Our Hangout

McLaren is a good person to get you asking questions and to think. He does a better job of asking questions than answering them in some cases, but that's okay. It is a rare author who can generate as much discussion as he does.

At times I think he gets carried away, and I think that some of his better critics have a point. But I agree that we can learn lots from him, as long as we read him critically just as we read everything else.

Ed, I like McLaren too, and the way he makes me think.

Darryl, I personally could be far more critical of other more widely accepted writers/thinkers than McLaren... but for some reason he's the one "critics" really enjoy picking apart lately (even personally attacking).

Yeah, I'm not talking about his bad critics, of which he has many.

But I don't think you should read McLaren without seriously reading what his really smart critics are saying. It's like a debate: sometimes the opposition raises stuff you hadn't thought of. Sometimes they make you appreciate your position even more.

Carson's critique isn't a perfect one, for instance, but I think he's worth reading alongside McLaren.

Somebody like Carson wouldn't go after, say, John Maxwell or Joel Osteen, so it's actually a compliment that he feels McLaren is worth the interaction. Or so I'm telling myself. ;)

Just to push back a little on one point, although hopefully not to pick a fight.

"Interestingly enough, often I hear people commenting on and worst, criticizing things they've never read. Kind of like the older brother in the prodigal son story, or the workers who were frustrated that the boss was willing to give the same pay to those who just worked one hour."

This may be a little harsh, especially since it may also be true also of those who criticize McLaren's critics without having read them. For instance, a lot of people have ripped Carson's critique but have never actually sat down and read it. How is that different?

I agree criticizing either side without reading them is silly, but I don't think intelligent and gracious interaction and debate with McLaren's ideas is out of place at all.

I'm not interested in picking a fight either ;)

Yes, (Darryl) to me that comment should work both ways, I would hope the grace would be extended in both directions.

I agree with you, gracious and intelligent debate would be welcome, but for reasons I mentioned in my post...I don't see a lot of intelligent and gracious debating going on. Talking primarily about the blogosphere. I think the reason for that is that the debating is usually centered around "who's right and who's wrong." And as long as that's the main driving factor for theological argument it's hard to have gracious debate. Somewhere along the line it always breaks down to tossing a stone or another at the other person.

Some people say & write that McLaren does the same thing the same way...I just don't see it and I'm pretty sure I've read all his published stuff as well as his blog.

In the end, yes, I like what he has to say, how he's more about helping people to think than about telling them how to think (some would disagree with that statement because he's willing to tackle controversial topics and express how he feels about them) that's ok. That's how I read him and how his writing impacts my thinking.

I think, for now, unfortunately, for many people, the lines in the sand go too deep and are still not open for debate at for most people, never mind gracious and intelligent debate. I know that's a general statement and it doesn't encompass everyone. As I mentioned before, generous and intelligent debate is usually only open in those areas that we agree with, if it crosses the lines that we've drawn for ourselves there usually isn't a lot of room.

As I read in Blue like Jazz, I'm learning that I need to be gracious and loving to those people I don't agree with as well because they're my brothers and sisters and God loves them just the same whether we're in agreement or not.

Interestingly enough, people like McLaren and others with similar thinking are the ones that are helping me to hang on to that belief and to the hope that we can get there. Most of my interaction with the "self-appointed" opposition wants to make me walk away from it all most of the time.

Darryl, I agree. I have never read anything by Carson, and have no real desire to. Nor do I comment about his critique of McLaren... or particularly care really.

I guess what I was saying is, you said: "as long as we read him critically just as we read everything else"... Totally true. So, why make this point about McLaren, do you know what I'm saying? Do you make that point about everyone you talk about?

Yes, you should read McLaren critically... and you should read everything that way. Unfortunately, some folks don't. They buy hook, line and sinker anything someone "with a name" says. Not cool. I just don't think we should be more critical of McLaren than anyone else. That's all.

I still love you [in a manly way].

P.S. Who is Joel Osteen???

I didn't see Ed's last post when I posted my comment.

I am still not convinced there should be any such thing as "opposition" in terms of other apprentices of Jesus. Period.

And frankly, I see tons of value in conversation, not so much in debate.

That's my two cents.

I agree, there should be no opposition...and maybe one day there won't be, but for now we're still too much about protesting...after 500 years we're not killing each other over theology so we're getting somewhere.

I'm not sure I want to be loved in a "manly way" :)

I'm getting so angry at you two that I am going to come over and hit you with my Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. ;)

Seriously, I think we are on the same page.

There are parts of McLaren I love and there are parts that I have problems with. I don't think that I only pick on McLaren or have it out for him. I also don't think I'm approaching it from the perspective of who's right and who's wrong, but I do want to answer what is true and what is right for us as disciples (which I think is what McLaren is doing as well).

