DISQUS

Oh and spend enough time with Ukrainians or others in the former soviet union, and you learn not to use the term oligarchy terribly freely. It can be quite bad.

dlw

Oh and spend enough time with Ukrainians or others in the former soviet union, and you learn not to use the term oligarchy terribly freely. It can be quite bad.


dlw

Oh and spend enough time with Ukrainians or others in the former soviet union, and you learn not to use the term oligarchy terribly freely. It can be quite bad.

dlw

congrads on the speaking engagement.

Here's hoping you do consider my last comment on Pneumatology when you get around to the topic again...

dlw

congrads on the speaking engagement.

Here's hoping you do consider my last comment on Pneumatology when you get around to the topic again...

dlw

congrads on the speaking engagement.


Here's hoping you do consider my last comment on Pneumatology when you get around to the topic again...



dlw

Hej, Hej Jonas!

I guess my ecclesiology nowadays affirms both the local house church and the parachurches, which ideally shd be as similar to the local house churches as possible, with thirty or less stewards from various house churches.

I think that the sorts of parachurch orgs we need varies historically and we could have dealt with the problems of heresy and the polemical attacks by greek philosophers like Celsus via parachurches of varying degrees of separation from local churches. Ie, parachurches of degree one are composed of stewards from 30 or less local churches and parachurches of degree two are composed of stewards from 30 or less parachurch organizations of degree one, as parachurch organizations of degree n woud be composed of 30 or less parachurch organizations of degree n-1. The sorts of parachurches would be "specialized" and reformed. Local churches would grow but always split into more local churches when the exceeded the size limitation mandated to keep things decentralized.

That's my vision of how the church shd operate. I think one could then have both coordination in provision of the sorts of services that we value and decentralization. I believe very much in the need and biblical nature of teaching hierarchy, which can and should be grown to be flatter, but I don't believe that such teaching authority leads to administrative authority, as sadly tends to happen quite a bit...

ps, It's not official, but I probably got the job in Idaho.
dlw

Hej, Hej Jonas!

I guess my ecclesiology nowadays affirms both the local house church and the parachurches, which ideally shd be as similar to the local house churches as possible, with thirty or less stewards from various house churches.

I think that the sorts of parachurch orgs we need varies historically and we could have dealt with the problems of heresy and the polemical attacks by greek philosophers like Celsus via parachurches of varying degrees of separation from local churches. Ie, parachurches of degree one are composed of stewards from 30 or less local churches and parachurches of degree two are composed of stewards from 30 or less parachurch organizations of degree one, as parachurch organizations of degree n woud be composed of 30 or less parachurch organizations of degree n-1. The sorts of parachurches would be "specialized" and reformed. Local churches would grow but always split into more local churches when the exceeded the size limitation mandated to keep things decentralized.

That's my vision of how the church shd operate. I think one could then have both coordination in provision of the sorts of services that we value and decentralization. I believe very much in the need and biblical nature of teaching hierarchy, which can and should be grown to be flatter, but I don't believe that such teaching authority leads to administrative authority, as sadly tends to happen quite a bit...

ps, It's not official, but I probably got the job in Idaho.
dlw

Hej, Hej Jonas!


I guess my ecclesiology nowadays affirms both the local house church and the parachurches, which ideally shd be as similar to the local house churches as possible, with thirty or less stewards from various house churches.



I think that the sorts of parachurch orgs we need varies historically and we could have dealt with the problems of heresy and the polemical attacks by greek philosophers like Celsus via parachurches of varying degrees of separation from local churches. Ie, parachurches of degree one are composed of stewards from 30 or less local churches and parachurches of degree two are composed of stewards from 30 or less parachurch organizations of degree one, as parachurch organizations of degree n woud be composed of 30 or less parachurch organizations of degree n-1. The sorts of parachurches would be "specialized" and reformed. Local churches would grow but always split into more local churches when the exceeded the size limitation mandated to keep things decentralized.



