"Biblical," older than "change" and "hope"

So this is more of a confession, but today is the third day in a row I unintentionally got in a conversation only to find out it was actually an opportunity for me to informed on my deviance from 'biblical' truth. I have found I can talk to almost anyone about most things except for conservative Christians. Atheist, Jewish, Agnostic, Hindu, and Muslim friends don't make me agree with their presuppositions when we talk, but for three days three different conservative Christians did not know how to have a conversation without me agreeing to their assumptions about the Bible. They couldn't figure out if I was one of them or a non-believer, as if the only legitimate opinion a Christian could have was their own. Not because they are arrogant, but because it is Biblical. So below is my observation and then I am going to ask for some advice if you have any.



Everyone knows the fights among conservative evangelicals over the Bible.  There are all kinds of theories of inspiration and fights over language.  Is the Bible innerrant, infallible, God's answer book, unquestionable Truth, and so on.  While those are important discussions for some, I don't feel tempted to deify the Bible, make the text itself sacred, or come up with some unnecessary and presumptuous compliment about that Bible that then makes me squeamish when I read the terrifying and outlandish texts.  Basically I am saying that there is enough in the Bible I don't want to claim for God that making the text itself the point isn't even attractive to me.

For example, the Bible has plenty of slave owners who get good face time and there is ample material for at least 15 good pro-slavery sermons in there.  Believe me I took Baptist history where famous expositors of scripture come to conclusions like, "the holding of slaves is justifiable by the
doctrine and example contained in Holy writ; and is; therefore
consistent with Christian uprightness, both in sentiment and conduct" (Richard Furman ).  There is just no one 'biblical' interpretation of most things.  In fact, the word 'biblical' is a word that unnerves me.  I actually read (or think about reading) the Bible every day with the expectation to commune with the Spirit and be engaged in spiritual transformation - hopefully towards the pattern of Christ - BUT when I hear 'biblical' it usually serves as a conversation stopper.  When someone says "belief or action X is biblical" they mean "my belief or action X is one that I find in scripture (or my religious authority said was in scripture) and since these 66 books all agree on everything, X is God's opinion.  So on behalf of God I can no longer talk to you without rolling my eyes in holy indignation unless you yield to my opinion.  To be charitable and sympathetic would be to compromise X which, while being my opinion, is really - thank God - God's. Believe X or get the X!"  Maybe if the word biblical meant "belief or action X is one sensible and legitimate interpretation of the diversity of witnesses within scripture that could apply to this situation, issue, or idea," but it doesn't function this way in conversation.  Furman makes some wonderfully 'biblical' points about the sacred support of slavery.  Abolitionists made some equally 'biblical' points against slavery, though they had a smaller total number of biblical footnotes.  Hopefully one can see why something being 'biblical' does not necessarily make it wonderful.  Despite the 'biblical' status of slavery I think it is horrible and thoroughly unchristian.

There are other more contentious issues in our contemporary setting than this one, though slavery remains a cloaked part of our economic reality, such as issues of gender, sexuality, and violence for which the 'biblical' phrase gets thrown around and I just want to say that is not how I want the Christian community to come to its decisions (or more appropriately justify their decisions).  I would like to say, I read the Bible with a liberating hermeneutic that coheres with both the inclusion of Gentiles and rejection of slavery and brings me to support the full dignity and humanity of women, homosexuals, my enemies, and Republicans.

SO QUESTION: Is there an option for conversations with 'biblical' Christians that does not necessitate
a. being purposefully vague (though it feels deceitful) so they do not notice a difference or actually understand the meaning of your statements
b. deciding to play within their framework and attempt to make your point or deconstruct theirs without ever saying why and how you actually came to your conclusion.
c. accept that their hermeneutic does not make conversation with any difference possible and walk away thinking that they are ignorant fundies who need to be enlightened...for those who have eyes.....

A and B are uncomfortable ethically and are made presuming a certain elitist stance. C is something I work hard at avoiding and may give up for Lent.


ohhhhh I thought of another example during that yelling spell.  About every way of ordering the life of the Church is biblical if you pick the right passages.  I can understand being a Catholic, or a Presbyterian, or a Congregationalist..... all biblically.  There are verses that sound like Christ wanted to give the disciples special ontological power and create a sophisticated hierarchy to solidify power, but even there we can employ the liberating hermeneutic (PS - it is called the Free Church). 