As I read the post it almost makes it seem that if you have problems with parts of what McLaren writes that you must be the older brother in the prodigal son story. I don't think Ed means that, but that's how it seems.

It is possible to be gracious and at the same time to disagree with someone. I can show grace to McLaren and still say, "I think he might be a little off on this point, but is he ever right on this point."

The flip side of this is that we can't talk much about grace unless we show it to those who don't show grace to us, otherwise we're no better than they are.

Just don't bring the Calvin commentaries, those things will kill someone :)

We are on the same page. I agree.

My issue is that what we sometimes call disagreeing is not disagreeing at all, disagreeing is when we have different views and try to talk through the differences of those views. Whenever that conversation turns away from the discussion to the attacking or the demeaning of people, then it's not disagreeing anymore. This is what we mean about no good opposition. Opposition that says we're right you're wrong, get out! And I don't miss the point that it happens on all sides of the many fences that cross our Christian landscape.

In terms of talking grace unless we show grace...I usually try to go out of my way over and over to listen and try to listen to the people who come here and disagree with me. Even though it's true at times I just want to tell them off and walk away.

Finally my placing the stories of the prodigal son and the upset workers was to say that if anyone criticizes people they've never read, they're missing the point. And as I said before, that goes both ways. But more than that I chose those stories in particular because they tied in to the discussion that followed on hell - to which I think those passages have something to say to. But no one's really talked about my comments there, so I think we missed the real point I was trying to make in my post. To me the post wasn't about McLaren as much as the discussing his works are generating. The best of which being not those who believe, vs. those who believe the same way...but the freedom that some are finding to begin for the first time to say, you know what, I've always struggled with that myself, and the Bible says this and it doesn't seem to fit.

Ed:

That is an excellent struggle indeed - the struggle to take our blinders off and read Scripture on its own terms.

Yes, it is an excellent struggle, but it is also one that would lead to the removing of a pastor from his role by many established churches if taking those blinders off and reading scripture on its own terms leads us to places (even just in consideration) that go beyond the lines we've drawn in the sand. You know I'm not just speculating here, I've been there and I stayed there for a season. I still loved the people and I still believed in their potential, but the time came when the light went out. When unrealized potential was all that would remain for a long time. A time beyond me. Never mind McLaren being a bad guy, Billy Graham was a heretic. Will time fix things, no, only a strong move by the Spirit of God would, but what are the chances, I don't know, God does, I'm not bitter about that. At best it saddens me when I think of where they're at. It saddens me for the generations of young people that find Christianity not an option for them because of the Jesus being presented to them.

Here's the tough question, is that the exception amongst established churches? Maybe to that degree it's the exception, but in the sense that there is little room to take off the blinders and read scripture on it's own terms, I'm not sure.

Does that mean you give up on the established church? I've put in enough time, to show I believe otherwise. I preach about the church in a manner that shows I believe otherwise. As a matter of fact, even my considerations for the future show otherwise. But this isn't about me, okay that really sounded like it is. I'm sorry.

More and more I think people need to be convicted about what God's calling them to, and serve there with all their heart, soul and mind, and not feel like they have to apologize for the choice they've made, whether they're in a very missional community or whether they've chosen a circle that is still a long way from being that. However, I don't think the conversation will, typically, flow easily between these two camps. I still think there is too much thinking in both camps that the other is compromising. I think in the end let Jesus bear his fruit, without having to try and fix the other side. Or trying to make sure we're putting warning signs out for the other side as if they. I hate to be talking sides, and none of us likes it, but for now there are sides. Even though some of us cross both lines.

And that will be the secret for relationship in the future. How we cross those lines and how we influence where we are. And how we support one another in the process. And how we encourage each other in the process. Even when we don't understand or outright disagree. (Remember the disciples ticked off that there was another group doing stuff in Jesus' name who didn't belong to them. Jesus' response - let 'em be. - Remember people ticked off that people might be preaching the gospel with the wrong reasons etc. Paul's response - at least the gospel and Jesus will be preached.) Kind'a sounds like where the world is at.

I think we're in a time where this conversation is really only starting and if the conversation is to go on, I think it will need much gentleness and much graciousness on both sides, and in truth I think we're still figuring that out. We're also figuring out that we live in glass houses and we don't like people throwing stones and breaking our windows.

Finally, from time to time one or more of us will cross sides. And that's ok too. It's not a condemnation on the other side, it's that realization that God has created us differently and has placed us in a wondeful time where there's a choice.

But in the end the door to the future seems to be the same for both groups - mission. It will look different in all the settings and we need to give permission to each other to look different.

We might disagree here and there, but that's ok too.