Based on this post, I think someone should really inform the “editor” of the definition of hypocricy. I just find it more than funny that a site that routinely parrots pastors, both dead and living, is complaining about pastors using each other’s material.
This is also coming from the anonymous “editor”, so we have no idea who this is talking, anyway.
This entry was posted
on Monday, November 5th, 2007 at 4:34 pm and is filed under Editor, Hypocrisy, ODM Responses, ODM Writers.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
53 Comments(+Add)
I thought the same thing. I also decry the blatant sermon parroting that seems to be going on these days. But if you look at CRN you will find that most of their devotional material is not just a rehash of other’s material, it is just a copy and paste. Without Tozer, Chambers, and Spurgeon their devotional posts would dwindle.
So they seem to be offenders in this practice as well.
Interestingly is that now that you said he/it/whatever editor “complained” he/it/whatever editor will say. “I am just reporting it.”
but…
Why report it if you are not complaining…
Now I see it this way, they are complaining that they are being challenged to NOT used other peoples sermons…. hmmm… like Spurgeon for example. So since that is an impossibility for them, to actually have an original thought on their own, they are complaining that they will have to stop regurgitating Spurgeon all over people and get back to the Bible and teach from IT! LOL!
Sadly though even if they did that, they would have to quote MacArthur or Spurgeon to back their own original thoughts so that they would be considered to be biblical by their listening audience… (Think about that for a moment)
Be blessed,
iggy
Iggy,
I would buy the “I’m just reporting” argument if it were just a link with an excerpt, but in case there is a bit of commentary. Of course the commentary tries to implicate the emerging church, but the linked article says nothing about the EC.
I have come to the conclusion that the “editor” moniker was invented to deflect negativity from travelling to the individual blogs. Yea, real warriors.
I was working on a cartoon having to do with pots and kettles. You totally killed my idea now.
Sigh.
The Spanish phrase that is the equivilent to the pot/kettle phrase is:
“The donkey is talking about ears?”
That’s just ass-inine.
I do remember how some told me that I was a “immature” to not let people post comments for a time… in fact here is his exact words!
Weird to read it again as it also seems that Tony is denying Jesus is God and that Pilate was only able to have authority if it was granted by God… but then that was a very strange conversation as all are with Tony Rose.
But the point is that i was told how immature i was for not letting comments… in fact for stating things and then not letting comments to respond to what was stated… and he is one of the “editors” of CRN… what a hypocrite! Closed comments as was getting comments from oldtruth.com that were really nasty and mean. Old news I know but this is how and what they do and then accuse others of not doing… it is a case of do as we say not what we do which seems to represent lying as a christian practise! While I see us “evil truth hating emergents”call for our words to match our belief! God said love your enemies and pray for them… and we do. And oh, I have forgiven Tony Rose and am again now for all the unkind things he and his friends stated about me in their slanderous attack.
Be Blessed,
iggy
Iggy, I didn’t know you were ‘emergent’! But then again, there’s really no definition of what an emergent is lol. Mclaren seems completely different from you. I happen to think that’s a good thing.
But yeah, what you’re talking about does seem pretty hypocritical of them.
Joe
Joe C,
Actually McLaren had a major influence on me and I think that the majority of the stuff out there about him is rubbish. I have listened to hundreds of hours of his lectures and read many of his books and truly cannot find even a minimal amount of the things attributed to him…
Now I do see a bunch of people who cannot read adn understand his genre or how he speaks or who he is ministering to. They try to filter him through modernism and then filter that through their own theological baggage… and they cannot see out of the box they have themselves in.
I am a like most emergents/emerging… as I do not see a “box” and if I did, my God is too big to fit in it! LOL!
be blessed,
iggy
Well friend, I can never figure out what emergents believe or not. All the emergents i’ve read from seem completely different from each other, the only thing unifying them is this….weird (in my opinion) “we’re emerging” attitude lol. I just feel it’s like an anything goes movement. I’ve seen bad bad and good good in it, and a lot of middle ground.
God did put Himself in a box though, did that thought ever occur to you? Is that an emerging thought? I dont know lol! He put Himself in a Book, that invariably boxes Him in, in terms of human understanding. He did that on purpose. Though we cannot know everything about God, true enough, the question is, what are we doing with what He HAS told us about Himself?
