Emergent Nazarenes - Latest Comments in What Is the Function of this Blog?

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Bresee's Ghost — Thu, 07 May 2009 19:44:42 -0000

New site to try and keep the anti-crowd honest. Probably a futile attempt... but nevertheless here it is:

http://inallthingscharity.w...

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Paul — Mon, 04 May 2009 09:57:12 -0000

On the impotance of orthopraxy:

Ephesians 5:1-10:

1
So be imitators of God, 1 as beloved children,
2
and live in love, as Christ loved us and handed himself over for us as a sacrificial offering to God for a fragrant aroma.
3
Immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be mentioned among you, as is fitting among holy ones,
4
no obscenity or silly or suggestive talk, which is out of place, but instead, thanksgiving.
5
Be sure of this, that no immoral or impure or greedy person, that is, an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
6
Let no one deceive you with empty arguments, for because of these things the wrath of God is coming upon the disobedient. 2
7
So do not be associated with them.
8
For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light,
9
for light produces every kind of goodness and righteousness and truth.
10
Try to learn what is pleasing to the Lord.

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Pastor Steven — Fri, 01 May 2009 20:20:21 -0000

Todd,

Yes I was being sarcastic, I just get tired of people dropping the F-bomb like that. I don't think it adds to the conversation.

Peace,

Steven

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Paul — Fri, 01 May 2009 16:18:17 -0000

James,

We have reached common ground!

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

James_Diggs — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:31:49 -0000

Yea, I agree 100%. That is certainly one way to accurately put it.

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

James_Diggs — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:30:05 -0000

I agree 100% that the gospel is neither modern nor postmodern; I just think that you are completely unaware of your modern lens.

To clarify I believe that orthodoxy and orthopraxy establish one another as they are two sides of the same coin. You can not have one without the other.

I would also say Truth of God with a capitol “T”, as you put it, is not “found” in scripture, that kind of Truth is only found in Jesus; which I would agree is whom scripture truthfully and faithfully points us too.

I think we have exhausted the places where this particular conversation can go. Until next time,

peace

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

James_Diggs — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:20:21 -0000

Thanks

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Paul — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:17:23 -0000

And...James,

Isn't this our goal?

Isn't our goal to reach postmodern, or any other, people with the Gospel of Jesus Christ and to then disciple them by teaching them to obey all things that Christ commanded (as found in God's Word)?

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Phule77 — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:16:02 -0000

Paul, do you understand that not all Emergent/Emerging folks think the same way, or say the same things?

Just as I'm sure that folks of various (traditional) Nazarene frames of mind get tired of being called fundamentalists, various Emerging Nazarenes get tired of being called heretics, and lumped in with people who support obviously non-nazarene trains of thought.

I think that any community which is not constantly asking the question "is this true to Jesus Christ, in service of the world around us?" is dead. But I think that there's a difference between accountability and attacking, and I believe that the questioning that you are referring to are when people who label themselves as emergent appear, to your eyes, to be actually attacking with their questions the things that you hold true as Christianity, and then retreating when approached on this by saying "oh, it's just conversation". when we all know that there's a difference between conversation and hyberbole.

None of us, I think, are advocating that American assassins go down to Venezuela and assassinate the president for the good of God and America...but one of the louder "Christian" voices in America has, and so we have to be somewhat apologetic when we go to people, we can't just say "oh, he's not one of us". He's a Christian, right?

By the same token, those of us who have taken this Emerging journey quite seriously, as disciples, as nazarenes, WANT to talk to you. We want to answer your questions, to achieve dialogue with you. But it's hard to do that when you approach us with sarcasm, or are only willing to hear us in light of the more extreme members of this group.

Can you offer us mercy, so that we have room to be humble?

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Paul — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:15:00 -0000

James,

I would submit this:

That the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and the sound doctrine established in the scripture, is neither modern, nor is it postmodern. The Truth of God, as found in scripture, is absolute and transcends, and reaches beyond and through, philosophies, context, culture and time.

I hear what you are saying and I undersatnd what you are saying...It is just wrong to say that orthopraxy establishes orthdoxy.

Regards,

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Phule77 — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:09:58 -0000

Which is why our heads must be married to our hearts, and our knowledge to our love, for surely where love abounds, room will be made for improper knowledge to be corrected in humility on all accounts.

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Paul — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:08:34 -0000

James,

Please note that I said this:

"...by people who mean to de-emphasize the importance of sound doctrine. I am not saying that you are doing that..."

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Phule77 — Fri, 01 May 2009 14:55:33 -0000

Um...I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic here, or...

And I don't think that it's possible to commit sexual adultery without committing spiritual adultery. Our bodies being the temple of the Lord, anything that we do with them that is contrary both to ourselves and to the others in our community is both spiritually and physically damaging.