That's my vision of how the church shd operate. I think one could then have both coordination in provision of the sorts of services that we value and decentralization. I believe very much in the need and biblical nature of teaching hierarchy, which can and should be grown to be flatter, but I don't believe that such teaching authority leads to administrative authority, as sadly tends to happen quite a bit...



ps, It's not official, but I probably got the job in Idaho.

dlw

who maybe someday will start voting again and encourage others to do likewise in creative independent ways?...

just messing with ya!

I think it's great that you are seeing a spiritual director. My director is my great uncle Rob Boyd. I'm also glad you got that doxy and praxy thing wrapped together, now we gotta try and change some of both parts... ;-)
dlw

who maybe someday will start voting again and encourage others to do likewise in creative independent ways?...

just messing with ya!

I think it's great that you are seeing a spiritual director. My director is my great uncle Rob Boyd. I'm also glad you got that doxy and praxy thing wrapped together, now we gotta try and change some of both parts... ;-)
dlw

who maybe someday will start voting again and encourage others to do likewise in creative independent ways?...


just messing with ya!



I think it's great that you are seeing a spiritual director. My director is my great uncle Rob Boyd. I'm also glad you got that doxy and praxy thing wrapped together, now we gotta try and change some of both parts... ;-)

dlw

Well, though the truth of our founding fathers faith was far more complicated, there is no doubt that they were all strongly impacted by Christianity and were relatively speaking people of integrity.


The sin here is more one of omission. There's no mention of how the flawed form of Christianity that became prevalent in the US was behind its decline and the festering of the serious problems that face us today. It is trite to simply call people to the Bible, without also dealing with the many issues of discipleship that we need to deal with our current problems domestic and int'l with integrity.



I just watched Miracle with Kurt Russell and thought about the patriotic themes and religious syncretism in that movie. The best thing about that movie is that the US hockey team won by virtue of its willingness to learn from its opponents and subvert our individualism to act as a team, putting the name on the front before the name on the back. These are definitely Christian values, but they're not necessarily typical of the USA today and its not like we own the property rights on them.



I am very thankful for the extent to which Christianity has had an impact on the United States. I wish that was more the case and that more countries were more impacted by Christainity. I remember feeling really sad when one of my students in Mexico told me that his hopes for the future lay with the US. He didn't have much hope for his own country. If all that has been noble in our country has ultimately stemmed from God then there shd be nothing preventing others from also demonstrating these characteristics. Its just up to us to let our lights shine and help to turn the tide, internationally, in part by prophetically and lovingly challenging the deeply flawed forms of Christianity that have been prevalent and are going to be transformed or lose ground.



dlw

Well, though the truth of our founding fathers faith was far more complicated, there is no doubt that they were all strongly impacted by Christianity and were relatively speaking people of integrity.

The sin here is more one of omission. There's no mention of how the flawed form of Christianity that became prevalent in the US was behind its decline and the festering of the serious problems that face us today. It is trite to simply call people to the Bible, without also dealing with the many issues of discipleship that we need to deal with our current problems domestic and int'l with integrity.

I just watched Miracle with Kurt Russell and thought about the patriotic themes and religious syncretism in that movie. The best thing about that movie is that the US hockey team won by virtue of its willingness to learn from its opponents and subvert our individualism to act as a team, putting the name on the front before the name on the back. These are definitely Christian values, but they're not necessarily typical of the USA today and its not like we own the property rights on them.

I am very thankful for the extent to which Christianity has had an impact on the United States. I wish that was more the case and that more countries were more impacted by Christainity. I remember feeling really sad when one of my students in Mexico told me that his hopes for the future lay with the US. He didn't have much hope for his own country. If all that has been noble in our country has ultimately stemmed from God then there shd be nothing preventing others from also demonstrating these characteristics. Its just up to us to let our lights shine and help to turn the tide, internationally, in part by prophetically and lovingly challenging the deeply flawed forms of Christianity that have been prevalent and are going to be transformed or lose ground.

dlw

Well, though the truth of our founding fathers faith was far more complicated, there is no doubt that they were all strongly impacted by Christianity and were relatively speaking people of integrity.

The sin here is more one of omission. There's no mention of how the flawed form of Christianity that became prevalent in the US was behind its decline and the festering of the serious problems that face us today. It is trite to simply call people to the Bible, without also dealing with the many issues of discipleship that we need to deal with our current problems domestic and int'l with integrity.

