chair and tell them a story.

Chronic

2007-04-25T17:46:00.000-07:00

In the spirit of merging (e-merging?) a couple of discussions, I thought maybe we could each list our top 5 chronic issues. Let's start with Kottre. That should be fun.

Maybe you can tell them as a story.

I Agree with Andy

2007-04-25T11:20:00.000-07:00

We are a bunch of pomo narrativists.

Nah, not really. Well, kind of. I like the narrative thing more as a pedagogical tool than some sort of theological bone to pick. I want kids to remember stuff, and I know it will stick in their heads more if they can put it into some kind of overarching storyline. You could even do a "best of both worlds thing"—use the narrative as pedagogy, and intro it by talking about the book we use to understand the story (bibliology, hermeneutics, etc). Stop along the way to discuss theology proper (the patriarchs), hit christology in the gospels, sanctification and pneumatology with the epistles, etc.

Buncha pomo narrativists...

2007-04-24T19:24:00.000-07:00

So, narrative theology is the way, eh?

I'm not going to disagree in principle, but if you're doing a shorter series for students, you can probably do better with a more topical approach while not losing the story quality (which I happen to really like). Systematic theology doesn't have to be a particular guy's theology (Grudem, Geisler, Grenz, etc.). In fact it shouldn't be. It is the holistic interpretation of Scripture for the purpose of intimately knowing and rightly worshiping God. (Note that this definition meets all three of Josh's objections to a systematic approach.) I also like Geoff's emphasis on the authority of Scripture, which is something that hasn't been mentioned much here - why THAT story rather than another? So it seems you have to deal with that also.

Mostly disconnected thoughts for now. I'm interested in what you guys construct for EBC, too.

Chronic Theology

2007-04-24T15:13:00.000-07:00

Josh used too many words that ended in -chronic. I feel like I'm in a Bill & Ted movie.

Yes, I would be Keanu Reeves. Not the other guy.

And since I've been making fun of Josh way too much, I'll move on: I think he's onto something with the whole "Story of God" thing. Mainly because it fits into my paradigm of worshiping God in relationship, and I like to be right about things. But also because it's a good idea.

Josh, if you get a chance, I'd love to see some of that curriculum stuff posted up here. Or emailed, if it's not one of those things you can just make public like that.

Bonus material: I ran into Josh and Spencer today in Simi Valley. It was really weird to see them in person, and I could tell the awkwardness ran both ways. Mainly because Josh touched my thigh and asked if I worked out.

Systematics

2007-04-24T13:51:00.000-07:00

I started down the baseball path and it went from funny to blasphemous way too quick. So, no Jesus in Baseball jokes.

Christ Kottre, I don't think the problem is with systematics itself, but rather the point in the process that it gets brought in. It seems that people like to use systematics as the 'basics.' Doing so creates several problems:

It teaches people to trust in Grudem, Erickson, etc. rather than in the Bible. It's true that to the degree the systematics reflect the Bible then they are trusting in the Bible.
The scriptures used are too frequently taken out of context and the student doesn't know enough of the context to evaluate the way it is being 'used.'
Personal application seems distant. Verses in their appropriate context always have application in mind. God never made statements about Himself just so that we would know, but rather that we would know and do.

Therefore, it seems to be a better route to teach them about The Story of God so they are able to put the Bible into context, and then let them ask questions about it (including systematic type questions). As they do so and develop a systematic approach, that will further inform their 'story' approach.

In other words, it would seem best to start with a diachronic approach which would lead into a better synchronic approach which in turn informs the initial diachronic evaluation. If the initial step is primarily synchronic, problems arise that can be alleviated by the more time-consuming process of diachronic instruction.

I think you could do a great "Story of God" presentation in 8-10 weeks.

As some of you know, we are working on revising the curriculum at EBC to reflect this thought process. Maybe I'll post our initial thoughts for your comment soon.

Puppets

2007-04-24T09:29:00.000-07:00

Walker: Just so you know, here at St. Anne's we put a cap on seminary jokes. We each get two a month. And the "Cyrus" thing counts. (Though it would be a fun game to see which one of us could come up with the most bad sermon illustrations that place Christ in different baseball positions. "Jesus is our Great Closer," "Jesus is on the field—He's the ump!" and things of that nature.)

Kottre: The puppets thing is brilliant. I'll teach a session if I get to be Animal from the Muppet Babies.

The thing I've always gone back to when it comes to teaching theology to people of any age is showing them how it directly ties in to their relationship with God. No matter what the subject matter, if it hasn't impacted my relationship with God I study it until I realize how it should, and then communicate it that way to the people I'm teaching. When I start to understand how effectual calling and regeneration (and even the Ordo Salutis, which I poke fun at all the time) changes my view of God and therefore my practical relationship with Him, the material takes on a lot more weight, gravity, and interest. It's like how Grudem puts hymns at the end of each chapter in his systematic, but on crack.

Theology and Ministry

2007-04-22T22:40:00.000-07:00

OK, here is the post I had sitting in the drafts a couple of days... I would love your insights.
It's a few clicks up from Banal, somewhere between the "Kottre's door" story and Jot.

I am in the very early stages of creating a curriculum for HS/College students on foundational theological principles. It will most likely be an 8-10 week course for students who desire to learn the basics... the Bible, Salvation, Pneumatology, the Church, Christology, etc.

Believe it or not, they seem interested in this... We're going to teach it with puppets.

Over the past couple of weeks I have heard various opinions from pastors, seminary students and the produce manager at Ralphs about how this class should be approached. What I found interesting is that many have had negative opinions of this "systematic" approach to teaching theology. Their go-to argument: "it just indoctrinates people." I even had one tell me that "knowledge just puffs up" so I should just take the students to a homeless shelter rather than wasting more air with theological mumbo-jumbo...

So I have a nice little mix of Pastors, Seminarians and Theo teachers here on the hill... Talk to me. What insights do you have for the pastor who desires to introduce his people to foundational, theological truths? What method would you use to teach to a group of laity at your church?

Furthermore, how important is it for lay-people to know the big time, theological buzzwords like "Calvinism," "unconditional election," "Lordship Salvation," "Semi-Pelagianism, etc."

Some churches go the "ignorance is bliss" route and opt not to introduce their people to the polarized world of Christian theological debate; others are quick to train and send out 5-point armies to fight against the tyranny of the Arminians.

Anyhow, I know I have moved out of the world "foundational" issues during the course of this post, but I would love to hear your thoughts...

Oops

2007-04-22T20:14:00.000-07:00

Although it wouldn't be blasphemous if he actually does 'save' the Padres. It would probably be more appropriate to call a closer "Christ" instead of a starting pitcher. It doesn't say anything about his moral character (last time I checked Cyrus wasn't exactly perfect...).