My point is that, depending on who is reading it, and how they are expressing it, the bible contains plenty that would or has offended many...it's all about presentation, and the heart with which one takes things.

if I enter into these forums, or any others, looking to be offended, I will be offended.

If I enter into them looking to love others and see Christ in them, and learn from the process, then I will do so.

I would also state, lastly, that it is possible to have attitudes that are just as offensive to people as words. So I might say, I find Paul's spiritual crudeness toward his brothers and sisters offensive. But it would likely be seen as infantile and off-topic, neh?

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

James_Diggs — Fri, 01 May 2009 14:11:51 -0000

Paul, your cart before the horse analogy is just more linear thinking. Clearly you are stuck in this as if God can only move in a straight line from position A to position B. I just don’t think you even understand where I am coming from enough to speak to it. It is like we are speaking too different languages.

And speaking of “strawman” arguments, so is your accusation that I am just trying to “de-emphasize the importance of sound doctrine”. I haven’t done that at all, in fact just the opposite. I just believe sound doctrine is MORE than just information.

You said that “there is no orthopraxy without a first-established orthodoxy”, yet Jesus himself embodied both at the same time. Orthodoxy and orthopraxy go beyond being step 1, than steps 2; they are organically intertwined as they reflect the Way the Truth and Life in Jesus Christ. I believe scripture is clear (unless you only read it from a step 1,2, and 3 mindset) that by participating in the Life of Christ we participate in everything that is orthodox. This isn’t just some mechanical process; it is a spiritual process and an organic one as we become one with God incarnate.

The reality is that you are so thoroughly modern that you are more of an apologist for modernity than you are the gospel. It is in modernity that we break things up into systems that create hard divisions for the sake of our mental models between things like orthodoxy and orthopraxy. In modernity we create these little mental models of how things work, and then we think our model somehow is the exact representation of what we are trying to describe. So according to your model, in linear modern thinking, orthodoxy is step 1 and orthopraxy is step 2 and you are absolutely unable to see these things outside of your modern framework.

You should try to look at things conceptually, or narratively, or thematically sometimes instead of like gears and cogs in a machine. I am not saying that I would throw out modern thinking, just grow beyond it so you can put it in perspective. I also am not saying that modern systematic models don’t reveal truth, but you have to be aware of the limitations of the model.

If you don’t want to do this, there is no sense continuing the conversation because you are just going to argue that your framework of God working in steps 1, and 2 is the only way God works.

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Paul — Fri, 01 May 2009 14:01:24 -0000

Hi Brad,

Please show me, in the Bible, it states that slavery is "right and just under God".

The historical fact that slavery existed does not mean that God says that it is "just and right."

And...what significance does the historical reality that men had concubines play in what God tells us is right doctrine and practice?

Were men like Solomon, who had 700 hundred wives and 300 hundred concubines, obedient to God's command as it related to marriage and fidelity?

(Read Deuteronomy 17 for starters)

The Bible does not tell us to repeat the sinful actions that are recorded for us in scripture.

Well...you've got me on the ordaining woman thing (I told you that it was hard to practice it faithfully)...

Since God doesn't condone slavery and polygamy...

I will just attempt to address the social drinking issue. It is not a sin to drink alcoholic beverages, but it is a sin to be drunk. It is also a sin to cause someone else to stumble. As evidenced by our culture and the negative impact that over consumption of alcoholic beverage has had
on our society, individuals, and local churches, are well within their biblical convictions to establish a tea-totalling policy that offsets the potential sin, or even appearance of sin. Isn't that reasonable?

Now, understandably, you may not share that same conviction. If you don't share that same conviction, then just do not become a member of the COTN.

Here is the COTN's reasoning from the Manual:

"34.5. The use of intoxicating liquors as a beverage, or trafficking
therein; giving influence to, or voting for, the licensing
of places for the sale of the same; using illicit drugs or
trafficking therein; using of tobacco in any of its forms, or
trafficking therein.
In light of the Holy Scriptures and human experience concerning
the ruinous consequences of the use of alcohol as a
beverage, and in light of the findings of medical science regarding
the detrimental effect of both alcohol and tobacco to
the body and mind, as a community of faith committed to
the pursuit of a holy life, our position and practice is abstinence
rather than moderation. Holy Scripture teaches that
our body is the temple of the Holy Spirit.With loving regard
for ourselves and others, we call our people to total abstinence
from all intoxicants.
Furthermore, our Christian social responsibility calls us
to use any legitimate and legal means to minimize the availability
of both beverage alcohol and tobacco to others. The
widespread incidence of alcohol abuse in our world demands
that we embody a position that stands as a witness to others.
(903.12-3.14)
(Proverbs 20:1; 23:29—24:2; Hosea 4:10-11; Habakkuk 2:5; Romans
13:8; 14:15-21; 15:1-2; 1 Corinthians 3:16-17; 6:9-12, 19-20; 10:31-33;
Galatians 5:13-14, 21; Ephesians 5:18)
(Only unfermented wine should be used in the sacrament
of the Lord’s Supper.) (413.11, 427.7, 428.2, 429.1, 802"