The Photographic Prophet and the Will-to-Heal

I love my church here in Winston. Over the last three years I have come across a number of prophets in the community. There were those who came to visit like James Forbes, “Buzz” Thomas, Paul Fiddes, and John Cobb. Then there are a bunch who serve, share, and worship with me each week. My favorite are the single women at least 40 years older than me, which is something I would not think I would ever say. This past week we had a new prophet in residence and it was one of the most refreshing and hope-filled moments I have had in a building with a steeple in a long time. Stewart Gerarad, a 24-yearold artist of the photographic variety, showed up with a sampling of the photos from his most recent collection on display here in Winston titled “Augmented Reality.” There was bit of news surrounding his exhibit after two photos with nudity in them were found in a closet. Apparently in the ‘Christian city of Winston, here in the Bible belt’ that kind of stuff shouldn’t be around. Aside from engaging in a debate of what classifies as art or the religiously imperialistic tone of the wanna-be ‘critic,’ I was struck by the insight of a number of comments Stewart made in a 30 minute interview with our Education minister Ken Myers. (Since its been a week I am not sure if he said what I am reporting during the public forum or afterwards in a conversation, but here we go. Plus other than what I wrote on 3x5 card the quotes are paraphrases)

Stewart, while not a church-goer since youth group, is not foreign to religion or the Christian faith. In fact he mentioned being ‘sword drill champion’ at his church growing up. In church speak that means he memorized a bunch of bible verses and knew the Protestant ordering of the two testaments. Point being, at some point he was heavily involved in his faith community. Ken asked him couple different ways why he wasn’t compelled to stay in a church to which he said, “When I got older I came to see that religion, at least how I had experienced growing up, wasn’t attached to the reality I was living in. Plus I did the whole Christian thing enough to have Jesus on tap.” Something that stuck out to me was his use of the word “pure.” He didn’t use it with a good protestant guilt complex, but as something treasured, valued, and even messily honest. In a response to a question about postmodernity and ‘why photography,’ he made a rather profound even prophetic observation about postmodern purity. There are a bunch of forms of art, most of which have a form of technical perfection. There are things like painting with a bunch of styles that you perfect the technique to do and then new digital based art that with the mastery of more technology there are more possibilities. Photography is simply the image. It is limited by what was actually present in history at the moment of the shot, it is limited by vision of a single lens, and is limited to the power present of a single sense, sight. The photo is pure in the postmodern sense. Stewart said, “technical perfection doesn’t mean a thing if you don’t get the image right.” Images are revelatory beyond the confines of technique and system, they reveal reality that is true but often ignored for the sterile, clean, edited, socialized, and manufactured existence we know. The stark difference Stewart saw between religion and reality was a prophetic judgment of our faith-imaging, not our religious speak that ‘sounds’ religion to the center of our life, but the substance in the religious images of our community. Where are the images of reality in religion? Is the religious reality imaginable? Bearable? Simply speakable?

When pressed by questions on how to get his postmodern people to church Stewart said, “I would think you should create a recovery zone that anyone can come to and those with the will-to-heal can find partners.” A pure community with postmodern sensitivity is one where the reality of life can find an open space to be as messily honest as need be and a community that encourages the will-to-heal. I imagine that this community is one where it is ok for the cross present and dirty or should I say pure.

Elgin + St. Francis = fun before bed. At night my son-in-process and I have a little night vigil and maybe a little theological discussion so he starts off on the right (or left, depending on who is judging) foot. Tonight Elgin and I did some reading from St. Francis of Assisi, maybe the coolest 'reformer,' and we got to this quote.

"Unhappy is the religious person...who instead of keeping the things the Lord has spoken to his heart and demonstrating them by a life of quality, tries to make them known by talking about it. That person may receive nothing more than an earthly reward, and those who regarded that person's words will take away little fruit."

Hopefully Elgin will talk a little less than his Dad and live with heart felt compassion given to him by his Creator.