Chris, four games? Really. I'll mark your words alright. "Choose your own adventure" preaching - that sounds a lot like what you do right now isn't it? Maybe there could be a charismatic version where you pause periodically and wait for someone to have a 'word' as to where to head next. That sounds fun.

So is the hill still serious or are we trying to brush against the banal line of the Kottre door story? The banal version's more fun and seems to spur more posts (especially from Kottre).

Kottre

2007-04-21T22:00:00.000-07:00

...is comedy gold lately. And Kottre, when are those drafts I see in the blogger backend going to get published? Do you need to establish your hilarity before you get serious on us?

By the way, this post is a piece of my sanctification—I'm not freaking out about how good my message is going to be tomorrow. At least, not much. So if it sucks, well, I blame St. Anne's. But on that note, I'd love to find a book or see a book written on the subject of a biblical view of preaching from a pastoral perspective. Most of the stuff I've read is either this super general theology of preaching mixed with outline preparation and how to use your diaphragm or it's about this very esoteric and removed philosophy of preaching from a global perspective. I'd love to hear stuff written by a guy like Piper from the perspective of a Saturday night, a Sunday, and a Monday morning.

Bonus Information: UFC 70 has proved to be pretty awesome so far.

Wow...

2007-04-21T18:39:00.000-07:00

Such a flurry of activity on the hill... To whom do I respond?

Josh: Your love for the Padres is as endearing as it is blasphemous (Christ Young?). Dodgers will be 4 games ahead of the Padres come the post-season... mark my words.

Scott: I think the best thing about the link you posted is in the comments. I don't know if you read down far enough, but the senior pastor of the church was able to steer the guy back to teaching the original passage that was scheduled for that weekend... Very crafty

The "hey, lets vote on a sermon topic" approach puts us just one step closer to my dream style of preaching... The "Choose Your Own Adventure" approach. Just like the great books from my childhood, the congregation will get to vote on what direction the sermon goes...

If you choose to take a literal approach to the passage, press the green button.
If you choose to allegorize this passage, press the red button.

That's right, in my "choose your own adventure" sermon fantasy, each seat will be equipped with an electronic voting system; the classic "raise your hand" vote looks too charismatic.

MLB

2007-04-21T09:15:00.000-07:00

As far as I understand it, nothing about baseball matters at all for another four months. In fact, did last season ever actually end? I thought it went year-round now a days...

That guy's name can't seriously be "Christ Young." (And let us not forget, the last time someone was labelled "Jesus in Cleats"—a la USC's Mike Williams—they turned out to be a spectacular bust.)

Though it does remind me of the time I first met Kottre. Shepherd's Conference sign in table, where all the nice ladies with the really long skirts are registering guys, and Kottre gets handed a nametag that says "Christ Kottre." So he says, "Christ..." and the lady who handed it to him looks up with the most incredible mix of horror and disgust. And he backpedals like a champ, stuttering all the way, saying, "no...nametag...christ, wait...not...no, not like that...uhh..."

I wore his nametag the rest of the day.

Top 5

2007-04-20T22:21:00.000-07:00

I guess I'd better post or I'll be relegated to commenter status again. I wouldn't mind so much, but it's the company I'd be keeping (=MacCuish).

So, The Top 5 Reasons the Padres will win the NL West (Again)
1. Chris Young
2. Jake Peavy
3. Adrian Gonzalez
4. The Best Dang Pen in MLB
5. They have a Christian mascot

I figure this should generate some response from Chris and Scott at least...

This Week's Sermon

2007-04-20T11:34:00.000-07:00

In the midst of a completely unrelated google search, I stumbled across this blog entry by a pastor. We all have heard stories about this, but I'm not sure I've ever actually seen it done. You have got to check it out!

Back to School

2007-04-19T18:11:00.000-07:00

So my tie is going to have to go back on...

A few days ago I went out to school and "filled my shopping cart" with classes that Andy so graciously signed me up for. I signed up for Grisanti's Biblical Ethics class over the summer, and for Snider's Fundamentals of Theological Method and Craigen's Seminar in Pneumatology in the Fall. I'm going slow, just trying to get my feet wet and see how I can balance classes and pastoring. But it should be fun, especially since I'll get to go buy back to school supplies again. I'd like a lunchbox.

Anybody got any ideas for a Th.M thesis?

iPod check - Scott

2007-04-18T13:37:00.000-07:00

Sorry...it's been back to the grind this week, so it's been a few days.

By the way, any chance we're going to hear from Walker anytime soon, or should we relegate him back to comments-ville?

As for me:

Christian: Chris Tomlin, See the Morning
I downloaded Tomlin's latest last week and have been really enjoying it. Although, I have had to be willing to look past the fact that in moments he's starting to sound like Michael W. Smith.

Other: Jamie Cullum, twentysomething
A really cool jazz album that Lara started listening to lately. I've really been digging it, and it's been the soundtrack at our house for the past few weeks...a definite keeper.

oh my...

2007-04-17T08:18:00.000-07:00

I just scrolled down to the "Banana Defense of Creation" link that Brian provided in his response to Scott... that is simply unbelievable!! Is that for real, or is it a joke?

And Godtube.com?? I thought the church was scraping the bottom of the barrel when they decided to rip of myspace with "Godspace." In their defense, Godspace does feature some of the best multi-ethnic stock photos I have seen in a while.

Perhaps our next "top-5" thread should be centered around the best internet/cultural phenomenons that Christians have taken and added "God" to...

::UPDATE::
mypraize.com may be even better!!

ipod check - kottre

2007-04-16T20:13:00.000-07:00

I'm a little behind, so I'm also going to post my top 5 childhood shows.

TOP 5 CHILDHOOD SHOWS::
5. Voltron
4. Thundercats (apparently I'm the only one who watched cartoons??)
3. Small Wonder
2. Mr. Belvedere
1. The Wonder Years (How could you guys forget this one!?)

Honorable Mention: Letterman (I snuck out into the living room to watch at night), Salute Your Shorts (Nickelodeon's finest), My 2 Dads (confusing for a young boy), Dodger games, and Shark Week (an annual obsession).

As for the iPod:

Christian: Switchfoot. I'm a sucker for those guys; good lyrics and happy guitars. You should also check out Cold War Kids and Dustin Kensrue (props to Mondo). The latter two bands are all connected to Biola.

Other: Brian mentioned them, but I'm a big fan of Arcade Fire. They're tough to categorize (Bowie + Springsteen + Talking Heads, poured over ice with a mint garnish), lots of exotic instruments and string arrangements...