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Paul — Fri, 01 May 2009 13:16:06 -0000

Good afternoon, James,

"...Compassion and love communicates and establishes orthodoxy, Unity and solidarity with the Church communicates and establishes orthodoxy. What we do for “the least of these” communicates and establishes orthodoxy. Making disciples communicates and establishes orthodoxy. And so on. "

None of these things "establish" orthodoxy. They are right actions based on already established orthodoxy (via God's Word). You don't put the cart before the horse.

And...just because someone communicates the importance of orthodoxy does not automatically mean that that said person does not believe in the importance of orthopraxy. That is a strawman argument. It is also a historical strawman argument that has been foisted on the Church, before, by people who mean to de-emphasize the importance of sound doctrine. I am not saying that you are doing that, but certainly people have done that and are now doing that. Obviously, holding to sound doctrine is emphasized throughout scripture. It is important because God said it was important (isn't that funny...it is orthopraxy to hold to orthodoxy).

"Orthodoxy" (right belief, right doctrine) has a clear and specific definition and "orthopraxy" (right action) has a clear and specific definition. Orthodoxy establishes orthopraxy. There is no orthopraxy without a first-established orthodoxy.

We are supposed to do (orthopraxy) what the Church did from the beginning:

42They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching... (Acts 2:42)

7 For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, 8 but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled, 9 holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict.
NKJV (Titus 1:7-9)

And...as to "linear and non-linear" views of orthodoxy, I think that if we really want to reach those in a postmodern culture with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, then we have to be direct, clear, and specific to reach through the mire, the context, the relativism, and the confusion. I don't think how you describe what orthodoxy is will accomplish pointing unsaved postmoderns to the absolute Truth found in God's Word (at least I believe this to be a danger given the lack of clarity).

Isn't our goal to reach postmodern, or any other, people with the Gospel of Jesus Christ and to then disciple them by teaching them to obey all things that Christ commanded (as found in God's Word)?

Regards,

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

brad — Fri, 01 May 2009 12:53:56 -0000

"God's Word articulates, very clearly, to us, the absolute right Christian faith and right Christian practice. And..these things are written in a manner that are easily unerstood (but not always so easily and faithfully lived out)."

with a 'very clear' reading of the scriptures we find that slavery is right and just under God. we find that Godly men have concubines. we find that women should never, ever speak in church, period and that we all should drink a little wine a day.

so i'm confused as to how the Church of the Nazarene can ordain women, be against slavery, stand against polygamy, and stand against social drinking. either the scriptures aren't so 'clear' and need discernment, or the Church of the Nazarene can't discern the scriptures.

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Paul — Fri, 01 May 2009 12:09:12 -0000

Hey Brad,

I certainly do not know "all of what scripture is saying", but I know, with certainty, certain things that the Bible clearly says.

That is but one of the beauties of the Bible...

It is a cure for much that is wrong with postmodern thought. There are clearly defined terms that have clear and distinct meanings that transcend time, culture and context (as Truth always does).

And...I don't care if people disagree with my view. I do, however, care if they disagree with God's clearly communicated "views".

God's Word articulates, very clearly, to us, the absolute right Christian faith and right Christian practice. And...these things are written in a manner that are easily understood (but not always so easily and faithfully lived out).

And...Church history is what it is. I don't know how folks can have differing accounts of documented historical occurences (other than by revising history).

You may disagree with me, and the absolutism of my view, which is fine, but disagreeing with God's Word, is not fine.

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

brad — Fri, 01 May 2009 10:00:33 -0000

what really bothers me, no offense intended here paul, is that in all of this, you are claiming to know with certainty all of what scripture is saying. furthermore, anyone who disagrees with your view of the scriptures, and church history for that matter, is wrong. because you somehow have the 'key' to understanding scripture. so we all have to fall under your view.

the 'word' became flesh brother. and that flesh is Jesus Christ. he is who we worship. not scripture.

i am not advocating that everyone believe whatever they want, although that is what we do. we believe what we choose to. however, i affirm you and your beliefs as much as they are a part of you. i just disagree with the absolutism of your view.

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

James_Diggs — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 15:05:35 -0000

Paul,

Forgive me I think Josh rightly pointed out that some of my frustration came through as I feel our conversation goes in circles.

Here’s the thing, you view orthodoxy as “having the right and true opinion/belief on Christian Faith and practice”. Likewise you say that, “only the Bible that establishes right and true opinion/belief on the Christian faith and practice”.