I listened to the WoM radio show, when Mclaren was on, and I gotta say….he sounded actually kinda insane, if I can call it that, that’s kinda mean I guess, but that’s the distinct feeling I got. I was really trying to give him the benefit of the doubt, but dude iggy if you haven’t listened, you gotta man. It sounded more like new age jibber jabber than anything else. My wife and I always always always try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, but our jaws were pretty much…hanging open listening to him. And I listened to the carm radio show with him on too, that was just as bad. I figured, already I’ve read what he has to say, and a lot of it to me seems like it’s definitely not what the last 2000 years of Christianity has believed…. so okay I’ll listen to what he has to say from his own mouth, and I don’t know dude, I don’t know. Do you really believe like he does? I’m not even sure what he believes iggy lol. I mean, I’ve heard Benny Hinn speaking in ‘tongues’ and beating people with his jacket being more clear than this guy was, lol lol. I don’t think it was the radio shows either, because he said the same things and acted the same way both times.
Tell me Iggy, what box am I in? I thought I was in the box of Scripture, and the Holy Spirit in me. But if I can’t figure out what Mclaren is about, then am I in some ‘box’? Or maybe he’s just dead wrong? Because a lot of people see it that way, that he’s wrong. Why is that such a hard thing? People are capable of going off the deep end and being wrong.
Ah I didn’t mean to go off on a tangent like that, but you Iggy seem FAR clearer in your positions than Mclaren. That’s what I’m getting at here. Hey, if you want to talk more, just email me or something. You have my interest.
Joe
Joe,
i am far clearer as I can be while McLaren needs to be much more open in his public so that he can minister more in private… I recommend reading
The Church on the Other Side: Doing Ministry in
the Postmodern Matrix, (Zondervan, 1998, rev. ed. 2000)
More Ready Than You Realize: Evangelism
as Dance in the Postmodern Matrix (2002)
I think that without these as foundations much of what McLaren states is missed.
As far as what box you are in? Whatever box you placed yourself it! LOL!… Seriously… that is my answer… I do not place anyone in any box…. remember I don’t see boxes. I see relationships and people and interactions. I see that if Jesus stated it and you can understand the context be it historical and contextual and revealed by the Holy Spirit, you have sound doctrine and understanding.
Much of “box” theology is no different than the Church in the box that many criticize to me. It is ready made and comes with no struggle as to what one really believes… It is easy believism as it is just regurgitated theology that is more based on traditions than Scripture.
Now, there are many “box” thinkers in emerging also… in fact no box people need box thinkers for structure… so I am not “anti-box thinkers”.
The core of emerging is that one takes time to deconstruct what they believe… some do this and do not come out… they lose faith, (though I see that many of those based their faith more on the institution than the Person) yet many of us have found deeper and richer understanding and hope.
To me it has always been looking for THE REAL. It is a return to the authentic message of Jesus and the Kingdom. So many of my friends are also looking at their faith through that view.
I am sure that someone can take my writings and put it in some sort of box. In some ways i am “fundamental”… or rather “foundational” as I prefer as fundamentalist have corrupted that word.
I see that we need to be real (not in come compromising way) to those around us that we minister… I do nto hide myself behind some religious facade… when I hurt I reach out to my friends and they pray for me.
Be blessed,
iggy
Well Joe, now you have done it…wait for the responses to your comment…you have opened up the emergent can of worms! My prayers are with you! LOL
I get what you’re saying, but when Mclaren couldn’t even answer if heaven was a place and God was in it…? or “Where does the good budhist go when he dies?” That’s when you’ve ‘deconstructed’ TOO much. It’s that whole ‘deep end’ thing I was talking about.
PS, I have no idea what you meant by your first line…he’s gotta be more open so he can minister in private? So what he says in public I should ignore and what he says in private is ok? How would you know what he says in private 1 on 1? Just curious. All in all, “Emergent” just confuses me, it seems so foreign to me. And remember, I didn’t grow up “Christian”, I had nothing to “deconstruct”, just a Bible and the Holy Spirit. I’m just lookin for an explanation on why the emergent movement seems so darn confusing. And why Mclaren said that the reformers, and early chuch fathers would agree with him (lol????) concerning the Gospel? I think Calvin would have detonated if he heard that radio interview hahaha. I mean, Mclaren is so completely different than anything I’ve ever read in the Bible before, or anything I’ve even heard, and that doesn’t necessarily make him right either, just because he’s completely different. And for a lot of the emergent writing I’ve read, it seems confusing all the way around…
I dunno Iggy. Where does the good buddhist go when he dies? lol!