Honorable Mention: The Shins, Damien Rice and Pearl Jam.

iPod Check - Brian

2007-04-16T16:50:00.000-07:00

I'm glad we're doing this, because I've kind of dropped off the face of the earth music-wise. I used to be hip, and but it turns out I just spent a lot of time around hip people.

Christian: I got nothing. The last new development in the Christian music scene that I actually cared about was when Andrew Peterson, Andy Osenga, and Derek Webb put together the Square Peg Alliance...but I'm a sucker for good folk-ish music, and I also haven't heard much on that front in a while. Tim Hughes is a good reference, though, I've sang a few of his songs recently at church and I've liked them.

Other: I'm looking forward to checking out Arcade Fire, on some good recommendations, but even they're probably old news by now. On a different note, I've rediscovered Steve Winwood since he showed up on my playlist while we were setting up for church the other day. Back in the High Life is an absolutely classic song, and for some good eighties fun you can jam to the electronic stylings of Higher Love and Finer Things. Good times.

Honorable Mention: Delirious, and their more recent World Service and Touch. The live version of "I Could Sing of Your Love Forever" is pretty cool, because they seriously change it up, though you have to wade through the lead singer talking about the song for like two minutes before the music actually starts.

iPod check - April

2007-04-15T18:48:00.000-07:00

We need to do this about once a month - recommend one Christian and one "other"artist/CD that we should get asap. Here's mine for this month:

Christian: Tim Hughes, Holding Nothing Back
Contemp. worship style, passionate lyrics, some nice upbeat driving or exercise music here. Edification to go round.

Other: Corinne Bailey Rae, Corinne Bailey Rae
Nice bluesy jazz. I love this girl's voice - it's different but not distractingly weird. There's a new live record that I haven't heard yet.

Bonus Recommendation: Brian Doerksen, Holy God
More worship, not all great songs, but some interesting arranging and production, including the periodic use of a boys choir, and a duet ["Change me on the Inside"] with Joseph Williams - yeah, the former Toto guy. Go figure.

Did you guys get Eva Cassidy yet?

I'm up

2007-04-14T08:47:00.000-07:00

After capping all over Scott—well, it was more capping all over Kirk Cameron, but whatever—it's only right I serve myself up at the table. Here we go...

As I had absolutely no life, I would worship at the altar of the all-powerful TGIF: ABC's "Thank Goodness It's Friday" lineup just for kids like me. Thus, the top 5 would rotate constantly, but the list below is at least an accurate snapshot:

5. Perfect Strangers. The odd couple + culture shock + a funny accent = hilarity. I watched this one even when Balky and Cousin Larry each got married and somehow found it most convenient to live in a house together with their spouses.

4. Step by Step. The first show to capitalize on our society's penchant for divorce and remarriage. Suzanne Somers did a good job being sort of funny, but the best part of the show was the fact that the dude who took over the "Kickboxer" series of movies from Jean Claude Van Damme played a total stoner who lived in a tent in their backyard.

3. Full House. Along with Scott, I thought Full House was witty, urbane, and incredibly sophisticated in it's humor. I was never into DJ Tanner, though.

2. Family Matters. Just edging out Full House was my man Urkel. I watched this show even when they pulled out all the stops and had Urkel invent himself a Nutty Professor machine so he could turn into the smooth "Stef-AN Urk-EL."

1. Saved by the Bell. A perennial favorite that I can't see today without wondering exactly what I was thinking. Best episode? When Zack daydreamed an entire VH1 Behind the Music about his non-existent band, which, of course, included all his friends making it big, letting the fame get to their heads, and crashing into obscurity only to reunite for one last farewell tour.

Honorable mention goes to shows like Night Court, Who's the Boss, and all the random stuff I'd watch during the days over summer break. Like Remington Steele. No comment necessary.

Memory lane is very long

2007-04-14T07:38:00.000-07:00

There are many to choose from, here are a few:

5. Fantasy Island ("de plane! de plane!" Tattoo was so cool)
4. Magnum, P.I. (Tom Selleck: manly surfer dude w/ a 9mm)
4. (tie) The Rockford Files (his fee was $200 a day plus expenses)
3. Family Ties (Alex was clever, Mallory was hot)
2. The Six Million Dollar Man ("Gentlemen, we can rebuild him. We have the technology.")
1. CHiPs (Ponch and Jon - keeping your freeways free. Loved it.)

Honorable mentions would have to include The Love Boat (I wasn't allowed to watch it, of course), Starsky and Hutch (the coolest car until the Dukes came along), and yes, the original Dukes of Hazard (believe it or not, Daisy wasn't the main draw - it was the antics of Boss Hogg and Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane), and the 70s show "Emergency" (paramedics in the San Fernando Valley - I had a fire truck phase). Of course, I won't mention The Brady Bunch or Little House on the Prairie because of the decidedly male constituency here.

Too....many....jokes........

2007-04-13T16:04:00.000-07:00

"I wanted to be Mike Seaver"

Only if you can pull off the "banana defense" of creation.

"I wanted to marry DJ Tanner"

Scott just wants us to think he was after the Christian ones. Everyone our age wanted to marry Kelly Kapowski. I would have even taken her last name. Plus, the bottom line is that no one our age had the game to compete with DJ's big time high school boyfriend, Steve.

"Yes...I did also want to be Zack Morris"

I believe this calls for a picture of you with your bleached tips to be posted in a very public forum. He didn't just want to be Zack Morris...ladies and gentlemen, he became Zack Morris. I believe he also had a massive cell phone in junior high.

I think Scott's on to something here with the top 5 tv shows growing up. I just have this nagging feeling that Kottre is going to list FraggleRock while Andy's going to tell us stories of staying up late to sneak in episodes of Eight is Enough.

A top 5 near and dear to my heart

2007-04-13T12:35:00.000-07:00

That "ministry training" class looked really interesting to me too, and I'm going to try to take it as my last elective if I can figure out a way to swing it with my teaching schedule.

The weakness I've found with "organizational aides" at times is that I find myself spending more time organizing my work than actually doing it...I guess we have it's a "balancing game" right?! Man, my brain would love to throw that whole balancing thing right out the window and sprint as fast I can to one side or the other (doesn't matter which side of things really...I just like extreme logical comclusions).

And yes, I did spend most of my childhood watching baseball. In fact, my experience of the 1989 SF earthquake (living in CO at the time) consisted of me standing at the TV banging the side of it, screeming because we lost the picture and the WORLD SERIES was on.