Len Sweet Audio pt 1

I posted the first segment of Len Sweet's audio from the 'Remix\Reboot' event. Check it out.

Project Presentation

PostProtoTheoEpistemic Projectilicitiness
Or, The things you will never talk to your congregation about unless you care about Jesus really mattering in the World

Senior Projects:
Tripp Fuller
“Becoming Jesus’ Church in the Post-Colonial World: Reframing the Mission and Power of God”

Corbin Boekhaus
"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End”: Creation and Eschatology in Dialogue with the Natural Sciences

Corbin, Tripp, and Jesus want you to be there!


Thursday, April 26, 2007
3:30pm - 5:30pm
Wingate Hall Room 302

A Refreshing Conversation

This was not the first time Patrick and I had this conversation. He left a small rural town and showed up at the University with a Gideon’s Bible in his glove compartment, the Roman’s road written on a note card in his wallet, hundreds of Contemporary Christian CD’s that sound just like ‘the real thing,’ and a Bible drill training that would make any youth minister proud. He didn’t bring his Bible or a track to our meeting this time, just the same question he had asked before but this time I think he meant it. “I never knew people like this existed. I mean I don’t even know what to do. There are so many lost people and I don’t even know how to help them find the truth or…I mean I can’t even figure out where they are and what they are looking for or even what their questions mean. At this point I am beginning to wonder if I am not as lost as they are…. Where is God here? Why isn’t the good news good enough? Do you know what I mean?”

I do.

McKnight and Tony pt.2

Check it out here. There is some more discussion from the audience here, but Tony will tell you that everyone is a relativist.

Len Sweet Fun

April 14th I am starting a new endeavor, Kin-dom Nexus. Basically I am going to organize “more-intimate-than-a” conference type things with authors and artists. The goal is to create more conversational engagement between people, which is code for talking about things that matter while having fun. On April 14th will be Kin-dom Nexus part One with Len Sweet. He is calling the conversation “Remix and Reboot: Becoming Jesus’ Church in the 21st Century.” If you are interested or would pretend to be because you don’t want Tripp’s first attempt to be his last, then registrar on the website. There are flyers and things on the website if you feel like proselytizing Christians into coming, so maybe the church will be less dodo in the future. If you bring friends then I could hook you up with a free pass, so check it out and join the ranks if it sounds interesting.

This is a sweet picture of Zach and I hanging with Scot McKnight and Tony Jones this weekend at our conversation weekend we put on. The weekend was awesome and I will post some mp3s of the conversations and talk about them then - once I get a new chord that wont' hiss at me. For now I wanted to let you in on a vision of the emergent eschatological banquet. Friends talking about theology and enjoying fantastic Rockey Patel cigars. Scot and I had Vintage 1990 Churchills, which are among the greatest things on God's planet. Zach and Tony had the Rockey Patel 'Edge' series which are a little cheaper than the 90, but still has the complex smoke Rockey's are known for. The best thing about a Rockey, outside of being served at the eschatological banquet, is the fullness of flavor without the gigantic amount of nicotine from similar cigars, say a Comacho. Any way, if you wondered what the emerging heaven looks like here it is. If we ever cross paths and you want to visit this anticipatory reality let me know, I will most likely be packing cigars and can create an 'opt out' situation for you. P.S. The reference to Spencer Burke's eschatology is in no way an endorsement. Save your money and buy Moltmann's eschatology.

What Does the Postmodern Negro and PoMo Pirate have in Common?