Joe
Where is heaven located if it is a literal place? Can you tell me? Is it next to Venus?
It is a Kingdom and is the eternal now… it is in the future and is now at the same time… how is that a place?
Also, which heaven… the one the is now that we refer to “eternal”? Or the one that will be in the New Creation that is (again) now and in the future… so how can you answer such a Platonistic Dualist question that has nothing to do with the Bible’s actually teachings?
So to even ask “where” a Buddhist will “go” again misses that there is now a”place” in the sense we understand it. He will interact with God by the knowledge he has of God… and God will judge him by what he knows… if it be by works then he will be judged accordingly, if it be by Christ, then accordingly… why is that not clear?
Again, if you can point to a star or whatever and tell me which one is the Biblical heaven… then tell me how that heaven will exist and not exist when the new heaven comes?
Be blessed,
iggy
Hey Iggy, don’t mean to double post like this but one more question…
You said you’ve listened to hundreds of hrs of mclaren…(and this goes for the people who’ve listened to or read hundreds of hours moder pastors, dead pastors, etc etc)
Should we focus on what men say so much? Shouldn’t we turn to Jesus and the Scriptures to focus hundreds of our hours on? I’m not saying you don’t Iggy, not at all, but that much listening to one specific guy can warp your bias a bit and view too. Don’t you think? You did say he had a huge influence on you….did that have an influence on how you saw, read, and acted out Scripture?
K cool stuff, cya!
Joe
Joe,
I listen to a lot of different teachers and not all are “emerging” … and I read and study the bible…
I guess I just don’t get what you are stating as my faith is not about “men’s thoughs”.
The hundreds of hours are over the course of 4 years… and due to having jobs where I drive and either can listen to hours of radio, or music or choose to listen to things that educate, edify, challange and let me focus on Jesus.
So again I am not sure what you are insinuating or trying to state as it seems a bit removed from where I am.
Be blessed,
iggy
Joe,
I probably shouldn’t even enter into this conversation, but I do see Iggy’s point about McLaren’s audience. I think McLaren has in mind someone who has been turned off by Christianity that appears boastful, self-righteous, and overall too sure of itself. I think sometime Christians come off to non-believers as thinking they always have the answer or that they are always correct.
So maybe McLaren has overcorrected, but I think some people still find his willingness to question some things refreshing. I think sometimes people ask him the questions just to corner him. I think what McLaren does is turn that question around to ask why we need to know the answer that question.
Also, the question you mention, “is heaven a place with God in it” seems very odd. I think the question reveal a bit of naivete on the part of questioner more than anything.
Good answer Iggy. But you and me both missed the point I think.
Again with Plato…
I can’t even think of how to respond Iggy, to be honest, you absolutely confused me. I got the part about….interacting….(you mean stand in judgment, right?) with Christ, and being judged according to what they’ve done…that part is clear.
The Venus stuff was unnecessary…but yeah, it’s somewhere around there. But I could be wrong.
So heaven isn’t a real place, but it is, it’s everywhere, but it’s in the now and the future…
We don’t go anywhere when we die? Man, um, so, what happens? What does ‘interact’ with God mean?
Iggy, my email is falsehopereigns@yahoo.com , if you want we can continue talking there over the course of time because I’m totally not getting this right now and it’s very confusing, and it’s getting late friend. Okay cya.
Joe
Iggy
My question about the hundreds of hours listening to people had nothing to do with basing your faith on men. I did NOT say that friend. I said, could that have changed how you see things? Did that affect how you read Scripture. I wasn’t judging you. Not everything people say online is an attack, and not everyone is out to get people. I gave you the benefit of the doubt about you reading Scripture regularly, I just thought that maybe that much outside influence from humans could affect how you see things, thats all. I didn’t even make a judgement on whether the influence was bad or not. I just really wanted to know what you thought.
And Phil, how does that make me naive for reading Scripture plainly. Surely Heaven is a PLACE. Another dimension, a place outside space and time, but does it have existence in reality or not?
How about this, please and honestly I am asking you, can either of you show me Scripture that indicates what Iggy or Mclaren is saying about where “God dwells in unapproachable light”. Is there Scripture talking about how heaven is NOT a place where God dwells? Where is Jesus right now?