But, just so as to not put myself in a box, here are my top 5 shows I grew up with:
5. Growing Pains (I wanted to be Mike Seaver)
4. Full House (I wanted to marry DJ Tanner)
I hope you appreciate the humor of #'s 5 & 4
3. Berverly Hills 90210 (I just wanted a zip-code that started 90... done!)
2. Kids Incorporated (I think this might have been the genesis of my love of musicals)
1. Saved by the Bell (Yes...I did also want to be Zack Morris)

Catching up to Colmery

2007-04-13T11:03:00.000-07:00

First, there is nothing wrong with making use of someone's productivity suggestions. Those things often arise unwittingly from biblical principles, actually. As always, read with discernment - if the author advocates hot yoga or sacrificing a pig in order to increase productivity, you might want to reconsider that chapter of the book.

Second, my class on Theological Method (no 's' on the end, that's a typo) will explore some of the issues that we take for granted in doing systematic theology. These may include a) the nature and use of language, b) what it means to 'use' the Bible for doctrine (i.e., what do we mean when we say the Bible is propositional truth), c) foundationalism and its postmodern detractors. Overall it promises to be an interesting mishmash of prolegomena-type issues. Lots of reading and discussion, a healthy portion of writing, and no exams.

Third, Picard is better than Kirk by a thin margin, but this is a very complex socio-cultural discussion. You're still too young.

New Schedule

2007-04-13T10:07:00.000-07:00

Hey, I got my bootleg copy of the TMS Summer and Fall schedule. I'd like to ask the venerable Dr. Snider (oh yes, he is a Doctor as far as the schedule is concerned) to enlighten me on a few things. What's your "Fundamentals of Theo Methods" going to cover? And what's the story with the one week summer class about Church Based training ministries (David Duel)? Looks interesting, but I'd love some more info.

GTD

2007-04-12T13:18:00.000-07:00

I know it’s not like my nerd-status was ever in jeopardy, but is there anyone else on this thing that watched a lot of Star Trek the Next Generation when they were growing up? I just caught a piece of a rerun on television and it brought me back. I’m thinking that Scott only watched baseball, Kottre was too busy finding new ways to use firecrackers, and Andy actually had debates as to whether Kirk or Picard is better.

BTW (that’s short for “by the way,” my twelve year old sister taught me all about it), have any of you ever benefited from any of those leadership/self-help/productivity books or methods? Someone just highly recommended Getting Things Done to me, and apparently it has a cult-like following, even among pastors. I’m thinking of putting it into use, at least a little bit, but it feels kind of weird. Then again, I suppose it’s just a stewardship issue. And can we find a new word for that? Every time I say “stewardship,” I feel like I’m talking about doubloons or camels or some ethereal spirituality.

Shut up, that totally made sense.

A Day Off

2007-04-11T18:09:00.000-07:00

Today's been my first complete day off in, well, in a long time...Lara made me breakfast (not in bed...that would just be lame), I read half of a book this morning, we went to the beach, walked, and just laid on the grass with Harper crawling all over us for like an hour. Then we drove around a couple neighborhoods on the way home...just for fun! I'm going to go pick up dinner and I think we're going to watch a movie tonight...now THIS is worship!

I Got the Jott

2007-04-11T13:41:00.000-07:00

So on my blog I recently posted about my latest find in the "sermon tool" realm: Jott. It's a free service that let's you call a number and leave yourself 30 second voice recordings that are stored as audio and transcribed and sent to your email inbox. Brilliant for when you're wandering around and have a thought or phrase you'd like to remember for Sunday morning, and much cooler than using one of those Doogie Howser mini tape recorders.

Anyways, a few days ago I was preparing for this Sunday. I started thinking out loud and decided to use the Jott service to record said thinking. Well, things got a little out of hand and I ended up talking through the entire passage using something like 18 "jott's" in a row.

By the time I got back to my computer they had kicked me off the service. Believe it or not, the "founder and CEO" of the company sent me an email letting me know that they couldn't handle the kind of volume I was putting out. Below is the actual email (which was worded rather nicely):

Hi Brian,
Ops flagged your account. I guess you left something like 18 30 second jotts, just reading something.

We’re not a dictation service I’m afraid. We just can’t afford that. We’re about notes to self, messages. We may offer a service at some point allowing longer jotts for a fee. Dictation services cost anywhere from $3 a minute and up.

Sorry about that. Please let me know if you have any questions, and sorry for any misunderstandings.

John

He also gave me his phone number and "skype" username. I might ring him up and see if I can grovel my way back into Jott's good graces...

My apologies

2007-04-11T12:24:00.000-07:00

I truly regret having to miss the chilli meeting this week... If it makes you feel better, I am at the flaky, peely stage of the sunburn process (after cooking at Dodger Stadium for opening day), and there is a good chance that a significant amount of Kottre would have landed in your chili if I were present...

Global warming, man, global warming...

Andy, I read your post on 24 over at your blog. I am "deeply saddened" that you feel that way. Not only is 24 the go-to sermon illustration for unimaginative pastors around the country, it's also taught us all an important lesson: that terrorists, no matter how well they are trained, have terrible aim and cannot shoot a moving target.

Brian, you have to tell the guys the Jott story...

Chili: Elixir of the Imagination

2007-04-11T07:43:00.000-07:00

B, thanks for putting up the Continuum. It is most inspiring to my banal side. It's been so long, I couldn't remember at first what "J.E." and "Kottre's door" stood for.

Isn't it interesting how that very special chili experience can fire a guy's imagination? I'm glad I used my new phone to capture some of the essence of the experience. There's nothing like a little Chipotle Tabasco to add a little smoky heat.

...and of course, no Soul Dog is complete without Mexican Coke - no corn syrup, only real cane sugar - the way God intended.
Refresco!

---Oh yeah, a Top 5 list for Kottre---
"Five Most Irritating Things in Life:"
5. Talk Radio
4. Top 40 Radio
3. Anne Coulter
2. Accidentally ordering a Soul Burger instead of a Soul Size
1. Dudes who flake out on a chili meeting

Mazel tov fellas...

Harkening back...

2007-04-10T17:00:00.000-07:00

...to the Continuum of Profundity, seen to the right:

The Chili Cohort met quite a few months ago and determined that St. Anne's is a very feasible enterprise to pursue, assuming that we stayed within these lines which Andy drew on a leftover napkin from lunch. I coined it the Continuum of Profundity, and thus our new mission statement was born: stay in the continuum. I know, I know, but we were tapped in terms of creativity at the time and inspiration wasn't really an issue.

Here's how it works: the top line is the ceiling of profundity, which no one can go above. The initials "J.E." stand for Jonathan Edwards, and since some of my posts were starting to approach Edwardsian levels of profundity—which are very difficult to converse with—we decided those were off limits.

