Search
Author
Signposts is the personal website of Phil and Dan McCredden. We are involved in leadership at Northern Community.
You can also get Signposts via RSS
Pages
Categories
- admin (17)
- blogosphere (115)
- book of the month (4)
- books and dvd's (31)
- bumping uglies (12)
- campaign 2004 (23)
- challenges for the church (436)
- chat (28)
- chicks in church (7)
- Christmas (12)
- election 2007 (2)
- environment (1)
- events (1)
- Forge (52)
- geek talk (51)
- General (5)
- Geoff Bullock (21)
- glurge (3)
- god as santa (3)
- God politics (25)
- guest posters (6)
- Hillsong (12)
- iraq (70)
- kaleo (3)
- leadership (6)
- Liquid (7)
- Mark for Lent 2006 (43)
- mDNA (51)
- notes from northern (59)
- NT for Lent (21)
- oz politics and society (140)
- poetry and writings (17)
- polls (1)
- quotes (34)
- random musings (125)
- reciprocal links (31)
- religious vilification laws (5)
- songs (3)
- spirituality and prayers (46)
- the good book (19)
- the kitchen garden (1)
- the money jar (14)
- theologically speaking (33)
- those wacky christians (5)
- Unfreezing Moves (14)
- us (154)
- wise words (44)
- World Affairs (84)
Recent entries
July 23rd, 2007 at 11:54 pm
Is it April 1st already? That almost read like a satire, except it’s not. Scary.
July 24th, 2007 at 7:25 am
I thought Al-Qaeda would be into cell groups!
July 24th, 2007 at 8:25 am
AQ aren’t on your side they are on suicide’s.
They do have a sunni disposition however
July 24th, 2007 at 8:47 am
I was sure I was reading theonion for a little there… definitely need more coffee. Or cynicism. Or both, probably…
July 24th, 2007 at 10:30 am
Why make value-judgements about this narrative? This man has a story to tell about his faith-journey and we should go along side him and tell ours.
July 24th, 2007 at 10:47 am
If the world is to be saved from Muslim conquest, it will be America who does it. And if America is to be saved, only conservatism can do it. And if conservatism is to be saved, it will be those Bible-believing patriots who do it–those conservative, evangelical Christians who are the bedrock of the American way of life.
That’s not a “faith journey”, it’s propaganda and jingoism.
July 24th, 2007 at 11:52 am
Personally, I would have thought that Al Qaeda has much more in common with conservative evangelicalism than it does with the Emergent Church.
July 24th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
“After all, the story of the birth and growth of Western Civilization is pretty much the story of the birth and growth of Christianity.”
For a few weeks now I’ve been watching some parts of a series of documentaries on the influence of Islam on the culture and science of Europe through the dark ages. Many interesting and eye opening concepts have been raised.
Such as the Spanish cathedrals that were built by the local Muslims for the catholics (they look a lot more like mosques than cathedrals). How quickly Europe adopted some concepts from Muslims, like our modern numbering system it only took a year or two for builders in england to receive the knowledge from Spain.
Also the catholic saints that were most likely praying to Allah for their whole lives. I particularly liked that story.
July 24th, 2007 at 12:13 pm
Yes, that’s a good point, Gareth. It seems that the authors either is ignorant of the fact (or wants to be ignorant of the fact) that during the Dark Ages when Christendom was a veritable black hole, Islam was streets ahead in the sciences and the arts and this influence remains today.
July 24th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
I’m no fan of the emerging church - I’m reasonably conservative and Calvinist in my theology so a lot of the issues of the EC grate on me.
But there is no way in the world - no way at all - that I would viciously attack the EC and portray them as terrorists as this man has done. He’s an idiot, a hypocrite and a false prophet all rolled into one.
July 24th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
It is one of those times where the authors words work against his own stance.
July 24th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
AQ is not trying to dominate the world far from it so he has got that wrong but his criticisms re post modernism etal of the ‘emerging ‘church are spot on and have bben said before
July 24th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Which criticisms would these be, EP at LP?
July 24th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
Hey Homer, haven’t heard from you for ages. Have you been OK?
July 24th, 2007 at 10:23 pm
Where do you start with this article?
He seems to have little idea that the “emerging church” is a very diverse phenomenon… but on average it’s far less liberal than (say) the mainline denominations of the US… I’ve had the impression it’s more a moderate evangelical phenomenon than either liberal or fundamentalist. It’s like he’s attacking a parody of the emerging church without making any effort to understand it.
Historically… Christianity overcame the militant paganism of the Roman Empire not by waging war but by love and disciple making… can true Christianity be defended by force? I say not… only a kingdom “of this world” can be defended by force.
Gosh… what can I say? Fundamentalists are scary sometimes.
July 25th, 2007 at 9:15 am
Janet, they prefer the much more euphemistic “conservative evangelical”.
July 25th, 2007 at 9:33 am
I think one way to depict the EC is to compare it to an earlier movement - the Jesus movement of the 1960s and 1970s.
The JM began as an ill defined movement, based mainly around the west coast of the US. There was no organisational structure and people moved from one group to another. As the movement matured, it divided into different groupings - some of which were good, some bad.
The Calvary Chapel movement and Jesus People USA came from the Jesus movement. Calvary is pretty much mainline Pentecostal these days while JPUSA merged its churches into the Evangelical Covenant Church.