Lets get one thing straight, I’m not saying anyone isn’t Christian or w/e, nor am I trying to be mean, nor am I out to get anyone, I’m just….how should I put this in terms you can understand….(hehe lol), trying to have a ‘conversation’ (eh??? eh??). Nice huh?
Joe
Joe, I was kidding with my statement. I am not emergent and I don’t prescribe to their methodology, but I know this is not a place to attack Mclaren…he is like Moses around here.LOL
Phil,I think sometimes Christians come off to non-believers as thinking they always have the answer or that they are always correct.
I see your point about being boastful. It should be the light which shines in us that shows them we have something that they don’t have. If we preach the cross and share the gift of the atonement we will always give them the correct and only answer.
By the way all…Buddhist go to hell….let us (starting with me) be more depserate about missions and go tell Buddhist that Jesus is the only way.
Oh…Does Mclaren have 10 emerging commandments?
“Thou shalt not interact with another man’s posessions based on your understanding of them in a way that allows you to acquiesce to your desire of them”
Or my personal favorite “Thou shalt not detatch someone from interacting with reality based on their cultural understanding of what existence is, by means of force.”
I wonder what the Pharisees of this Law will be like!?
All in jest of course guys, please don’t ODM me.
Love,
Joe
PS, on the whole buddhist thing, bottom line is, no one get’s to God except through Jesus, period. That’s something everyone can agree on, I pray. Oh boy do I pray. =)
Joe,
Let me explain how it works with me…
I used to beleive in the Rapture and pretrib… then I studied it out in scripture by using the “supplied verses” by the best teachers… and now I no longer believe in the Rapture and pretrib… I hold to the Resurrection.
I changed my view by looking at what the bible teaches and not adding things like “the 144000 thousands are Jewish evangelist”…. they are not… it does not state that in the text at all and is one is honest and looks at it (I even had friends very knowledgeable in Greek to look at it in the original language)… evangelist is added.
I took time to look at what I believe and studied it out against much I was taught. Such as also is Jesus the “God-man”. He is, but we are told He had two natures… and scirpture states He had one… He was in very nature God… yet also man… He was a New Creature… and we will be like him… as we are now given New Life and are now New Creations… I have one nature and it is of the New Man that God created and showed us through Jesus Christ who was the first fruit.
Again, search it out as to what the bible states on Jesus and His nature and how it is all connected to the Resurrection.
There is much more… but at least these two I will go into now.
I did not take you as bashing my faith, or at least that you believe you are not… but re-read you comments and they sound a bit condescending.
be blessed,
iggy
JOnathan,
So you deny that God will interact with the Buddhist by what the Buddhist knows?
Roman2: 6. God “will give to each person according to what he has done.” 7. To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9. There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10. but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.
11. For God does not show favoritism. 12. All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous.
14. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15. since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)
Now God will interact with each person even Christians and judge them… the difference will be what is done with Jesus and what was not. In that I do not know if a Buddhist did do some things with Christ or not as even a Donkey in the OT was used of God… Even Saul was used of God and lost.
Now, by Grace we are saved, and that will depend on what was done with Jesus… can a Buddhist come to know Jesus and serve him in a limited knowledge and way… and be saved?
I think God can do that… so to say a Buddhist is not saved seems a bit presumptuous in the sense that we know that man’s heart and what God did in his life.
A man will die without the Life of Jesus in him… but if he has the Life he has the Son for the Life is in the Son.
If a man meets that, the that is how Jesus will judge them, the rest of mankind will be judged by their own words against the standard of God.
Be blessed,
iggy
Well, perhaps it’s just your bias in that most people just attack eachother online that you thought I was condescending, I didn’t mean to come off that way AT ALL. I guess I’m just not good at this whole “conversation” stuff. Y’all get to be sarcastic and esoteric, but I’m condescending =(
lol it’s okay, I’ll figure our being tactful eventually. Pray for me, I’m still trying to figure this internet stuff out and interacting with Christians from all over.
But about Jesus…I think the Bible is clear on Him being both God and Man. I’m not going to deconstruct plain greek. I also see it plain that we will be like Him at the resurrection, but if you’re implying we’ll be God or part God, (I don’t think you are), then I disagree. I kind of don’t totally get your point in all of that.
If being emergent means questioning and testing everything by Scripture, then count me in. But somehow…I don’t think that’s exactly what emergent is..? Somehow I don’t think it’s that simple when it comes down to it.
I’ve really enjoyed talking Iggy, thank brother.
