Comments on: A Little Less Squirrelly Discernment http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment ...dispatches from the post-evangelical wilderness Sun, 08 Nov 2009 09:23:32 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Berean Girl http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment/comment-page-1#comment-7273 Berean Girl Tue, 18 Jul 2006 22:50:04 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment#comment-7273 Steve: I can see your point about how tedious it would be to have to read continual disclaimers coupled with other author's quotes. It is an option, though, if the author is really set on using a quote from someone who he doesn't agree with on important Christian doctrines. Ideally, when communicating spiritual truth or principles, Piper should quote someone he could endorse as Biblically sound or at least solid as far as the "majors" of the Christian faith. (Actually I haven't done any research on Willard and don't know where he is doctrinally although many seemed concerned about his beliefs.) I don't know how others respond when reading quotes in Christian books that are instructional or devotional, but I will often look up some of the quoted author's works if I am intrigued by what he or she had to say. I DO assume that, for example, if Piper quotes Willard on Bible memorization that Piper is holding him up to the reader as a sound spiritual teacher. I don't think that it would take "exhaustive" research to confirm that, but I do think there is a responsibility when quoting others in regards to spiritual teaching, exhortation, etc. Surely, there are "safer" sources to choose from in regards to encouraging Bible memorization. Actually, my pastor recently used a Robert Schuller quote to emphasize the importance of hope in one of his sermons. I think he could have quite easily have chosen someone else to quote (and should have). I think there is an unconscious "approval effect" that takes place in people's minds when they hear that in the context of a sermon (much like a book). We can definitely take this too far, but isn't it worth considering in the cause of guarding God's truth? Steve: I can see your point about how tedious it would be to have to read continual disclaimers coupled with other author’s quotes. It is an option, though, if the author is really set on using a quote from someone who he doesn’t agree with on important Christian doctrines. Ideally, when communicating spiritual truth or principles, Piper should quote someone he could endorse as Biblically sound or at least solid as far as the “majors” of the Christian faith. (Actually I haven’t done any research on Willard and don’t know where he is doctrinally although many seemed concerned about his beliefs.) I don’t know how others respond when reading quotes in Christian books that are instructional or devotional, but I will often look up some of the quoted author’s works if I am intrigued by what he or she had to say. I DO assume that, for example, if Piper quotes Willard on Bible memorization that Piper is holding him up to the reader as a sound spiritual teacher. I don’t think that it would take “exhaustive” research to confirm that, but I do think there is a responsibility when quoting others in regards to spiritual teaching, exhortation, etc. Surely, there are “safer” sources to choose from in regards to encouraging Bible memorization. Actually, my pastor recently used a Robert Schuller quote to emphasize the importance of hope in one of his sermons. I think he could have quite easily have chosen someone else to quote (and should have). I think there is an unconscious “approval effect” that takes place in people’s minds when they hear that in the context of a sermon (much like a book). We can definitely take this too far, but isn’t it worth considering in the cause of guarding God’s truth?

]]> By: Jeremiah Lawson http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment/comment-page-1#comment-7270 Jeremiah Lawson Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:04:56 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment#comment-7270 Berean Girl, if we use the principle that quoting implies endorsement then when biblical authors cite or allude to pagan or apocryphal writings does that mean those carry the weight of Scripture? Most of the people who would jump on Piper for quoting Willard would say we can't possibly make this kind of category mistake ... at least not when dealing with an author of a biblical text. But all bets might be off for anyone else. I can imagine how many people wish Jude had put in some disclaimer saying the books he alluded to weren't going to be in the Bible. :) Berean Girl, if we use the principle that quoting implies endorsement then when biblical authors cite or allude to pagan or apocryphal writings does that mean those carry the weight of Scripture? Most of the people who would jump on Piper for quoting Willard would say we can’t possibly make this kind of category mistake … at least not when dealing with an author of a biblical text. But all bets might be off for anyone else.

I can imagine how many people wish Jude had put in some disclaimer saying the books he alluded to weren’t going to be in the Bible. :)

]]> By: Steve Sensenig http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment/comment-page-1#comment-7247 Steve Sensenig Mon, 17 Jul 2006 23:18:45 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment#comment-7247 <b>Bearean Girl</b> wrote:<i>...isn’t quoting someone in your published writings an implied endorsement to an extent?</i> Is it really practical to consider that we should research everything about a particular author before quoting them? And what if they write something <b>after</b> we have quoted them? I guess what you're saying is that a disclaimer would prevent from this causing any problem, but I think it seems a bit annoying to constantly have to disclaim something in order to use it. Just my thoughts. steve :) Bearean Girl wrote:…isn’t quoting someone in your published writings an implied endorsement to an extent?

Is it really practical to consider that we should research everything about a particular author before quoting them? And what if they write something after we have quoted them?

I guess what you’re saying is that a disclaimer would prevent from this causing any problem, but I think it seems a bit annoying to constantly have to disclaim something in order to use it.