But other groups also came out of it - the Children of God (who advocated a form of “sexual evangelism” to get new people in via sexual encounters with female members); the Potter’s House (which you probably know is quite authoritative and restrictive); and, of course, The People’s temple led by Jim Jones, famous for their mass suicide in Jonestown.
Will the EC develop into similar strands? I don’t think that it will produce the same type of cults like the Children of God or the People’s temple - as far as I can see the EC movement has no hypnotic or charismatic leaders that people obey without question. But I’m certain that many church groups will end up embracing a form of theological liberalism.
On the other hand, I can also see some good and challenging groups come out of the EC, who believe in the scriptures and have a passion for preaching the gospel to the lost and who have modified their church structures to be more biblical.
July 25th, 2007 at 11:31 am
Hi Janet,
I am okay and I have been around.
David, the critcisms in the article of post-moderinism I think are spot on.
you cannot be post-modernist and christian.
Don Carson is so much better on the specifics and the intellectual background.
As I said the person has a poor understanding of what AQ is about.
I think I understnd what he is on about but he is all over he place
July 25th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
I think I understnd what he is on about but he is all over he place
Pot calling the Kettle black me thinks! You make me laugh Homer
you cannot be post-modernist and christian. Where do you come up with this crap Homer - that’s like saying you can’t be medieval and Christian, or a product of the enlightenment and Christian
July 25th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
David, the critcisms in the article of post-moderinism I think are spot on.
you cannot be post-modernist and christian.
Clearly you don’t understand what postmodernism is if you make this comment.
Don Carson is so much better on the specifics and the intellectual background.
No he’s not - he’s simply quite talented at speaking and writing in a sophisticated fashion. His comprehension of the Emergent Church on the other hand is quite poor.
July 25th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
If one understands postmodernism then there are no absolute values.
This is completely opposite to what is in the bible.
I have always preferred God to derrida.
The problem of the emerging church as I have read the literature is that the main proponents are not particular eloquent and are ambiguous.
I have always found ambiguity correlated with a lack of intellectual depth to put it very euphemistically.
July 25th, 2007 at 12:59 pm
Oh, I understand - you’re equating the claims to evangelicalism to the Bible. This, as I see it, is your first mistake.
Not saying that this is a standard Emergent text, but you’d do well to read “Subjectivity is Truth” by Soren Kierkegaard. Please have your report on my desk by noon tomorrow.
July 25th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
The problem of the emerging church as I have read the literature is that the main proponents are not particular eloquent and are ambiguous.
Stop it Homer, you’re killing me…Oh my pants, I don’t think they’ll ever dry
July 25th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
David,
Read up on this logical fallacy :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority
Have your report on my desk tomorrow.
July 25th, 2007 at 2:30 pm
Warren, isn’t there an inherent irony in you directing me to Wikipedia in this instance?
Besides, I wasn’t appealling to Kierkegaard as though the very mention of his name would prove the immutable truth of postmodernism - I was merely suggesting that “Subjectivity is Truth” is an interesting paper which might help to clarify a few things for Homer.
July 25th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
I subjectively believe youre an idiot
Subjectivity is Truth
QED
July 25th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
i actually believe Homer is right in saying you can’t be postmodern and Christian. as long as you are defining postmodern as a philosophical worldview rather than historical as you seem to put it Greg..
like being a commie capitalist. you can’t be both
but you can of course be a Christian who lives in a postmodern world.
further.. the tone of the piece seemed to be akin to Lances calling AOG pastors “pond scum” etc.. this is overkill design to provoke
July 25th, 2007 at 4:35 pm
I subjectively believe youre an idiot
Subjectivity is Truth
QED
Is that kind of behaviour really necessary, Warren?
i actually believe Homer is right in saying you can’t be postmodern and Christian. as long as you are defining postmodern as a philosophical worldview rather than historical as you seem to put it Greg..
I’ve heard a number of people suggest that on this thread now, but nobody has actually explained to me why they believe this to be the case. Could it be that you misunderstand postmodernism, you misunderstand Christianity or you misunderstand both?
July 25th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
David, lets deconstruct your post 22
“Oh, I understand .. this, as I see it, is your first mistake”
You claim that you understand exactly what Homer is saying, but that he is making a mistake. Also you claim that Homer and others do not understand either PM or Christianity. You are trying to set yourself up as an authority.
“Please have your report on my desk by noon tomorrow”. Of course the allusion is to a stern schoolmaster who can order an ignorant school-boy around. Another very authoritarian image.
You are playing power-games by alluding to texts which you hope no-one else has read. If they have, you still have an out because you said that you are “not saying this is a standard Emergent text”.
Now I thought post-modernists were very skeptical of truth-claims by authorities and analysed the underlying power games.
If you are going to engage, debate the issues dont give us this superior attitude.
July 25th, 2007 at 9:54 pm
#
I’ve heard a number of people suggest that on this thread now, but nobody has actually explained to me why they believe this to be the case. Could it be that you misunderstand postmodernism, you misunderstand Christianity or you misunderstand both?
i actually suggested a couple of things davo
what are you referring to as ‘this’
could it be that you misunderstand PM or Christianity or both?