Joe
Joe,
Again, I did not take it that way, but only pointed out is sounded a bit that way…
Now, this is what gets me…
I stated that. but also that the traditional view does not match scripture in its fullness of revelation. Many teach we will be like Jesus and mean we will be “like Him in His divinity”, yet I see He was a New Human… with the Life of the Divine… In that we share in His Life as is stated in Revelation using “light” as the metaphor…
Rev 21: 23. The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. 24. The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it.
Jesus was not just the “God-man” but the New Man that we will be…
Ephesians 2: 13. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.
14. For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15. by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16. and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility.
You see the man’s nature now is one of death, and if one is in Christ, be changed to the New Nature of Life.
We take really basic understandings as the whole concept and it limits our view of who we will be.
Now here is another thing that many miss… there is a basic assumption of “not just” and the fundamentalist goes ballistic and misses that or takes that as a denial of the said theological slant… Substitutionary atonement is a great start, but we then must throw out the Gospel of Mark and most of the early church history that did not have that doctrine as taught today… they did have Christus Victory… and in that saw Jesus (as Mark teaches) that Jesus was the suffering Servant/King that set things right in His sufferings.
Again, there is the foundation, and Brian is not negating things like “hell” but asking legitimate questions like… where is it if it is a place? Which one are you talking about? What do you do about it being “eternal” if it is tossed into the LoF and purged from the New Creation…
many people miss that what Brian did was give permission to ask questions… and seek after God for answers… most of the questions have been being discussed for centuries by theologians, and Brian brought these down from the Ivory Towers and allowed the common man to discuss them.
This is not much from what Gutenberg did with the bible… adn I see that it shows more trust in the Holy Spirit’s leading and teaching than to just feed the regurgitated man created theologies that have been handed down without question… most of which are only as old as the 1860’s… via Darby… and is considered to be “oldtruth”….
Be blessed,
iggy
Interesting thoughts Iggy, very interesting.
Time for my brain to regenerate and ‘interact’ with REM sleep. Thanks buddy.
Joe
Sleep would be great… yet I find i get to go in tonight and work the night shift… so REM will be in about 8 more hours.
Sleep well,
iggy
Jon,
Just to note, McLaren’s primary defender here is Iggy, who is not a writer for the site. Personally, I am about 50/50 on McL, as I think he often a) asks some very good and thought-provoking questions, but b) doesn’t know when to stop trying to ask thought-provoking questions and to just answer a question.
At this point, I wouldn’t call this site a bastion of McLaren support, outside of contending that he is a Christian brother.
Joe C,
There are two primary (and somewhat opposite) reasons for this.
1) The “Emerging Church” (not to be confused with a very small subset, Emergent Village) movement is not a denominational movement, like many in the past (Reformation, Restoration, Charismatic, etc.), but the way that churches from all sorts of denominations/backgrounds have sought to deal with living out Christ in a society that is moving from Modernism to Postmodernism.
So, each ECM church tends to carry some characteristics and baggage from the denominational (or non-denominational) background from which it came. Some, like Mars Hill (Seattle), are unashamedly Calvinist in their theology. Others, like Solomon’s Porch, seem more Episcopal, while others still, like Mars Hill (Grand Rapids) are decidedly Arminian. They don’t fit neatly into a box, because they didn’t all start out in the same box (unlike other recent church “movements”).
2) Critics of the ECM, like Slice/AM/C?N, are sloppy in their criticism, basically lumping anything and everything they find in the church which outrages them into “the Emergent Church”, thus creating a boogeyman with which to scare other Christians. So, this “Emergent Church” is confusing and can’t be pinned down in real-life because it doesn’t exist, except in the minds of these same critics.
Shouldn’t you be studying for finals or something?
For the record I like McLaren. I don’t like that he is slowly becoming a media darling but I do like that he is willing to question and challenge. Instead of singing the tired and worn cachaphony (sp) of the white washed tombs of American christianity.
Yeah I said it!
Chris L,
I try to give some humurous interjections to keep the mood light….Just call me my fathers son.LOL
As for me, I am 0/0 on Mclaren and I diffenitely don’t prescribe to his methodology. I don’t believe in Slice’s methodology either so I can’t be labeled a “watchdoggie.” LOL
You know what is funny….sometimes I can’t believe there isn’t more 100 to 200 comment entries in here. Iggy just opened up an eschtological fun room…I just can’t believe there are people who don’t believe in a “taken away” or “catching up” of the believers. The bible is clear! I Thess. 4:17
Chris, Chris, Chris(not Chris L)…
Lighten up a little…Chris, you must get more fun out of life. LOL
PS…All A’s here! Ya I said it..LOL
Actually I do have a lot of fun. Unfortunately I’m in youth ministry in a fairly well to do population.
