Disqus - Latest Comments for Markingtime4now

Re: “The kingdom of God is among you” Four misconceptions about the kingdom Jesus announced

Markingtime4now — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 09:44:43 -0000

Yes, same Reba Mark, but not tied much to Reba anymore, except by inspiration and indirect means. Had to cut the apron strings after 20+ years, bring some of that teaching out to people beyond the "choir". Sent a private note to you and Heather thru your blog site. Good to catch up with you again...

Re: “The kingdom of God is among you” Four misconceptions about the kingdom Jesus announced

paulmunn — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 08:33:59 -0000

Hi, Mark (by any chance the Mark I know from Reba Place Church?). Thanks. Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that de Chardin did not have any sense of God's kingdom present. I only meant to use his theories (specifically his "Omega Point" theology, describing an evolutionary development of all things towards God) as a well-known example of the "slow, gradual" school of thought. As I said in the article, I see Jesus announcing his kingdom as immediately present, but then also expecting its final, future revelation in an immediate way, too (not a slow development, or even "uncovering," over centuries). So it is very clearly God's work, God's gift.

I've have appreciated much in de Chardin's writings. And, as for you, keep on shoveling it!

Re: “The kingdom of God is among you” Four misconceptions about the kingdom Jesus announced

Markingtime4now — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 08:01:14 -0000

Very fine work here. One suggestion: Providentially, I was reading today of de Chardin (first time ever...), and contrary to your proposition here, his mystical vision did seem to me to include a sense of God and kingdom already fully arrived, though perhaps not fully revealed or understood due to human limitations. Maybe his was a theology of "uncovering", not so much literally of creating/building, as just owning and growing into our role in the full sweep of creation, and more fully valuing the kingdom and our divine family. Plus the "work" of reflecting kingdom for those who have not noticed its subtleties, and been set free by realizing their purpose in history and creation. But this is just my reading of de Chardin. Perhaps he points toward joy in the work of science and theology and social justice (as opposed to burden/burn-out), but with recognition at all times that it is God who has done/is doing the work. Me and Pierre, we're just shovels.

Re: Guestroom for Jesus?

Markingtime4now — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 10:21:49 -0000

As somone with a schizophrenic in my family, who was also homeless for a short time, I commend this article and the spirit of courageous generosity it tries to call us to. If God is our security, we can practice hospitality more boldly.

Also, the article reminded me of a favorite poem, by the Sufi poet Rumi in the 13th century:

_Guest House_

This being human is a guest house
Every morning a new arrival.
A joy, a depression, a meanness,
some momentary awareness comes
as an unexpected visitor.
Welcome and entertain them all!
Even if they are a crowd of sorrows,
who violently sweep your house
empty of its furniture,
still treat each guest honorably.
He may be clearing you out for some new delight.
The dark thought, the shame, the malice,
meet them at the door laughing,
and invite them in.
Be grateful for whoever comes,
because each has been sent
as a guide from beyond.

Re: Finding Our Way Again (Brian McLaren)

Markingtime4now — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:09:59 -0000

A good overview. Thanks.

One thought I had about your "anti-consumerist" comment near the end. I don't know how much McLaren's theology deals with an *active* Holy Spirit, but it seems to me that when one is trying to make a case for practice, the proof ought to be in the pudding, not in the words his book uses to celebrate or describe it. In other words, joyful, disciplined, authentic spiritual practice should be something inspired by the indwelling Spirit, and any "evidence" or ideological argumentation about its essential (non-optional) qualities would run counter to the core of his argument: that it's in the DOING of the thing that its fruits are seen. A few anecdotal examples might qualify as evidence for some, but could be grounds for dismissal if an already biased reader is inclined toward abstract doctrine instead of concrete practice or openminded exploratory inquiry (a stance McLaren is becoming known for).

Perhaps he's simply trying to teach and encourage those making early forays into this area, and not even trying to address the "outsider" critics who are just going to keep pigeonholing him, whether he makes a good case or not. Is the book a manual for the "new school monks", or a justification of their approach to those who would discount it? One way to sidestep the "marketplace" of ideas is to refuse (in subtle ways) to even participate in the debate as they define it, to deny doubters the power they're seeking by the mere asking of their questions, legitimate or not.

Pursuing a singular voice and ignoring the naysayers is one of the inherent strengths of both visionaries and lunatics. Perhaps Brian's just keeping his eye on the ball here...