Just my thoughts.

steve :)

]]> By: Berean Girl http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment/comment-page-1#comment-7240 Berean Girl Mon, 17 Jul 2006 12:54:39 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment#comment-7240 Michael: Guilt by association is questionable as a tactic for reasonable or even Biblical criticism, but isn't quoting someone in your published writings an implied endorsement to an extent? Your examples of correct criticism using a disclaimer would also be proper, I would think, for someone like Piper to use in his quoting of Dallas Willard in his book. (Especially if he would want to distance himself from some of Willard's other doctrinal beliefs.) If we are serious about contending for and defending the faith, I think we should at least consider the charges of "guilt by promotion or endorsement" in some cases. Michael:

Guilt by association is questionable as a tactic for reasonable or even Biblical criticism, but isn’t quoting someone in your published writings an implied endorsement to an extent? Your examples of correct criticism using a disclaimer would also be proper, I would think, for someone like Piper to use in his quoting of Dallas Willard in his book. (Especially if he would want to distance himself from some of Willard’s other doctrinal beliefs.) If we are serious about contending for and defending the faith, I think we should at least consider the charges of “guilt by promotion or endorsement” in some cases.

]]> By: chaplainwinston http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment/comment-page-1#comment-7230 chaplainwinston Sat, 15 Jul 2006 18:07:05 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment#comment-7230 "How shall we use the Word of God to fight for joy?" I hope you don't mind if I respond in my own particular, and please, forgive if my technical analysis offends thee, Im a computer/Bible Geek, KJV only ... 4 all seasons ... fully justified it's inerrant and authorized by a king, prophets, priests who according to the O.T. had conversations with God, and had gifts from God such as to author and build the Tabernacle and Solomon's Temple for God for example. Am I being too picky or technical. As an natural gifted analyst the Bible is more too me that a book to read and memorize verse, chapter, to book. I have to know what it means, not just memorize what it says. You probably see why now I prefer to speak out side the walls of a congregation. They think I am too deep and it does not take all of that, therefore what I know can't be spoken there. I am an Urban missionary without a car nor offerings received ever. That does not jive in buildings either. I'm supposed to go along with the program but I can't. 10 + 7 months to get Bachelor of Biblical Studies and Clinical Pastoral Education with prior computer analysis since 1970 makes me not. I don't have a place to lay my head on the bus for long. Seems like Bishops or Deacons who call themselves pastors because they want to be according to Pauls instructions to Timothy and Titus don't like me very well and I can't stay in Church very long, back on the streets again. O My, mercy me, O LORD !!! How shall we use the Word of God to fight for joy? That's how I do it in part. Got Red Sea ??? www. Chaplain Winston .com “How shall we use the Word of God to fight for joy?” I hope you don’t mind if I respond in my own particular, and please, forgive if my technical analysis offends thee, Im a computer/Bible Geek, KJV only … 4 all seasons … fully justified it’s inerrant and authorized by a king, prophets, priests who according to the O.T. had conversations with God, and had gifts from God such as to author and build the Tabernacle and Solomon’s Temple for God for example.

Am I being too picky or technical. As an natural gifted analyst the Bible is more too me that a book to read and memorize verse, chapter, to book. I have to know what it means, not just memorize what it says. You probably see why now I prefer to speak out side the walls of a congregation. They think I am too deep and it does not take all of that, therefore what I know can’t be spoken there.

I am an Urban missionary without a car nor offerings received ever. That does not jive in buildings either. I’m supposed to go along with the program but I can’t. 10 + 7 months to get Bachelor of Biblical Studies and Clinical Pastoral Education with prior computer analysis since 1970 makes me not.

I don’t have a place to lay my head on the bus for long. Seems like Bishops or Deacons who call themselves pastors because they want to be according to Pauls instructions to Timothy and Titus don’t like me very well and I can’t stay in Church very long, back on the streets again. O My, mercy me, O LORD !!!

How shall we use the Word of God to fight for joy? That’s how I do it in part. Got Red Sea ???

www. Chaplain Winston .com

]]> By: Beyond Words http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment/comment-page-1#comment-7227 Beyond Words Sat, 15 Jul 2006 02:50:56 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment#comment-7227 Heather, I heard a rumor that some Korean Christians want to send missionaries here... :) Heather, I heard a rumor that some Korean Christians want to send missionaries here… :)

]]> By: Dan Price http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment/comment-page-1#comment-7226 Dan Price Fri, 14 Jul 2006 15:11:01 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment#comment-7226 Great post. Luther called John Huss (who died on the stake for not believing in transubstantiation) a "heretic to be burned." The was after the 95 thesis, after the reformation had started, etc... By the way, I believe I will be coming to your school in a couple months with Noel H. I'm the music guy. Nice to meet you. www.danprice.net Great post. Luther called John Huss (who died on the stake for not believing in transubstantiation) a “heretic to be burned.” The was after the 95 thesis, after the reformation had started, etc…