The bottom line is labeled "banal," since Andy loves the french and decided he'd use their language to describe what "really, really bad" is. Just above that line is "Kottre's door," which was a story Kottre told about trying to find a door. Shockingly, this was in no way entertaining and barely, barely scratched the surface of interesting, and thus was ruled off limits.

The end result: post random, entertaining stuff that is interesting enough for someone to read through but not so ridiculously profound as to make other, less profound posts seem inadequate (i.e., stick to the arrow in the middle). Do it often, do it well, do it in such a way that facilitates chili community even when we're away from the beautiful San Fernando Valley.

Gentlemen, I feel no need to locate specifically where the "Top 5" kind of post would place on the Continuum. I believe we all know the height from which we've fallen. And today can be a clarion call to reform and resurge, or a day that marked the end of the Continuum altogether.

It's time to make the magic happen again. It's time...to go to the Hill once more.

Vaya con Dios,
Colmery

Top 5...

2007-04-09T19:49:00.000-07:00

Top 5 movies:
1. When Harry Met Sally
2. Any combination of Braveheart, Gladiator, and the dark horse "300" (since they're basically all the same movie)
3. Shawshank Redemption
4. Godfather
5. High Fidelity (since we're going with the whole top 5 thing...)

I know this is lame...

2007-04-02T10:48:00.000-07:00

...but we have not had a post in a while.

I want to hear what some of your "Top 5's" are.

Top 5 books, bands, movies, hobbies, sport teams, websites/blogs... all that kinda stuff...

I was just thinking that I don't know a ton about some of you guys...

do it.

Check out Google

2007-03-07T13:57:00.001-08:00

Google Book Search is intense.

man.. the EC again???

2007-03-05T13:24:00.001-08:00

Brian and Andy both articulated some thoughts that I had on the EC.
Scott (and Bette) also.
As for Josh -- well, it's his first post in a long while, so we'll give him some time to get interesting again.

Kimball's post seems to rely heavily on the same arguments I have seen on many other emerging church blogs...

1. Critics of the Emerging church are making hasty generalizations that do not apply to all (or even a majority of) emerging church communities.

2. Most of the loudest critics of the Emerging church have never been to an emerging church, and certainly have never taken the time to get to know EC leaders.

I have heard these arguments more than I have heard Scott say "bro." If critics of the EC truly want to have their opinions heard and thoughtfully considered by those within the EC, then they need to change their approach and address these arguments. If their only goal is to chastise, raise awareness and make themselves look like the mayor on Footloose - then stay the course, you're doing fine.

It should be clear, by now, that the Emerging church movement is multi-faceted and that its advocates resist being defined and put into boxes. Unlike, for example, the thousands of guys we are going to be hanging out with next week at Shepherd's Conference; where we could safely assume that most of them are Calvinist, expository preachers, who enjoy Sproul, Piper, Spurgeon and tucking their t-shirts into their shorts. The EC is not as homogeneous as the Shepherd's Fellowship - or the conservative church in general. This is part of it's allure, and also it's go-to defense from criticism.

I'm not advocating that Carson, Macarthur and all other EC critics take every emerging church blogger out for a pint - but I would like to see it happen with emerging church leaders like Kimball: I bet they would find a lot more common ground than we all think. Whoever and wherever it is, I think it's time to see some interaction between EC leaders and critics.

I am totally with Andy. If we really want to have fruitful discussion on the EC, we probably also need to discuss it on an issue-by-issue basis; rather than trying to discuss the conversation as a whole.

...you look like my friend...

2007-03-01T17:30:00.000-08:00

The title to Andy's last post inspired me. Maybe we could all learn a thing or two regarding how to relate to our fellow Christians if spent a little more time listening to Bette Middler. A sample:

From a distance we are instruments
marching in a common band.
Playing songs of hope, playing songs of peace.
They're the songs of every man.
God is watching us. God is watching us.
God is watching us from a distance.

From a distance you look like my friend,
even though we are at war.
From a distance I just cannot comprehend
what all this fighting is for.

From a distance there is harmony,
and it echoes through the land.
And it's the hope of hopes, it's the love of loves,
it's the heart of every man.

True.

From a distance

2007-02-28T20:59:00.000-08:00

Brian, you're right, only there's no pole long enough really...

Josh, welcome back. Not ignoring you, just not paying attention to you...

I don't think I have much to add (you didn't really think I would swat at this hornet's nest on a blog, did you?), but it really seems to me that if we took this discussion down to the issue level (what about multisensory worship? what about epistemic certainty? what about social justice?) we could have dialogue, conversation, understanding, organic green tea, maybe even fellowship. Oh, and doctrine, we could still have that, too. Anyway, this kind of approach (rather than critiquing a "movement") might help us actually function as the body of Christ should. And if this sounds vaguely familiar, it's because I got it out of my system exactly a year ago.

So, I'm thinking about taking a little weekend getaway to Santa Cruz this summer. Can anybody recommend a church?

Joining the "Dialogue"

2007-02-28T19:43:00.000-08:00

Hi Guys. Thanks to Kottre for being brave enough to nominate me; Scott for being gullible enough to agree; Brian for succumbing to peer pressure and allowing me in; and finally to Andy for...er....um....ignoring me altogether???

I really can't wait for Andy's response on this one. I'll hold my breath. Still holding...

My first question is: did J-Mac actually write the letter? I know his signature is at the bottom, but in all actuality wasn't it probably a certain "inflammatory" gentleman with initials PJ who happens to write..er..edit most of his stuff? Ok, so it doesn't really matter does it? He's still responsible for what's in it.

I have to agree with Brian (Colmery, not Mclaren) on this one (at least the wanting to "be treated like grown ups" part). I would actually go farther and say that being treated like grown-ups is only the beginning. What happened to Christians applying the virtues to their interpersonal interaction? Sadly, it seems like this type of thing is fairly common in the Christian world, ranging from theological treatises to fund-raising letters like this one. It seems that most of the time instead of trying to understand what another group is really saying and grappling with the issues (which takes a degree of humility), they (we?) just jump to conclusions and blast 'em. Sad. Since when did the virtues of kindness, humility, patience, love ("hopes all things", etc.) get generally lost in the way that Christians treat each other? You guys should know me well enough that I'm not just saying let's all love each other and ignore doctrine.

I guess this is just an issue that I got a little sensitive to at seminary where I was most exposed to it. Take for example the way that NT Wright is generally treated in ‘our’ circles. “He denies justification; he’s a heretic; end of story. No need to discuss him.” Actually if you read him a bit you find that it isn’t nearly that simple. Or what about all the firestorm about “just stop and think”? It just goes on and on. Christians chewing each other up in a completely unfair way. “They will know you by your love for one another.” Maybe Jesus got it wrong? Or maybe we’re so concerned with the doctrine that we’ve forgotten about the importance of how and why we critique and evaluate doctrine.

