Comments on: Review: Static by Ron Martoia

By: Derek Ray

Derek Ray — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 23:54:26 +0000

Chris Brown is a good person he does not have a history of violence..cant wait til this is over and he is with a new love.

By: chris synesael

chris synesael — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 05:11:05 +0000

one of the questions that i kept asking myself as i read this book was, ‘did everyone else before us have this wrong?’ i mean spurgeon, edwards, other preachers, were they preaching the ‘wrong’ gospel? i mean theres was certainly one centred on repentance, forgiveness, etc…

the other question was this, ron only refers to scriptures from the Gospels, what about Pauls writings, he was clearly interested fall-redemption.

i realize i am late on this one, but i just read it and wanted to get my thoughts out there…

By: Marcia

Marcia — Thu, 10 May 2007 12:25:06 +0000

Oops–I didn’t mean to make it sound as though I don’t believe those embracing the emergent stuff aren’t going down the narrow road. That’s their own business.

I was only speaking for myself.

By: Marcia

Marcia — Thu, 10 May 2007 12:08:04 +0000

jmanning–thought-provoking comment. I’ve wondered sometimes if my own attraction for things emergent comes from my unwillingness to go down the narrow road.

As far as the book review, hey, readable works for me. I’ve been trying to struggle through Colossians Remixed for weeks now.

By: Jamie Arpin-Ricci

Jamie Arpin-Ricci — Thu, 10 May 2007 03:44:43 +0000

Wow! Excellent review. I wish I had written it. I wrote my own review, but will likely send people your way, as it is excellent. Thanks for the great work here.

Peace,
Jamie

By: Matybigfro

Matybigfro — Mon, 07 May 2007 22:30:53 +0000

the thing is personanly i’ve done bit of missional reading
and to be honest am not to bothered about what i’ve heard written by driscoll already. and my wife not to keen on him because of his haggard blunder. also i think he’s very much in a entirly different cultural context to me and so i’m not sure how much relevance will hold.

what i really want is, What Jesus said and what it meant to those who heard it (probably in the line of what NT wright has done but not as technical as i would like to read it with my wife, although he’s out local bishop and i’ve heard him speak and find him incredible he sends my wife to sleep cos she can’t hold onto the depths and widths to which he goes to make his points) with a bit of modernism did this to our understanding of that postmodernism showed this about our understanding of that

have been recomended some scott mcknight by some freinds

By: Michael Spencer

Michael Spencer — Mon, 07 May 2007 00:08:35 +0000

matt: for missional church basics, Driscoll’s Radical Reformission is very good. Statis a fairly narrow discussion of Biblical issues, i.e. do we understand the Gospel correctly?

By: Matybigfro

Matybigfro — Sun, 06 May 2007 22:58:31 +0000

HI
just wondering
i’ve read the mclaren trillogy, and velvet elvis
i’m not new to the new ideas about what the gospel of jesus was and is
and redefining christianity
however i do feel often confused about how i would then, sum up what i know/believe, how to live to that the how to offer it to others.

Myself and my wife are in the process of begining a missional work in a estate in england doing something organic and christ focused
i feel like i need a reall brushing up on the message of jesus and an opurtunity to get deep into the story of jesus.

Also i’d like to have something to read with my wife to bring us on the same page (it needs then be not to accedemic and a good read) as she’s from a more down the line church/gospel understanding (although both of us grew up in charismatic churches i was naughtier and asked naughty questions) she came out on the wrong end of a penticostal mega church and is fed up of the church culture but not revised the story

mabey this all to much to ask of one book
but
in your opinion would this book be a good book to help us understand what we’re living for and inviting people to

cheers
matt

By: Kyle Potter

Kyle Potter — Fri, 04 May 2007 12:51:09 +0000

I’ll pick up a copy of this.

Just a question about the subtitle – is this critter “anti-church”? ‘Cause I’m just about sick of that…!

By: jmanning

jmanning — Fri, 04 May 2007 12:14:25 +0000

Michael,

Is it possible for those who have rejected the faith in “traditional terms” as you say, to have also rejected the faith in its essential components. They may argue about the package…but they really don’t like the product either.
Then they find a lot of people who are also discontent about the packaging, and they feign that they are in agreement, when they really just don’t like the product deep down.

To be literal, not everyone who rejects fundamentalism does so because they don’t like the “fundamental” aspect of it. They reject it at times because they just reject Jesus, even the skewed portrayal of him. Their re-packaging of his message becomes then an idol of His essential components, and they have altered Christianity.

Not all, but some authors, do this quite well. They say “I believe in the central points of Christianity, they need to be re-articulated”. And what they mean is “I believe them according to my own definitions of them”. Wright may be among these….his restatement of justification and hell….sigh….its not a restatement, its a reinventing