If I hear one more parent tell me that their kid can’t come to church because they are studying for the A.C.T. I’m gonna scream. So in my frustration was at it’s height when I got on the web this morning.
I live in the “Land of Milk and Honey” where high g.p.a’s matter more than deep spiritual lives. It’s even worse when I hear “little johnny just got into Harvard it’s a good thing we had him in youth group”
You see in my neighborhood when you’re well to do OBVIOUSLY God is pleased! So spiritual you’re fine. Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuugggggggghhhhhh!
Way off topic! Deal with it. Sorry that’s my mood this morning.
Chris, Dealing with it…..LOL
My father drove us to get good grades, but that drive never came close to his passion for us to grow spiritually closer to Jesus. My parents never shide away from an opportunity to unclude the gospel in any area of my life.
A close friend I have is a youth pastor and from speaking to him I understand that I don’t understand the hardships and fustrations that come with that ministry. Keep strong and I will pray for you!
Jon,
If you’re referring to nobody defending pretrip/rapture eschatology, sorry to disappoint you, but there are a huge number of Christians who are not pretrib/rapturists. In fact, outside the USA, pretrib/rapture interpretation is very much the minority view. Dispensationalism is only about 150 years old, and is full of holes the further you go into it. I Thess 4:7 can be referring to the time of Jesus’ final coming to earth.
If you’re simply referring to the descriptions in the passage “we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air”, you also need to consider he cosmology of the ancient world, and how Paul’s statement fits within that cosmology.
In the ancient world, ‘heaven’ was a sphere surrounding the earth, and the stars were fixed onto that sphere. God existed beyond that veil (if you look at drawings of the Temple veil, it was a picture of the stars in their constellations, beyond which God dwelt in the Holy of Holies).
In contrast, the underworld was where physical bodies went – literally buried in the earth.
“The air” is where human beings live, between heaven and the underworld. Satan is identified by Paul as “the ruler of the kingdom of the air”. And so it is later Paul says that we will meet the Lord in the clouds (which are between heaven and earth) ‘in the air’ (where Satan will no longer have dominion).
So, the question becomes ‘how literal is Paul being here?’ When you consider that throughout the Thessalonians passage, Paul refers to death as ‘having fallen asleep’, it is possible that Paul is writing in theological language rather than scientific language.
I hate dispensationalism. Its one of the few theological streams I really despise.
Joe,
Phil wrote:
As I read your statement, I also saw a bit of a naivete (for lack of a better word), as I can only think of a single description of a place without God, that being hell.
The Kingdom of Heaven exists where things are as God would have them be – which doesn’t necessarily describe a state of location as much as it describes a state of being. If it is in another dimension, then it would also cease to be a “place”, since a “place” is defined (in our understanding) within the 3.5 dimensions in which we live. Certainly it will be a reality, but assuming the physical location is different than our current physical location is an extrapolation we have made, which may (or may not) be correct.
Joe,
Please understand I wasn’t calling you naive, as I assumed you were quoting someone from the radio program. I basically agree with Chris L.’s answer.
I think describing Heaven as a place seems a bit odd. I think Christians have tended to take the descriptions in Revelation a bit too literally – i.e., real streets paved with gold, a sea of glass, etc. It is certainly powerful imagery, but I think we have to compare it to other literature in that time period, and look at who John was writing to, and what his overall message was. It is indeed one of hope, of a renewed Creation, and of Resurrection, but I think to take it as AAA tour guide misses some of the point somewhat.
Phil, I think using the word ‘place’ is semantics and that’s what’s getting debated.
I see what You’re saying Chris, but that begs the question and still doesn’t answer, what happens when we die? If we’ve ‘extrapolated’ that heaven is a place outside of this creation, what happens when we die, before the new creation (which is obviously, according to revelation, where believers will spend eternity)?
Am I being too platonic still? (How can I think the same as a guy I’ve never read anything about? That’s what gets me, lol) When you have “we’ll be with the Lord forever” and “God dwells in unapproachable light”, where is that? Or, when Jesus told the thief he would be with Him in paradise that day, where’s paradise? If you guys are in to the cultural context of things, surely you know that the Jews saw Sheol and Paradise as literal places, and that was the context Scripture was written in. So what’s the deal? What happens when you die, in terms of location?