My thoughts feel very discombobulated (that means “confused” Kottre) at this moment. Sorry about that. I hope my rambling makes some sense.

Taking the Bait

2007-02-28T19:29:00.000-08:00

Since Andy can only touch this one with a very long pole, it's up to the rest of us...

It's easy to fall back into the emergent-fundamentalist cliches, even after a few years have gone by. "How is Carson/MacArthur/Etc supposed to know what is and isn't emergent if there isn't any cohesive doctrinal statement?" "MacLaren and Paggitt are the only two who have said much of anything besides pithy blog posts, and they're heretics, so they define the movement as heretical." And, of course, the other side: "How can you say these things without even having one dialogue with the people you're criticizing?" "How come it's always your interpretation that's right and how do you dare be so dogmatic about it?"

Pretty much every comment I read below the post in question was some variation of those four statements. But it's surprising to me that no one has gotten down to what I think are the real issues: emotional and not theological.

Webber, a solid guy as far as I can tell, rebuts the statements in the letter in a very gracious tone. But the problem is that he's still rebutting point for point what MacArthur said, and that was never the issue in the first place. The issue is that MacArthur by his tone dismissesthe emergent church as though it can be assessed in five minutes or less by anyone with any theological know-how. At least, that's the tone. This is why the emergent crowd always yells about "being a conversation" and cries foul about the level of research involved (he never visited any emerging church websites, etc). Sometimes they're right: straw men have definitely been used. But sometimes it's just that scholarly fundamentalist conviction can easily be mistaken for ignorant dogmatism.

At the end of the day, I think the emerging crowd isn't asking for domination of evangelical theology. They're just asking to be treated like grown ups and not dismissed outright. And even despite the fact that many of them are extraordinarily intelligent and well educated, I think they deserve it just because they are people like us with opinions that can either be engaged or ignored. As far as I can tell, engagement doesn't have to equal agreement. Even though you'll have to deal with a mob of people who didn't take the time to understand what was going on.

Kimball v. MacArthur

2007-02-27T21:35:00.000-08:00

In my research for the paper I'm writing for Senor Snider's class I came across a very interesting post written by Dan Kimball just a few months ago. I've followed Dan's ministry for a number of years now and have had some time to sit down with him at a couple YS conferences (more as a fly on the wall than an actual conversation participant), and I have known him to be a very mild mannered, humble man. He always goes to great length to not point out individuals or to make things personal, which is why this post caught my eye. In it, Kimball takes MacArthur head on in response to a letter that was sent out by "Grace to You." It's a little long, so make sure you've got a few minutes before you read it, but in the web adress the post is titled "Saddened by John"...I wonder if that emotion would be shared on the hill.

Alright, alright, alright...

2007-02-23T09:36:00.000-08:00

He's in. Though I've got some money that says that after he's a full fledged member again, we don't hear from him for at least a couple of months. Besides the obligatory sarcastically gracious acceptance post that we're all looking forward to.

A Second

2007-02-23T08:16:00.000-08:00

I would have to concur with Kotre's assesment. Maybe adding Walker Texas Ranger to the mix will keep us alive and kicking...trust me...I worked at the Bible College with him...he's got the time.

Kottre's opinion...

2007-02-15T21:52:00.000-08:00

for his consistent use of sarcasm and because he appears to be the only one that checks our blog; i hereby move that josh walker be brought back onto the hill...

i know talent when i see it.

Gospel Hinderances

2007-02-12T13:00:00.000-08:00

Well, I've been waiting to post until I had the time and...well...that's not happening, so I'll force the issue anyways.

I understand, and actually greatly appreciate, the need that exists for us to not hinder the gospel with our own practices, traditions, expectations, etc. However, I think that the most prominent fallacy in that post is the assumption that that is what Paul was doing when he established a certain order in the church, or instructed believers to behave a certain way. His exhortations were much more deeply founded than simply nods to cultural concessions. His exhortations stemmed from God's design of and desire for His people. His instructions were rooted in God's glory and His purposeful design for his church, and should not be explained away by "cultural context" (i.e. check the basis upon which Paul instructs the roles of men and women, it is almost always taken back to Adam and Eve, not based on practical concerns).

But while this fallacy may be present, the fact remains that we are told to be all things to all people and Paul does provide us with an example in his ministry which demonstrates his pursuit to not hinder the gospel in any way. So, the question still rings in my mind: In what ways are we unintentionally hindering the gospel by our practices, expectations, traditions, etc.?

Gotta go open up the gym for lunch...peace!

Men, women, carts, horses

2007-02-12T07:06:00.000-08:00

I don't have time for detailed discussion of the article, but here are two things to consider:

1. He refers repeatedly to "God's ultimate plan." Fair enough. The principles Paul uses in 1 Cor 11:3, 7-10 reflect exactly that kind of thinking. For example: "But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God." The point is not culture bound, it is the way God made things as a reflection of who he is. This is how Paul talks about male and female roles as a whole.

2. Methodological point: "Would appearing unloving or intolerant increase suspicion that Christianity is just a fundamentalist wacko religion to be ignored? Then make every effort to be gracious and full of love." I know he called this a "pragmatic understanding," but gimme a break here. We are to be gracious and loving because we are one with Christ and are his body, the reflection of him in the world. Methinks he has confused his cart with his horse.

The Church and Image

2007-02-10T13:56:00.000-08:00

From a blog with one of my favorite names, this article describing how the church should react to culture and it's image to the world (spoiler: the thesis is that we should change our image to avoid hindering the gospel, and thus slaves being subject to their masters and women remaining quiet in church are cultural concessions to avoid hindering the spread of the gospel). Worth talking about.

JPizzle gets Some Street Cred

2007-02-09T17:16:00.000-08:00

Apparently Piper has been getting jiggy with it, and, of course, everyone is really upset.

Gymnastics

2007-01-29T15:39:00.000-08:00

I think the main difference is that the metanarrative of the gospel is not rejected on principle anymore. It's rejected for the practical reason that it simply won't conform to our will like the rest of our world. UCLA kids used to question the philosophy of overarching reality (metanarrative), now they see the issue from the view of a consumer: the gospel is too static and doesn't take my input into consideration, so it's not entertaining enough nor useful enough to keep in my cart. It goes back on the shelf. Subtle difference, I know, but with some interesting ramifications. It might very well signify a response to the emptiness of postmodernism in that the philosophical side has caved in and a utilitarian/hedonistic model has taken its place. Or it could mean that the logical extension of metanarrative rejection is extreme relativism, even to the degree that it kills off the philosophical worldview that created it in favor of something more pragmatic.