By the way, I believe I will be coming to your school in a couple months with Noel H. I’m the music guy. Nice to meet you.

http://www.danprice.net

]]> By: Heather http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment/comment-page-1#comment-7225 Heather Fri, 14 Jul 2006 14:13:20 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment#comment-7225 BW, Thank you for your clarification. I agree whole-heartedly with you and, like you, am also very excited about the developing diverse shape of Christianity. The diversity unveils a larger picture of God and His mosaic creation but also gives us a deeper unity. I look forward to the day when Indians and Chinese and Africans are sending their missionaries here! BW,
Thank you for your clarification. I agree whole-heartedly with you and, like you, am also very excited about the developing diverse shape of Christianity. The diversity unveils a larger picture of God and His mosaic creation but also gives us a deeper unity. I look forward to the day when Indians and Chinese and Africans are sending their missionaries here!

]]> By: Beyond Words http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment/comment-page-1#comment-7222 Beyond Words Thu, 13 Jul 2006 22:07:20 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment#comment-7222 Heather, I'm sorry if my comment seemed to imply that the true church has never existed. In the context of this thread, I was making the point that those who are against the Emergent church are fighting against the true church itself--which is constantly emerging and has been for 2000 years. It's the ethnocentricity of the past couple of hundred years of the Western church, in fact, that concerns me the most, as the church continues to emerge. The church is bursting with new believers in many parts of the world--like India and China and Africa--my concern is that those who cling too tightly to a Western conservative definition of the church will miss the chance to be mediators of Christ to the subcultures here, as well as to all the rich, diverse cultures of the world. Heather, I’m sorry if my comment seemed to imply that the true church has never existed. In the context of this thread, I was making the point that those who are against the Emergent church are fighting against the true church itself–which is constantly emerging and has been for 2000 years. It’s the ethnocentricity of the past couple of hundred years of the Western church, in fact, that concerns me the most, as the church continues to emerge. The church is bursting with new believers in many parts of the world–like India and China and Africa–my concern is that those who cling too tightly to a Western conservative definition of the church will miss the chance to be mediators of Christ to the subcultures here, as well as to all the rich, diverse cultures of the world.

]]> By: Heather http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment/comment-page-1#comment-7221 Heather Thu, 13 Jul 2006 15:32:19 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/a-little-less-squirrely-discernment#comment-7221 Beyond Words (I tried to look at your blog, but the website would not come up), While I agree that American conservatism does have its faults and its limits in hermeneutics, I would be careful to use words that claim that the "true church" has not existed at all. The "true church" is the body of Christ, with all of its faults and redemption. To say that it has not existed is to say that our perspective is right while their perspective was wrong rather than saying that both are limited but both see an aspect to God that the other did not (and both have a continuity with the other). This is arrogance, as if God works through us but hasn't been working the past 2000 years. More than that, it is ethnocentric, as the "true church" is measured by what is happening in the States. I want to affirm that I am excited about many of the things going on - the theology and hermeneutic that is being re-evaluated so as to open up new perspectives, some of the return to ancient practices, the emphasis on spiritual formation and disciplines (which include meditation that involves the heart, soul, mind, and body), how post-evangelical and post-liberal camps are moving to closer to each other. The church in the past century was responding to questions of culture. Most of those questions are antiquated and it is time to missiologically respond to the questions of our culture. As N.T. Wright says, we need to find out who we as the church need to be for the world. We are a kingdom of priests, of mediators. We are the body of Christ to incarnate His love and Truth to the world. I know God will work in this culture as He has worked in other cultures. And I'm sure that we will have our fallen and corrupt aspects that a later generation will correct. Beyond Words (I tried to look at your blog, but the website would not come up),
While I agree that American conservatism does have its faults and its limits in hermeneutics, I would be careful to use words that claim that the “true church” has not existed at all. The “true church” is the body of Christ, with all of its faults and redemption. To say that it has not existed is to say that our perspective is right while their perspective was wrong rather than saying that both are limited but both see an aspect to God that the other did not (and both have a continuity with the other). This is arrogance, as if God works through us but hasn’t been working the past 2000 years. More than that, it is ethnocentric, as the “true church” is measured by what is happening in the States.
I want to affirm that I am excited about many of the things going on – the theology and hermeneutic that is being re-evaluated so as to open up new perspectives, some of the return to ancient practices, the emphasis on spiritual formation and disciplines (which include meditation that involves the heart, soul, mind, and body), how post-evangelical and post-liberal camps are moving to closer to each other. The church in the past century was responding to questions of culture. Most of those questions are antiquated and it is time to missiologically respond to the questions of our culture. As N.T. Wright says, we need to find out who we as the church need to be for the world. We are a kingdom of priests, of mediators. We are the body of Christ to incarnate His love and Truth to the world. I know God will work in this culture as He has worked in other cultures. And I’m sure that we will have our fallen and corrupt aspects that a later generation will correct.

]]>