I just watched Miracle with Kurt Russell and thought about the patriotic themes and religious syncretism in that movie. The best thing about that movie is that the US hockey team won by virtue of its willingness to learn from its opponents and subvert our individualism to act as a team, putting the name on the front before the name on the back. These are definitely Christian values, but they're not necessarily typical of the USA today and its not like we own the property rights on them.

I am very thankful for the extent to which Christianity has had an impact on the United States. I wish that was more the case and that more countries were more impacted by Christainity. I remember feeling really sad when one of my students in Mexico told me that his hopes for the future lay with the US. He didn't have much hope for his own country. If all that has been noble in our country has ultimately stemmed from God then there shd be nothing preventing others from also demonstrating these characteristics. Its just up to us to let our lights shine and help to turn the tide, internationally, in part by prophetically and lovingly challenging the deeply flawed forms of Christianity that have been prevalent and are going to be transformed or lose ground.

dlw

MVS:But don’t you think that the huge bulk of the problem is that communities AREN’T involved?

dlw: Clearly, community would be critical for good enforcement, but often its just as big of a deal that there are variations in property values and so inner cities can't afford adequate police-support to keep crime and illegal activities down.

Politically active folks aren’t rare.

dlw: The sorts of "rules of thumbs" many people use for politics don't qualify as politically active. People focusing activism on building up the institutions of poorer parts of the urban city are relatively rare.

MVS:Churches that do actually stuff to directly address the evils of society ARE. I know it doesn’t have to be an either/or. I get that.

dlw: Are you saying that most urban churches do not do much to help out former-prostitutes or what-not? This seems like partly a product of economic segregation. There are ways to deal with that and with rising oil prices, a significant chunk of the suburban sprawl is going to get hedged back in... But yeah Churches shd directly address these evils, but we do this in tandem with how the State selectively uses the evil means of the threat of violence to check evil. We, in the Churches, can together participate in the process of using ends-means analysis of how such threat of violence can be adjusted to be more effective at reducing particular evils.

MVS:But it seems like every time I make the point “hey we shouldn’t rely upon the government to get all of this stuff done…let’s BE the change we want to see instead of being inactive Christians who think voting gets the job done” you say “hey, don’t forget to vote.”

dlw: In other words, we're going around in circles again. Or, we're both responding to the same outrage in our own ways. I don't know. I'm not sure how good I would be at working directly with ex-prostitutes. Our lives wd be very far apart and it wd be hard for us to have a lot of points of contact. I think toughening up enforcement of laws against prostitution and pushing for programs like the Basic Income Guarantee(It's just like the flat tax but with an income transfer not tied to how much one earns.) wd do wonders for USAmerican society, especially those at the bottom, and the ministry of decentralized house churches.

So I'm not contradicting you, I'm just saying that damn, it ain't the economics of Jesus to forgo participation in the remaking of the rules that govern us as as a critical part of how we love our neighbors. Or more positively, I think too many people ministering in inner cities get burnt out in two or three years over trying too hard to change things with their community. I don't want you to get burnt out and believe that your community approach with Missio Dei may be critical for avoiding that. But some of that tendency for people to burn out may be because the Social Gospellers were half right that the "structures" really are making sin to fester. If so then we need a double-barrel approach to do justice to the matter, so yeah my reminders to vote are needed. It's a matter of exhortation to avoid sins of omission.

dlw

MVS:But don’t you think that the huge bulk of the problem is that communities AREN’T involved?


dlw: Clearly, community would be critical for good enforcement, but often its just as big of a deal that there are variations in property values and so inner cities can't afford adequate police-support to keep crime and illegal activities down.



Politically active folks aren’t rare.



dlw: The sorts of "rules of thumbs" many people use for politics don't qualify as politically active. People focusing activism on building up the institutions of poorer parts of the urban city are relatively rare.