Me and My Reality

2007-01-29T07:21:00.000-08:00

Interesting article. But I've always associated the "make-your-own-reality" phenomenon with postmodernism. If the metanarrative goes away, one's reality is community-dependent, but it's only a matter of time until the individual rejects the community's narrative and we're back to the high-tech, high-touch brand of existentialism that this article describes as pseudo-modernism. Whatever you call it, it looks to me like a natural extension of postmodernism. And the point of departure for the gospel is still the rejection of metanarrative. Isn't it?

Check This Out

2007-01-23T15:42:00.000-08:00

Not to disturb our mutual slumber (at least as far as St. Anne is concerned), but check this article out. It's a secular (which means it's not 5-10 years behind) philosophical attempt to analyze culture and discover what has replaced postmodernism, which has technically been dead since the mid-eighties. Since postmodernism has a lot of legitimate and illegitimate impact on the church, I thought finding out about the next "-ism" before it's already passed us by would be important. Then, thanks to StumbleUpon, I find the aforementioned article.

In a nutshell: the high academic postmodern denial of Truth and Meaning was born from and led to cultural forms that were highly ironic as they interacted with themselves, knowing all the while that true communication was meaningless. So art/literature/everything would end up being the author inviting the reader, if he/she were philosophically astute enough, to join him/her in a laugh about the meaninglessness of it all (all the while, of course, patting themselves on the back for being part of the cultural/intellectual elite which could understand such things). This bled down to the common man in the form of relativism, and, oddly enough, a kind of class system where those who were not in on the postmodern joke were looked down upon, and everyone wanted to be in on the joke.

According to the article, the new system in place is "pseudo-modernism," a pejorative term that describes a fundamental shift from a focus on the author and the joke, if you will, to the reader and their ability to create the culture on a whim. Postmodernism is Kurt Vonnegut, Derrida, and The Matrix (or Momento); pseudo-modernism is YouTube, American Idol, and Wikipedia. The main idea is that the deconstruction of Reality has left a vacuum filled by a creation of reality by the consumer, which exists in an eternal present. Reality is what you click, culture is yours to be made, and consumption is enjoyed only in as much as you were able to influence it's direction.

How this all affects the way we view people in this culture (namely, those born in the eighties and after) I leave up to you smarter people.

Writing madness

2007-01-06T19:06:00.000-08:00

I'm almost done drafting the final chapter of my dissertation (less than 10 pages left), and I just came up with a new theological term. I thought you might like it.

I'm writing about open theism now, and in introducing it, I was thinking about how to say that it represents the logical extension of Arminian theology, and it hit me.

Open theism is "end stage Arminianism."

How's that for irenic?

Mourning wealth

2006-12-29T09:09:00.000-08:00

"Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming upon you" (James 5:1). So I guess having the Tag Heuer is ok if you're ready for the misery.

That said, of course, the issue of wealth in the Scriptures is always a matter of heart and stewardship. The rich people James was writing to were being greedy and abusive toward others because of their riches.

As for pastors, the man of God is not to be a "lover of money" and must "manage his household well" (1 Tim 3:3, 4, 12). So you can have the watch but not love it. :-) I think you see the difference. It's not a bad thing; it's actually an opportunity for you to show your flock how a Christian should respond to earthly wealth. A pastor with a Tag Heuer and a Lexus is MORE accountable than one without.

You're welcome.

Christmas Question

2006-12-28T08:35:00.000-08:00

So I have a quandary: my parents gave me a Tag Heuer watch for Christmas. Now, since I'm completely fashion illiterate, I had no idea that this is like a big time watch. Apparently it's rather expensive -- and by "rather," I mean "very" -- and they came to me and said that they really wanted me to have it as a special gift, but weren't sure if it was "okay" for a pastor to have a watch like that. I didn't really know what kind of answer to give them, so I'm hoping for your guys' input.

Is it okay for a pastor to have nice things?

MySpace Experiment

2006-12-22T10:25:00.000-08:00

Found this article this morning, and it's pretty interesting. It's about a female journalist who went onto MySpace for seven days and accepted every friend request and invitation she received. Be forewarned: there's some frank talk of a sexual nature, but it's minimal and not graphic -- basically the same stuff that spams your email inbox every once in a while. And let's be honest, when you're dealing with MySpace you can't be a good journalist and avoid that side of it.

And in the meantime...

2006-12-20T17:00:00.000-08:00

You have no idea how excited I am about this. Seriously.

Going East

2006-12-19T17:17:00.000-08:00

So a friend of mine seems to think we're intelligent and that we have a wide readership, and thus he's asked me to bring a situation before y'all. He has "a friend whose brother has decided to attend and join the Greek Orthodox Church. He now has his own patron saint. Not to mention that this young man also attends a popular bible college in Portland. (it's not Western)."

What do you guys make of this one?

oh man!

2006-12-15T21:55:00.000-08:00

I just messed around with max's blackberry... you gotta get one, brian!

That thing was awesome!

I was wrong Brian! So totally wrong...

No PDA for Brian

2006-12-15T13:19:00.000-08:00

After spending seventy five seconds in the Cingular store today I learned that there are some significant fees tied to having a "smart phone" that does put it seriously out of my price range. So, basically, Kottre's been right twice this month.

Christmas Extravaganza

2006-12-13T11:09:00.000-08:00

Since only half of our membership atteneded the epic Shoreline Christmas Extravaganza, put on by our own Brian Colmery (that's right...Brian organized an event...and it was AWESOME!), I thought I'd share a piece of the revelry.

I feel it's safe to assume that Shoreline may have been the first church (at least of TMS grads) to have a rendition of Stonehenge performed at their Christmas party...but I may be wrong. I leave the conclusion up to you.

Check out the official "Christmas party video" here.

Ping 4

2006-12-12T11:34:00.000-08:00

So, it's been a while...but i thought I'd at least throw my two cents in.

From personal experience, I bought a PDA about three years ago for the exact reason mentioned in Brian's post. It now is used to seperate (incredibly effectively...I might add) my pens from my highlighters in my desk drawer. Never could quite work it into my life.

And since we're the only ones that read this blog...on a Sunday morning everyone and their mom wants to make an appointment with the pastor. A convenient way to weed out those who aren't in real need of your time, or who aren't serious about wanting to talk to you is to ask them to email you during the week to set something up. It may not be a sure-fire thing, but it can help the process of a pastor trying to protect his time...although your time may be best spent if you can email that person back while sitting at Starbucks with someone else!

Either way...that's my two cents (propbably only worth 1 and a half).