The problem I have with this is not that it isn’t at all true, it’s that it isn’t true enough. It severally limits orthodoxy to being about belief concerning Christian Faith and practice, and reduces Christ’s presence in the world to just a book. I believe even scripture points beyond itself, it points to Christ’s presence in the world, that Jesus is living and orthodoxy is about keeping instep with Christ, not just as individuals but as part of His community through the empowerment of the Holy Spirit.

Orthodoxy is not just about right opinion and right belief, it is about life; the Life. We went round about this in another thread concerning Ephesians, as Paul directs us to be connected to the Body as way to ensure orthodoxy. This is not just about being connected to a source of good teaching, it is also about actually living in the orthodox Christian Way of unity in Christ.

I think our communication problem can be summed up this way. You are looking at orthodoxy in a linear way and I am looking at it from a more nonlinear perspective. The problem I have with the linear view is that it tends to marginalize elements of orthodoxy in favor of what can fit easily in a line or a row. For you orthodoxy is about belief and opinion, therefore it must come from a reliable source of information.

In a nonlinear view, orthodoxy is about a Way, this included elements of your view (really all of it except the exclusiveness aspects of what limits your definition) but has a far more dynamic understanding. Orthodoxy is not just about belief and opinion, but literally about the Life of Christ which we encounter and experience in Him.

You wrote, “There are no other communications by God” to establish orthodoxy besides the Bible, yet everything about Christ who we believe is actually alive and present in the world communicates orthodoxy. The Eucharist communicates and establishes orthodoxy. Compassion and love communicates and establishes orthodoxy, Unity and solidarity with the Church communicates and establishes orthodoxy. What we do for “the least of these” communicates and establishes orthodoxy. Making disciples communicates and establishes orthodoxy. And so on.

From a linear perspective you will simply say that these are the practices that come FROM the bible, but while that may true from an informational sense, it isn’t true in the sense that these things come from Christ himself working in us as we live in the world.

At this point, I am not trying to convince you to agree with me and I ask that you stop trying to convince me to agree with you. I just hope this helps you at least understand where it is I am coming from. I feel I have a good understanding of where you are coming from.

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Aaron Gregory — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:37:31 -0000

I should have looked over the questionnaire one more time, in the paper it is quite clear and I make a distinction between the two, but pasting 40 pages did not seem like a great idea. I am referring to the mourner's bench, not the Eucharist table.

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Paul — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:13:32 -0000

Holy cow, James!

I think that we lost each other, here.

I was referencing/concentrating more on the words of scripture themselves when I commented, rather than referencing/commenting on the developed canon.

Intersetingly, though, Dr. Norman Geisler (don't worry...he isn't a Calvinist), and I am sure others, has written on the topic of the canon and submits that the Church was not a judge of what was in the canon, but was more just a jury affirming what God had already established. I would tend to agree more with a Geisler-type position on the issue.

And...on the issue of Christian orthodoxy, which is having the right and true opinion/belief on Christian Faith and practice...

It is only the Bible that establishes right and true opinion/belief on the Christian faith and practice, including right and true opinions and belief of Christ. There are no other communications, by God, for the Church, that establishes right and true opinion/belief/doctrine...the Bible is it. Therefore, scripture is central to Christian orthodoxy. This thinking was alive and well prior to the Reformation and can be seen in the writings of the apostles and continued through the writings of the early Church fathers.

This does not mean that I believe that Jesus Christ is not central to the Christian faith...He is (and I, obviously, believe that). And...I in know way idolize scripture, nor am I confused, nor delusional, nor heretical on the issue.

Regards,

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

Pastor Steven — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 09:42:01 -0000

Todd,

WOW! I'm so impressed and shocked you know how to say the F word. You need to learn the difference between spiritual adultery and sexual. The bible is full of sexual references and metaphors, but that's just crude brother.

Really man,

Steven

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

richschmidt — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 09:39:13 -0000

Re: "rules for engagement"

I always like to see what other people have done... So you might check out the FAQ pages over at NazNet.com to see how they address this:

http://www.naznet.com/commu...
http://www.naznet.com/commu...

You also might read Hans' post at the beginning of their Theology forum where he gives some additional helpful thoughts:

http://www.naznet.com/commu...

Re: What Is the Function of this Blog?

richschmidt — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 09:28:42 -0000

Aaron, you might want to specify what you mean by "altar" as that term is used in different ways in different churches. I assume you're referring to the "mourner's bench" type of altar, the rail across the front of the sanctuary, between the congregation and the platform, where people are typically invited to kneel and pray. Is that correct? If so, you may want to say something like that in your questionnaire. (In many traditions, the term "altar" refers to the table on which the communion elements are placed. And in many of those traditions, there is also a railing up front where people come to kneel and receive communion... but it is not typically used in the same way that the mourner's bench -style altar is used in traditional Nazarene churches.)

Just a heads up to avoid confusion. :)