MVS:Churches that do actually stuff to directly address the evils of society ARE. I know it doesn’t have to be an either/or. I get that.



dlw: Are you saying that most urban churches do not do much to help out former-prostitutes or what-not? This seems like partly a product of economic segregation. There are ways to deal with that and with rising oil prices, a significant chunk of the suburban sprawl is going to get hedged back in... But yeah Churches shd directly address these evils, but we do this in tandem with how the State selectively uses the evil means of the threat of violence to check evil. We, in the Churches, can together participate in the process of using ends-means analysis of how such threat of violence can be adjusted to be more effective at reducing particular evils.



MVS:But it seems like every time I make the point “hey we shouldn’t rely upon the government to get all of this stuff done…let’s BE the change we want to see instead of being inactive Christians who think voting gets the job done” you say “hey, don’t forget to vote.”



dlw: In other words, we're going around in circles again. Or, we're both responding to the same outrage in our own ways. I don't know. I'm not sure how good I would be at working directly with ex-prostitutes. Our lives wd be very far apart and it wd be hard for us to have a lot of points of contact. I think toughening up enforcement of laws against prostitution and pushing for programs like the Basic Income Guarantee(It's just like the flat tax but with an income transfer not tied to how much one earns.) wd do wonders for USAmerican society, especially those at the bottom, and the ministry of decentralized house churches.



So I'm not contradicting you, I'm just saying that damn, it ain't the economics of Jesus to forgo participation in the remaking of the rules that govern us as as a critical part of how we love our neighbors. Or more positively, I think too many people ministering in inner cities get burnt out in two or three years over trying too hard to change things with their community. I don't want you to get burnt out and believe that your community approach with Missio Dei may be critical for avoiding that. But some of that tendency for people to burn out may be because the Social Gospellers were half right that the "structures" really are making sin to fester. If so then we need a double-barrel approach to do justice to the matter, so yeah my reminders to vote are needed. It's a matter of exhortation to avoid sins of omission.



dlw

MVS:But don’t you think that the huge bulk of the problem is that communities AREN’T involved?

dlw: Clearly, community would be critical for good enforcement, but often its just as big of a deal that there are variations in property values and so inner cities can't afford adequate police-support to keep crime and illegal activities down.

Politically active folks aren’t rare.

dlw: The sorts of "rules of thumbs" many people use for politics don't qualify as politically active. People focusing activism on building up the institutions of poorer parts of the urban city are relatively rare.

MVS:Churches that do actually stuff to directly address the evils of society ARE. I know it doesn’t have to be an either/or. I get that.

dlw: Are you saying that most urban churches do not do much to help out former-prostitutes or what-not? This seems like partly a product of economic segregation. There are ways to deal with that and with rising oil prices, a significant chunk of the suburban sprawl is going to get hedged back in... But yeah Churches shd directly address these evils, but we do this in tandem with how the State selectively uses the evil means of the threat of violence to check evil. We, in the Churches, can together participate in the process of using ends-means analysis of how such threat of violence can be adjusted to be more effective at reducing particular evils.

MVS:But it seems like every time I make the point “hey we shouldn’t rely upon the government to get all of this stuff done…let’s BE the change we want to see instead of being inactive Christians who think voting gets the job done” you say “hey, don’t forget to vote.”

dlw: In other words, we're going around in circles again. Or, we're both responding to the same outrage in our own ways. I don't know. I'm not sure how good I would be at working directly with ex-prostitutes. Our lives wd be very far apart and it wd be hard for us to have a lot of points of contact. I think toughening up enforcement of laws against prostitution and pushing for programs like the Basic Income Guarantee(It's just like the flat tax but with an income transfer not tied to how much one earns.) wd do wonders for USAmerican society, especially those at the bottom, and the ministry of decentralized house churches.

