tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37430348.post1815767342970831738..comments2023-09-01T02:58:45.146-06:00Comments on A Genuine Faith: Rodney Reeveshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09807421344946408041noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37430348.post-63909105154878459962010-10-21T06:35:54.944-06:002010-10-21T06:35:54.944-06:00I absolutely think that you were supposed to enjoy...I absolutely think that you were supposed to enjoy it. I certainly did. Thanks for the clarification.matt gallionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06761088685963884199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37430348.post-68971930519170351802010-10-20T10:32:25.397-06:002010-10-20T10:32:25.397-06:00I'm so glad you people know how to put into wo...I'm so glad you people know how to put into words what you're trying to say. :) I'm always falling over my words. Loved reading what y'all had to say.jesnicolehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09507944560076614238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37430348.post-36479106011253191142010-10-20T08:25:20.674-06:002010-10-20T08:25:20.674-06:00Matt,
I was trying to be clever with my musings (...Matt,<br /><br />I was trying to be clever with my musings (but I didn't pull it off). Actually, I'm rather sympathetic to the gist of what Caputo and Rollins were trying to do/say because their task is even more vulnerable to critique than most (they are trying to fight a war on two fronts: cynics of the church and heroes to the cynics).<br /><br />Anyway, here's the point: how can we subvert the norm when subversiveness becomes normative? How can we oppose the dogmatism of certain Christians (fundamentalists) when we know we're right? How can we extol the openendedness of our faith ("the event") when we prescribe what it must look like? (even Caputo acknowledged the double standard when he, somewhat apologetically, used Hegel's dialectic as a metanarrative).<br /><br />Thus, my muse about saying "amen" at a gathering such as this.<br /><br />This is what I meant by trying not to become what you are, or trying not to say what you mean. (Honestly, sometimes these language games wear me out).<br /><br />The Spirit encouraged my soul when Caputo was talking about the faithfulness of God, how what we did to His Son was unforgivable--yet the very place where we find divine forgiveness. And, when Collins explored the heart of the gospel that must be seen in the church--where our struggles should be fleshed out in order to be the Body of Christ--I heard the voice of Jesus.<br /><br />I enjoyed the event (but I know I'm not supposed to say that).Rodney Reeveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09807421344946408041noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37430348.post-55128251007227930902010-10-19T14:52:05.206-06:002010-10-19T14:52:05.206-06:00I have a few possible responses:
First--for the s...I have a few possible responses:<br /><br />First--for the sake of clarification--most people there were not actually "disenchanted with traditional forms of Christianity." In fact, most were fairly content mainline pastors who were curious about possible ways to help a dying institution.<br /><br />Second, I can't help but wonder if the title of the conference (which I honestly wasn't a huge fan of) wouldn't be something that more than just first-century cynics would embrace. I can't help but wonder if the earliest followers of Jesus, or Paul, or even those in the first few centuries of Christianity (and particularly the ascetics before the Constantinian establishment of "imperial Christianity")--not to mention a whole slew of others throughout the entire course of historical Christianity--wouldn't also find resonance in an attempt to "subvert" certain norms. <br /><br />Third, I'm interested in what you mean by this:<br /><i>And yet, trying to be for something without becoming the very thing you despise (agenda!) is the natural consequence of the human condition.</i> <br />Could you unpack that bit?<br /><br />Finally, I'm not so sure that Rollins (at least) would be so hesitant to use the words "faithfulness," "salvation" and "Spirit," but I'm fairly sure that he would mean them in radically different ways than are commonly understood.matt gallionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06761088685963884199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37430348.post-51745496852247506672010-10-19T11:33:24.758-06:002010-10-19T11:33:24.758-06:00I wasn't there, but Darryl and I have talked s...I wasn't there, but Darryl and I have talked so much about these ideas. I'm just not on board with so much of it,because as you put it, "It's easier to be against something than for something." Also, as Darryl mentioned, it seems to me that so much of *it* is semantics. Again...I do confess a VERY limited knowledge...and of course, I always have so much to learn. Thanks for another good post, Dr. Reeves.jesnicolehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09507944560076614238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37430348.post-82958803110219869962010-10-18T15:16:37.056-06:002010-10-18T15:16:37.056-06:00Bearing in mind that I'm new to all this "...Bearing in mind that I'm new to all this "stuff," I kept wanting to say "amen" along with you, but I sometimes wanted to say, "Yeah, but..."<br /><br />I need to engage doubt. Fully. But if I don't believe in doubt, then I'm an unbeliever because my faith in doubt isn't sting enough. Can I doubt my own doubt and still believe? Can I doubt my own faith and believe in doubt but no longer be faithful? <br /><br />I feel like some of this is just semantics (something I think Rollins would agree with). But even though my picture of God (Wittgenstein!) is just that, I still can't let go of this intangible, indescribable belief (!) that parts of my picture overlap with who God really is. <br /><br />But like Wright has said: a third of what I know is wrong -- I just don't know which third that would be.Darryl Schaferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11546651861977543817noreply@blogger.com