Love,
Joe
PS, no one liked my ‘emerging 10 commandments”??? I thought someone’s day would be brightened by that =(
Of course heaven is a place, an existance. Now if it was just a consciousness of bliss (state of being) then the descriptions of joy, removal of sorrow, and other states would have been appropriate.
But the descriptions of celestial beings, words, sights, streets, thrones, are surely metaphorical but representative of literal aspects of beings in a “place”. It is difficult for us to even imagine (neither has it entered into the heart of man) how this place is defined. Like describing the color “red” to a man born blind, there are no earthly reference points with which to provide defining relief for an earthly description.
These things are usually understood within a mature believer, but to attempt to dismantle even our simplisitic definition serves no purpose since it has a legitimate place in the discussion. The most dangerous aspect of some teachings is to question both the eternality of heaven (less) and/or the eternailty of hell (more).
We seem more able to digest an eternal place of bliss than an eternal place of torment. Much energy has been spent attempting to disprove the latter. This remains at the crux of today’s theological morass and combined with how a person comes to saving faith these are becoming more and more contentous.
One difficult aspect of the discussion is nebulousness from some of the teachers. Some are resistant to say clearly that they no longer believe the generally accepted views of heaven and hell but instead remain mercurial or at least concealed. The reason for this is either a fear of eliciting more attacks than they already have had, or being uncomfortable with openly espousing the last breach from orthodox theology.
Although much of Revelation is imagery, we must be careful not to remove all literacy from its meaning. Many, for instance, have pounced upon the imagery interpretative method and taught that the virgin birth and the incarnation were as well literary metaphors. Jesus, they say, was just a man through whom God revealed His kingdom and the hope of a renewed creation should be gleaned from His life while man’s evil can be gleaned from His death. This imagery not only places the authority on the interpretations of man, it is a house of mirrors without any guidelines.
I believe that the “unapproachable light” interpretation is probably derived from God’s words to Moses in Exodus 33:20-25. An additional interpretation is that God, in His glory, exists in dimensions beyond our own, and that for Him to be present in His fullness in our own dimension would destroy us just the same as trying to put a 3-dimensional figure into a two-dimensional space (think of your hand and the surface of a piece of paper) would destroy the two-dimensional space.
A much better question would be ‘what’s paradise’, as the ‘what’ is far more important than the ‘where’.
Sheol was, literally, ‘death’ or ‘the grave’ or ‘the dust’. Here, the idea was again not a ‘place’ but a state of being. Since we begin as dust, when we go to Sheol, our bodies go back to what they came from – dust.
Paradise, on the other hand, was more developed during the Babylonian captivity, but is based on ‘paradise’ = ‘garden’. Here, man came from a garden where he walked with God, and if He accepts Jesus’ invitation, he will return to the garden (paradise). Note that Genesis begins in a garden (the paradise of Eden) and Revelation begins with a garden (the paradise of God).
So, from a Hebrew context, the ‘what’ is far more important than the ‘where’, as well. The ‘what’ God gives us in the Bible. The ‘where/how/when’ comes in the fullness of faith, and can’t be known here. So much of the arguing over heaven/hell and eschatology is quibbling about where/how/when it will happen, when those things are not important in how we should live.
Joe,
Well, we’re all influenced by Plato in probably more ways than we realize, even if we haven’t actually studied him. Platonic thought forms the basis for much of the philosophy that guided the Enlightenment. It’s not all bad, for sure. It’s just that looking at the Bible through that lens can lead to some distortions.
I agree with you that, yes, ancient writers would imagine the cosmos as sort of a dome system with the earth as one dome, Sheol underneath it, and the heavens above. Now the way the Hebrew Scripture describe God talk about Him dwelling in certain places, but also as being omnipresent. This type of thinking was really unique at that time when you compare it to how other cultures talked about their gods.
I guess what I’m getting at is that I think there is extra-dimensionality at play when we talk about heaven. There’s not a lot of description in the Bible, but I think of events like the Transfiguration, and it seems that Moses and Elijah were able to come back on Earth somehow, and they had real bodies. They weren’t just spirits. It also describes a voice speaking from a cloud, and the Moses and Elijah just sort of disappeared. How it all works, I don’t know.