So I'm not contradicting you, I'm just saying that damn, it ain't the economics of Jesus to forgo participation in the remaking of the rules that govern us as as a critical part of how we love our neighbors. Or more positively, I think too many people ministering in inner cities get burnt out in two or three years over trying too hard to change things with their community. I don't want you to get burnt out and believe that your community approach with Missio Dei may be critical for avoiding that. But some of that tendency for people to burn out may be because the Social Gospellers were half right that the "structures" really are making sin to fester. If so then we need a double-barrel approach to do justice to the matter, so yeah my reminders to vote are needed. It's a matter of exhortation to avoid sins of omission.

dlw

let me know if and when you reply, Mark.


dlw

let me know if and when you reply, Mark.

dlw

let me know if and when you reply, Mark.

dlw

One cigarette a day isn't that bad, but the addictiveness of cigarettes make it much harder to hold it to that....

dlw

One cigarette a day isn't that bad, but the addictiveness of cigarettes make it much harder to hold it to that....

dlw

One cigarette a day isn't that bad, but the addictiveness of cigarettes make it much harder to hold it to that....


dlw

MVS:Pneumatology affects our understanding of Christ. Is Jesus primarily a moral exemplar? An ethical genius? If so, then the Spirit can simply be understood as a “life force” or a great love. In this sense, Gandhi was spirit filled the same way Jesus was. Is Jesus primarily a miracle-worker? A wielder of charismatic power? If so, then the Spirit can be understood merely as the “power of God.” The Gospels tie Jesus’ Christ-hood with the Spirit’s anointing. Folks like Clark Pinnock have put forth a Spirit Christology that deals with this sort of interconnectedness. Whatever our view of the Spirit is, it helps shape our understanding of Christ.

dlw: Why does there have to be a primary metaphor...? My vote is the reciprocal love of the Father and the Son that is manifested in our created world.

MVS:Pneumatology affects our understanding of the Church. The church is Christ’s embodiment in the world. One’s understanding of the relationship between the Spirit and the church (and between the Spirit and the world) affects how that embodiment is understood and what it looks like.

Shdn't that be "shd look like"?

MVS:Is the Spirit at work in a way that isn’t always radically Christ-centered?

dlw: If the HS manifests the love of the Godhead then might not its connections or pointing back to God sometimes be beyond our comprehension?

MVS:Is the Spirit at work in all religions?

dlw:Would it not surprise you if historically seeds of points of contact or plagiarizations had been implanted in most if not all religions?

MVS:Do we still experience the Spirit the same way today as in the early church?

dlw: Unclear what you mean by "same way"...

MVS:Is our engagement with the Spirit primarily centered on Scripture?

dlw:If the HS is leading us to Truth and all that is to come, why need it center on something we can center on???

MVS:What are spiritual gifts and how do they work? How do we experience the leading of the Spirit in mission? Are we to make decisions as a church based upon spiritual discernment or simple wisdom? Or both? How?

dlw:Is there any discernment that does not draw on our spiritual natures? If the HS is and manifests the love of two spiritual beings then shdn't we expect it to be manifested in our lives through apersonal means, or institutions, by which we manifest our love and community, not unlike that of a blog?

MVS:Depersonalizing the Spirit takes us off the rails.

dlw:No one is depersonalizing the Spirit. The nature of the HS is what it is, apart from the ontological understandings we have. It also is wrong to presume that "depersonalization" makes the HS "impersonal". Your blog is apersonal, and yet it is very personal as it embodies your personhood and the personhoods of those of us who comment here.

MVS:I’ve already posted a bit on this. But I want to give some concrete examples of how depersonalizing the Spirit plays out. My primary encounter with a depersonalized Spirit is with some Pentecostals/Charismatics that I know. These are the very people that are supposed to care MORE about the Spirit. But they get drunk on the effects and power of the Spirit. When the Spirit is boiled down to an experience or special abilities, then there is no place for real discernment. If the Spirit isn’t a One that Requires our Submission, but instead a Force or Power from God for Our Disposal, then the goal isn’t to live in obedience to Christ by the humble submission to the work of the Spirit in our midst. Instead, the goal becomes more about gaining power, utilizing power, and climbing the ladder of spiritual superiority. Look at people like Benny Hinn. He is a perfect outworking of someone addicted to an impersonal Spirit.

dlw: I agree. Though we shd expect to be empowered by the HS, though not in ways that exalt us personally. Once more, apersonal does not imply impersonal.