Ping 3.. (worlds most boring post)

2006-12-11T23:03:00.000-08:00

Brian,

I thought about going the PDA route recently....but chose not to...
Those things are expensive to buy (unless you get some new activation deal) and the data plans to get email, web access on them are really expensive (from what I've seen about $100 a month w/ phone service).

Most new phones (like razor's and all that) have bluetooth - to sync calendars, address books, appointments with our laptops. On top of that, many new phones will allow you to check your email too (I have verizon, for 2 bucks a month I get to check all my pop email accounts with my cell).

So I went the cheap route and stayed with a phone plan, and sync it to my laptop to do a lot of the personal organization that a PDA would do.

i sound like such a nerd.

Ping 2

2006-12-11T19:41:00.000-08:00

On an additional arbitrary note, I have a question: PDA or no PDA? My cell phone has gone from bad to worse to hanging up on people when I try to answer the phone. I think it's finally time to make the upgrade, and so I'm wondering if the PDA phone is worth it. It's not that I need to get all those emails about free generic viagra and the cashier's check I need to send to the King of Nigeria while I'm out and about. It's more that I'd like to be able to schedule all those meetings I make on Sunday mornings without double or triple booking.

I'm not comfortable with the BlackBerry thing, especially since I have a rather addictive personality. I'm thinking about the Samsung BlackJack. How close does that bring me to Relevant Pastor of the Year?

Pinging the group

2006-12-10T17:46:00.000-08:00

Thought someone should say something here before our blog becomes roadkill on the info superhighway (blogkill?), so it's a music post...

Recently an object of my musical delight is Eva Cassidy. First, the Songbird CD, then Live at Blues Alley. Until her untimely death of cancer at 33 (in 1996) she was making some pretty amazing music. A rendition of "Fields of Gold" that, according to rumor, Sting himself was envious of; and on Blues Alley, a flat-out version of "Honeysuckle Rose" that will leave you smilin' and tingly (even you, Colmery); and "I Know You by Heart" is so moving that if I try to describe it, I'll get mocked by the other Hill dwellers as a metrosexual girly man.

Chapter 3 is at 34 pages and rising. I now have less than 100 pages to write. Back to work.

Everyone's Sorry

2006-12-03T23:38:00.000-08:00

Interpret the title freely. Apparently the protest has been called off after a meeting between it's organizers and Driscoll plus Mars Hill Staff. Read all about it here. Not sure who "won," but definitely adds some spin to the discussion.

well...

2006-12-03T16:37:00.000-08:00

Well, as nice as it is to have a distinguished Professor tell me I'm right, I guess I was not...

This quote is from the group that is protesting driscoll....

People Against Fundamentalism is not an anti-gay group. While it may seems like splitting hairs, even though we do disagree with that theological position, the focus of the protest is not of his theology but the way he uses feminine terminology as a pejorative.

He similarly uses (or has used) as pejoratives terminology that society
has associated with gays, such as 'limp-wristed' and 'faggoty'. I think
reasonable people can (should?) agree that such rhetoric is not acceptable
to use either of gays or as slams against heteros.

You can read the whole article here.

As nice as it was to be right, I guess this time I was wrong.

Andy 1, Chris 0

Doesn't it almost seem like they read our post?...

It's about the salt

2006-12-02T07:36:00.000-08:00

I think part of the answer is in applying Matthew 5:13 and Colossians 4:5-6 in the right balance:

Matt 5:13 - "You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people's feet."

Col 4:5-6 - "Conduct yourselves wisely toward outsiders, making the best use of the time. Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person."

We are to be different, and to stand out in sharp relief against the darkness of the world, but we are also to be wise, understanding our audience and thinking about how best to communicate to them. So Driscoll in this particular case is great on being the salt of the earth, but may have lost sight of keeping his speech gracious in terms of word choice. Easy to say, but not always easy to do.

But Chris is right - no matter how a complementarian expresses his or her belief, some egalitarians will take it as misogyny no matter how graciously they say it.

Did I just say "Chris is right?"

I Can't Top Andy's Title

2006-12-01T17:21:00.000-08:00

The guys a master of alliteration. He must teach at a conservative seminary.

And make sure that you read all the way to the bottom of the Rocky article. Why? They're making another Rambo, where he turns "Christian warrior." I'm not kidding.

The thing I'm trying to figure out with Driscoll is, practically, how much are you supposed to "doctor" what you say based on how enemies are going to take it? Because Mars Hill is one of the only churches I know in a demographic similar to Shoreline's (lots of young singles), I've paid particular attention to his messages on marriage, singleness, and gender roles. In listening to those messages, I've found that Driscoll isn't overly passionate, or really worked up at all when he talks about this stuff. His tone is best described as "just being honest." He's not angry, or loud, he's just talking about what the bible says in a straightforward and generally relaxed kind of way.

Given that in some of his writing (not his speaking) he has a rougher tone which needs to be put in check, what exactly does he need to change? And what lessons do I learn from that as someone who speaks a lot? Because, to be honest, I find his honesty kind of refreshing.

Driscoll vs. Mad Chicks

2006-11-30T18:43:00.001-08:00

Sorry, I had to go there with my title...

As I read through all the quotes that the anti-Driscoll coalition posted, I did start thinking he was too brash. He has a very public ministry, and should be a bit more mindful of his word selection and tone.

At the same time, I don't think that his critics are only concerned with the way he expresses his view. He can clarify, re-word and sugar coat what he said all day long (in fact he did write a post to clarify his position that was pretty sincere), they are still going to have issue with it. It's his theology that they hate - not just the fact that he uses terms like "limp-wristed" and "chickity."

Driscoll's brash-ness and writing style make him an easier target; but when it comes down to it, anyone who holds to complementarian views will probably end up accused of misogyny at some point.

And for the record, the new Rocky movie is just what the world needs. We will all be better people for seeing it. I hope they find some way to put Apollo Creed in it.

Fizzling Films and Faux Fundies

2006-11-29T15:59:00.000-08:00

First things first: Rocky 6?? That's just wrong. Very Wrong.

As for the Driscoll thing, it's just so frustrating. I'm afraid this is a bed of his own making (no pun intended. really.). He's got this reputation for coarse language, particularly about sex. The egalitarians combine this with his complementarian theology (i.e., men and women have different, God-ordained roles and are equal in his sight), and they interpret it as misogyny. If I put myself in their position, I can hardly blame them. Driscoll's theology in this area is right, as far as I can tell. And, as far as I can tell, he isn't guilty of misogynistic content in his teaching. But instead of seeing him as a partner for legitimate theological debate, the egalitarians look at him like CBMW*-meets-Dr.-Gene-Scott. And ugliness ensues. Very sad.

*Council on Biblical Manhood & Womanhood, a front-running complementarian organization