Rick,
Just to point out – the bulk of Revelation (Book 4 and on) is in line with apocalyptic literature of its period, which is meant to be read symbolically and metaphorically.
The virgin birth and other aspects of Jesus’ life are chronicled in a form of narrative, which assumes an amount of literal-ness first, with symbolism and metaphors expressed in the dialog of the characters in the narrative, rather than the narrative, itself.
If people are mixing the two types of interpretation (strict literalism for apocalyptic literature or strict metaphor for narrative), they are in grave error in interpretation.
Jon thanks for the prayers!
As Jesus said in John 14:2-3, “In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also.”
So heaven is a place were God dwells but we are not told the “where” it is as far as a three-dimensional place in creation. It might be that but it might not. But the most important thing is we will be where God is for eternity.
I just had to go read my original post to remember what this was originally about. Something about pots and kettles, lol. I couldn’t remember how we actually got to the subject of heaven.
It’s all good, though. I enjoy the discussion.
As far as dispensationalism and preterism is concerned, I’ve been both. I’m more closer to the historicist position. I’m putting my Gary North, Gary DeMar, etc. books on ebay sometime soon.
It was pretty much all my fault we got off from the original post. But I’m glad we did, I learned a lot.
Joe
hmmm…
I think it’s funny when people speak of McLaren’s methods, etc. He can sit with his head in the clouds of dreaming, re-imagining, etc. but peopl never go to the church he started (Cedar Ridge) and read the statement of faith, the elder statement on human sexuality, and generally look at the structures (i.e. the methods!) a ministry led by him ends up looking like.
He can write things, say things, affiliate with people that sound wacky and look wacky, but you really have to temper that with where he’s actually ministered for a good long time.
That is…if you want to be intellectually honest and balanced.
Just some thoughts…
Also, just because somebody is selling books and getting some Xian media buzz doesn’t mean they have the impact it appears they have…
Lots of us who are part of a network of friends called “Emergent Village” respect Brian, like him, appreciate his expansive heart for Jesus and his compassionate tone, but to assume we take everything he says as gospel is really insulting.
Emergent is made up of people who celebrate our differences, value them for their effectiveness in very different ministry settings. We’re not sheep–needing “conformity” for a sense of security.
That is…if you want to be intellectually honest and balanced.
Intellectually honest? Balanced? What do you think this is? Fox News?
Jesus is right, everyone else is wrong, unless they agree with exactly what God, that is Jesus, said and meant.
Jesus wins! yay!
=)
When i question the idea of “heaven or hell being a place” I mean it in the way that it is separated and out there waiting for us.
I see that the plan of salvation is not one of destroying this one completely but of restoring this one to it original glory and and more.
As we will still be “us” in the Resurrection but clothed in the imperishable… I see that the New Heaven and Earth will be the same. I do not see “New” as scrapping this creation, but the restoration of this creation.
All things have been reconciled. TO speak on terms of “places” then negates that the Kingdom of God is here and now and will be fulfilled in the future here…
Again, to ask things in the terms to where will one “go” when they die… I would have to honestly answer from the bibles teaching… in the ground or “with Jesus”… but I cannot say they go to a “place”. I used to but as I studied out the bibles terms on the New Creation I do not see hell as a state that one waits and this heaven as a state also where one waits…
I do not say I know all the answers, but the answers I once had do not fit into the bibles teaching as I read it.
Jesus speaks of places like “Gehenna” which is I beleive to the Lake of Fire… in it the garbage will burn… and was created for Satan and his followers, but not intended for men.
Satan is an immortal being and many of his followers are also. But man is a created mortal being… so when if one die and is cast into the Lake of Fire, will an immortal being burn forever?
I do not mean to throw out questions but the true naivete is that many just teach that man is immortal and lives in a disembodied spiritual stated… and when they die go to places called heaven and hell that are not here and God then will destroy this creation as in oblivion so it never is again and then will totally create a New Heaven and New Earth and place us down there. So we live in Heaven for eternity and on the New Earth and New Heaven somehow at the same time….
Heaven and earth are not just that simple… I see it almost simpler than that, but due to Platonist Dualism we have this idea of “places” where the flesh is evil and the spirit is good and we get to go to that good spiritual place. This is not what the bible teaches in about the New Creation and Plato’s Gnostic beliefs have corrupted many things like this.
There you go… there is some more worms for you can! LOL!
be blessed,
iggy
Dave,
Fox Noise sucks