MVS:Another example of a depersonalized Spirit is a sort of unreflective version of the work currently being done linking the Spirit and pluralism. Many see the Spirit as an attitude or posture: the “Spirit” is being loving to others or the “Spirit” is pursuing truth.

dlw: Part-to-whole. The selflessness shown in all inquiry that pursues what is destined to emerge is made possible by the HS.

MVS: In this idea, the Spirit isn’t the One who brings us to Christ, but a personal disposition to truth. And in this way, there isn’t anything particularly Christian about the Spirit, and there isn’t any particular submission to the Spirit in a relational way. Instead the submission is akin to the way in which we should all submit to abstract ideas like “tolerance” or “democracy.”

dlw: Would these sorts of disciplines embedded in Scientific methodology be possible without Christ's example? How many who followed Newton failed to see that he was truly following Christ, albeit imperfectly? Tolerance is a good thing, as is democracy. The advancement of the kingship of God is abetted by both. I'm remind of Mark 9:38-40. Be careful that your "Christocentrism" doesn't become a neo-Judaization!

MVS: You might ask: Why are you subordinating depersonal or impersonal existence below personal existence? Because, I’m with John Zizioulas (and others like LeRon Shults) that argue that the category of “existence” or “being” is subordinate to the category of “relationality.” God’s being is grounded in the triune relationality of God. My existence is contingent upon my relationships–to God and to others. I am who I am because of my relationships. All of creation flows out of the inter-relationality of God.

dlw: I fail to see why the priority of relation wd imply that the HS has to be personal in the same sense as the Father and the Son are personal. I am relating with you right now through an apersonal means!!!

MVS: Sure, one can have inter-relationality within God without personhood for the Spirit. But to do so would be to subordinate the Spirit to the Father and the Son–and do we REALLY want to go there?

dlw: Not if such was what enabled the relationality of the Father and the Son!!! After all, as you stated, relationality is of greater importance than being. Therefore, it shd not matter whether all three members of the trinity are personal beings. They are all related in a manner that affirms their equal importance. A requires B and C, B requires A and C, and C requires A and B. As such it does not matter if A, B and C are differentiated some, including whether one of them is apersonal...

MVS: Basically, I believe that if I am a person, and the Holy Spirit is not, then I really believe that I am more than the Holy Spirit.

dlw: This vaunts the import of being a "personal" being. What matters is not whether you are a person but whether you are in a saving relationship with God. Now, you may need to be a person to have such a saving relationship, but that doesn't make you "more" than an apersonal being that stems from and manifests God in relation with all that is created by God.

MVS:The Spirit needs to be understood eschatologically. I don’t believe creation is a static event in the past, but an ongoing event that breaks in from the future. The new heavens and the new earth aren’t a destruction of the old and a rebuilding of the new…but a transformation of the old into the new. It is the Spirit who deconstructs and re-creates–it is the Spirit who brings the transformation of all creation in Christ.

dlw: This adds nothing to the argument. Your simply supposing that the HS must be a personal being to do all of that.

MVS:The Spirit continually creates the church…and when we use a blueprint-approach to church creation and formation, centered around church leaders, we piss the Spirit off.

dlw: Note, apersonal does not imply impersonal, as in fixed blue-print. Blue-prints can be dynamic, working models that are reframed by personal beings in a way that the "center" is a working term, not an ontologically given term.

MVS:Here is where I connect pneumatology most practically with ecclesiology. I fundamentally believe that if we “do” church based upon some sort of success blueprint, then we are in sin. And, believe it or not, I believe that if we “do” church based only upon what we read about in Scripture, we are also in sin.

I agree.

MVS:You heard me. If we don’t believe that Christ still leads through his Spirit, and that the Spirit still opens our eyes to see the world as-it-could-be, then we should merely (and dogmatically) cling to Scripture. But I don’t believe that after the Spirit inspired the authors of Scripture, the Spirit went into early retirement. This is by no means to say that the Bible isn’t inspired or that it isn’t fruitful for doing ecclesiology. But to simply say “we’ll do it the way they did it in the book of Acts” is to grossly ignore context and to under-value the role of the Spirit in our lives today.

dlw: Or the extent that the Acts of the Apostles selectively and deliberately chronicles the acts of the innovators or envelope-pushers.

dlw