Tonight I chatted to Anthony Smith (postmodern negro) and it was just flat out energizing. We are both involved in the emergent conversation and so we were talking about random conversations we have gotten in with interested onlookers trying to figure it out and came to two general things that need to be either more emphasized or brought into the conversation. Emergent leader types are so concerned about keeping everyone happy at being in the conversation that sometimes you can’t tell what they think or mean at all. Now I am down with letting anyone who wants to join in do so, but someone’s presence isn’t an excuse for being dishonest or avoiding being truly clear. I have talked to multiple conservative people about the emergent church and basically felt like I was being witnessed to by a representative from true Christianity. Then if I am honest about some random topic (if they are scared of emergent types it is usually God letting too many sinners into heaven, not having enough confidence in Truth to use it as a sword on others, being too loving to the homosexual community, advocating too much feeding of mouths and not sin sick hearts, and being too honest about how the majority of the institutional church in America is not identifiably Christian…now that is an excursus) the conversation ends and it becomes an attack on some straw figure version of my own theological opinion they learned at an apologetics conference. That isn’t a conversation. I vote that people involved in the emergent conversation, when pressed on something, say exactly what they think and then let the other share too. If being in a room with a Jesus follower who thinks that the war in Iraq is a disgusting sin that requires repentance or that believing in truth does not mean a human can know it absolutely, makes the conversation partner unable to keep conversing then so be it. I know not everyone in the conversation agrees on issues, but we should on the value of conversing and that requires honesty. If getting everyone to be honest means some people don’t want in that is their choice. We should always provide room for any voice and be as articulate and honest as those who seek us out to save our theology. Being honest will be perceived by the ‘modern’ conservatives (and liberals) as emergent finally letting their true sub-Christian –insert their favorite category used to label people you demonize and ignore – selves be known. I bet that when, perhaps a smaller group of people get honest about becoming a gospel people in our contemporary setting others will come and join because we will have effectively separated ourselves from being associated with the groups who left the gospel to be the Empire’s chaplain and publicist. (an aside: this may sound political and it is, but not partisan. when we screw the two-thirds world again with our farm bill and subsidize American crops and facilitate the growing debt and starvation of sisters and brothers around the world it will have happened with a democrat congress)

The second thing is the need for real conversation about the American churches role in colonialism. That is another conversation, but it might step on too many toes (including my own) and the upcoming Emergent Manifesto might not sell as many copies to fundies who think our souls can still be saved….then again we might get cult status at Bob Jones and their missions class might buy it.

Well Anthony and I’s conversation was really good and this rambling does not reflect anything other than me being up late and responding to what we talked about. I do think it’s cool that this suspect movement leads to a 24 year old white Baptist dude in Winston Salem becoming friends with an African-American father who is a reformed Pentecostal in Charlotte.

Christian….what does that mean?

Christian….what does that mean? I guess I may have never thought this was a question that needed to be answered, but here is why I ask. I was talking the other day with a longtime friend of mine. He didn’t grow up with ‘religious’ parents, so all he got was a heavy dose of southern civil religion – which may or may not be that friendly to actual transformative encounters with God. Well my friend and I were talking about what you might call global issues or things that matter, but for both of us they are the reasons we lose sleep at night. After sitting there for a while and mourning the breaking point feeling we shared he asked a question, “I know you are bound to have an explanation, but you seem to be too observant and care too much to be a Christian.” Underneath that question is something I think the church in America needs to think about and hopefully respond to in a positive way.

When the growing segment of the American population with no attachment to the church think a ‘Christian’ they think of a very particular strand of the faith when. ‘Christian’ equals that segment that manages to get huge amount of face time and have even managed to become a cultural stereotype of ignorance, fanatical nationalism, crusader mentality, and compassionless judgment. I’m not sure that the stereotype is accurate to all visible conservative evangelicals, but the crazies do get enough money to stay on TV and radio waves around the nation. In response to my friend I made a case that the gospel not only acknowledged the realities that worried us, but responds to them and calls the followers of Jesus to do the same. He asked why in all the hours of playing drinking games to TV preachers all he knew was the God took his frustration out on Jesus and this gave you ticket to heaven and a means to worldly success if you signed up. “Christianity seems to be a way to avoid the world’s ills and wash your hands of the situation in the name of God,” my friend said “and that is just intolerable.”


After this conversation I decided that there is not one Christian faith, but a multiplicity of Christianities. The one I am committed to and seek after is the one that takes Jesus’ message seriously and proclaims a God who is love for every one.

By the end of the conversation my friend said, “if what you said about Jesus is true then I can understand wanting to follow him and not giving up on God.” So I ask myself again, what does Christian mean? I am not sure, but in the mean time there is fiercely loving Jewish man calling me to follow.