DISQUS

Nagler's UC Berkeley courses on Nonviolence are available for free download:

http://webcast.berkeley.edu/course_details.php?...
http://webcast.berkeley.edu/course_details.php?...

I've been listening to them on my iPod and these lectures are awesome.

One of my favorite techniques is to summarize all the best bits of an expensive book in a blog post, which is of course available for free.

The problem of course is that the Christian book publishing industry, and especially the CCM industry, are INDUSTRIES. They exist to make money, not to help people. (That is also why 99% of what they produce, like 99% of the self-help market, is bullshit made to entice - not help - you.)

Sad, indeed. I think his "Persona" (1966) is the greatest film of all time.

Keith,

Though it is tangential to Mark's question, let me address your quibble. You are right that Enlightenment thinkers have their own "tradition" (I'm using Alasdair MacIntyre's term; he writes on this issue quite eloquently). If we can call it dogma, then it is a different sort of dogma altogether.

Religious dogma is about what one believes, which is separate from how one believes. Whether one comes to Christian belief through personal experience, induction, deduction, or are simply grandfathered in (as is usually the case), what unites religious people is their dogma of what to believe: an omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent God created the universe; Christology; atonement; etc.

The Enlightenment dogma is, on the other hand, about how one believes, separate from what one believes. The Enlightenment dogma is too think rationally about what we observe in the real world, not to believe any set of truths for all time. Thus, even if nearly all Enlightenment thinkers assume the universe is eternal, they all change their minds if presented with well-considered, compelling evidence (as happened during the 20th century, with Big Bang theory). And of course, Enlightenment thinkers are not going to accept truths just because they were asserted by ancient persons, whether Paul of Tarsus or Aristotle.

Thus, we might see the central virtue of religion as faith; asserting truths in the face of whatever evidence comes our way. But the central virtue of the Enlightenment (or rather, Descartes' skepticism, which preceded the Enlightenment) is doubt; not asserting truths unless reason and evidence compels one to do so.

Perhaps that is why religion has no problem asserting gods despite so much evidence to the contrary, and why Enlightenment thinkers refuse to assert indemonstrable gods.

I tend to think a lot more people would be seduced by the beauty of the way of Jesus if they didn't feel they needed to swallow all the irrational doctrine of the church first. Kind of like how Buddhism has found followers in the west (but not so much Mahayana Buddhism). Even the vitriolic Richard Dawkins wrote a piece called "Atheists for Jesus."

I even wonder if neomonasticism could take hold in the non-theist mainstream if the movement's focus was on love and service and simplicity and it could be decoupled from talking snakes and mind-reading, tri-person, invisible spirits. People want a better, fuller, more loving way of life than their busy and pointless consumerist rat-race, but children of the Enlightenment don't, by definition, swallow dogma.

Have you seen this?

http://www.theforgottenways.org/blog/index.php/...

I rather like it when people do therapy through their blog. That's what my own blog is all about... :)

I can't say I'm "grappling" with that, because the word implies a struggle among at least two competing ideas. I am solidly opposed to the church calender because I share your critiques of it but not your defenses.

I do not think church events give us more opportunity to "live in" our faith than we could choose without church events. And I think the centrality of images and story in the church is an abuse of potentially illustrative resources; they mislead more than they lead. And I do not think participation in the church calender is a good way to stand in unity with the body of Christ, or in fact that unity with such a broad and often evil body of persons is good. (Mutual love and respect and service, sure. ) I can't imagine wanting to unify myself with the conservative George Bush cheering squad, and I can't imagine you (Mark) or Barthrop or a thousand others wanting to unify themselves with my hypocritical, uncompassionate, unserving, ungenerous, selfish ass.

The Catholic mass a few blocks from my apartment in Merida, VZ was a "palm branch" service, too. We twisted palm leaves into crosses and then prayed to the Virgin Coromoto, an abstraction of Mary that serves as the patron saint of Venezuela.

Great post! Thanks for explaining.

I can't find much more on your blog about substitutionary atonement. Is there?

Besides this one: http://www.jesusmanifesto.com/?p=510

Yay! I look forward to your cogent thoughts.

AMEN!

Honestly, not a fan of the new Missio Dei header graphic, both for the sepia and the cutout-filtered cliche Jesus. Nice West Bank Images page.

Very interesting! I do love these series that take us inside your brain.

So, did you get it all in already or something?

My response to posts like this is always:

1. Could this ever really work?
2. Is it worth the tremendous cumulative co$t to me? (Wal-Mart always has lower prices. Always.)

The way of Jesus is so impractical.

Very stressful! Very dependent on God! I can't say anything you don't already know, but God bless you!

Spiffy new site! But did I miss something? Does this mean the publisher also accepted your proposal for The Jesus Manifesto?

Also, FYI: in Firefox but not in IE the borders to the textboxes for name, mail, website, and comment text are nearly invisible, which probably makes things slightly confusing to those unfamiliar with blog commenting (who happen to use Firefox). Dunno if you're getting the same effect.

Very cool! I'm glad you were presently surprised.

Yes, it's Christmas. My own blog's comments this week dropped to 2 from my previous high point of about 6. :)

Does this community of resistance interest you?

http://www.sundancechannel.com/onepunk/

Brick and The New World were my favorites of 2005 (though they didn't see many theaters in the U.S. until 2006). so far my favorite of 2006 is Borat, though I've seen very few movies this year since I usually wait for the DVD.

I'm just now reading Rick Richardson's short book "Reimagining Evangelism" and it is very exciting. But here are some immediate thoughts:

I'm not sure there needs to be a line between embodying the gospel and simply living like Christ. There is something incredibly beautiful and attractive about the real Jesus, and people will be more than curious about such a person. I recall, for example, Barthrop telling me about how the Muslims at Hard Times really respect him though they know he works for Jesus. You can't argue with true, sacrificial love.

About narrating the gospel. It's hard to say which truths are necessary to explicate, especially if one ISN'T engaged in "sales pitch" evangelism for "fire insurance" salvation.

That's cool that you've linked up your personal favorite posts, rather than the usual most-read/commented posts.

Yeah, the Washington Avenue Bridge signs are disappointing.

I put off reading your reflections on evangelism because (a) I wanted to wait for the series to finish so I could read the whole thing as a continuous thought, and (b) I realized by the third paragraph of your first post I'd have to look up the word "enculturation."

But now I've read the series and like it very much. It's a very succinct presentation of the (hi)story of Christian evangelism and how current views have formed and dominated, and how we might look at evangelism in a more holistic, Po-Mo way.

This series is another example of how you've been able to excite my inner desire for Christ by reframing questions and ideas. Evangelism as embodiment of the Gospel and not a list of truths. Christ's presence reaching others when WE embody it among them.

BTW, I've been having some major problems with your text captcha. When I take more than a minute to type a comment (like this one), it always gives me a "Sorry, it seems you didn't pass math!", even though I'm sure my simple addition is correct. :) But when I only take about 30 seconds to leave a comment, it accepts my mathematical solution.

I've lost many a comment this way, and so I've begun copying my comments to the clipboard before I "Submit Comment" on your blog so I don't have to re-type it all.