Disqus - Latest Comments for Devan

Re: Red Letters: Living a Faith that Bleeds

Devan — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 09:32:32 -0000

Sounds like a great book; I'll check the local library.

I shudder to think, though, that the CEO of Coca-Cola is endorsing a book on Christian discipleship, when Coca-Cola has many well documented human rights abuses in Colombia and El Salvador:

http://www.hrw.org/children/labor/elsalvador/

http://www.corporatecampaign.org/killer-coke/wh...

Re: Red Letters: Living a Faith that Bleeds

Devan — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 09:32:32 -0000

Re: Red Letters: Living a Faith that Bleeds

Devan — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 11:21:09 -0000

Yes. It's frightening. As a former member of the United Students Against Sweatshops movement, I remember on at least two occasions listening to union leaders from Colombia talk about their experiences of intimidation, violence, torture, and murder.

One even described how a fellow union leader was dragged from his home, beheaded, and then the paramilitaries played soccer with his head. His presentation was in Spanish, and when I heard it I asked my friend sitting next to me if I had just heard him wrong. Unfortunately, I hadn't...

Re: Red Letters: Living a Faith that Bleeds

Devan — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 11:21:09 -0000

Re: Red Letters: Living a Faith that Bleeds

Devan — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:07:46 -0000

any follow up on this?

Re: Red Letters: Living a Faith that Bleeds

Devan — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:07:46 -0000

any follow up on this?

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Devan — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 17:21:48 -0000

I have two comments on this:

First, jurisnaturalist:

While you are right that there are fundamentalist Christians who support Zionism as a result of Christian dispensationalism, I don't think this really accounts for U.S. support of Israel and I think it is damaging to the witness of the church to attribute US-Israeli alliances solely to theology for the following reasons:

1) It overstates the influence of fundamentalist Christianity on US politics. Certainly Barack Obama is no fundamentalist and his appointment of Israeli-hardliner Rahm Emmanuel is a good indication of his support of Zionism in the Middle East. Rahm Emmanuel has even criticized the Bush Administration (they are the fundamentalists, right?) for not being strong enough on their support of Israel.

2) It overlooks the historical and political factors of US-Israeli relations: Israel being seen as the only "modern democracy" in the Middle East by the U.S., the strength of AIPAC, and the stereotypical Islamophobia that pervades American culture (and not "Christianity" per se), which have little to do with dispensationalism.

Second,

As for your post Sam, I would highly recommend G.E. Ladd's The Gospel of the Kingdom, as it articulates a premillennial eschatology that the church is already incarnating the Kingdom of God but that the Kingdom is not fully consummated until the return of Christ. This has immense impact on ecclesiology as service toward the building of the Kingdom and in preaching the gospel so that others can join in the work of building the Kingdom. I know this idea is super hip for a lot of Emerging folks but Ladd already articulated this point of view a half-century ago.

Re: The Apocalyptic Church

Devan — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 18:21:48 -0000

I have two comments on this:

First, jurisnaturalist:
While you are right that there are fundamentalist Christians who support Zionism as a result of Christian dispensationalism, I don't think this really accounts for U.S. support of Israel and I think it is damaging to the witness of the church to attribute US-Israeli alliances solely to theology for the following reasons:

1) It overstates the influence of fundamentalist Christianity on US politics. Certainly Barack Obama is no fundamentalist and his appointment of Israeli-hardliner Rahm Emmanuel is a good indication of his support of Zionism in the Middle East. Rahm Emmanuel has even criticized the Bush Administration (they are the fundamentalists, right?) for not being strong enough on their support of Israel.

2) It overlooks the historical and political factors of US-Israeli relations: Israel being seen as the only "modern democracy" in the Middle East by the U.S., the strength of AIPAC, and the stereotypical Islamophobia that pervades American culture (and not "Christianity" per se), which have little to do with dispensationalism.

Second,
As for your post Sam, I would highly recommend G.E. Ladd's The Gospel of the Kingdom, as it articulates a premillennial eschatology that the church is already incarnating the Kingdom of God but that the Kingdom is not fully consummated until the return of Christ. This has immense impact on ecclesiology as service toward the building of the Kingdom and in preaching the gospel so that others can join in the work of building the Kingdom. I know this idea is super hip for a lot of Emerging folks but Ladd already articulated this point of view a half-century ago.

Re: the Jesus Manifesto » Maintenance Mode

Devan — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 09:46:13 -0000

Thank you. I agree wholeheartedly with your perspective on this; so much so that I have nothing else to add!

Re: A Size 10 Hypocricy

Devan — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 10:46:13 -0000

Thank you. I agree wholeheartedly with your perspective on this; so much so that I have nothing else to add!

Re: A More Gracious Radicalism

Devan — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:56:50 -0000

"When Christians, upon discovering the deficiencies of their traditions begin, in earnest, to tap back into the root of Jesus’ provocative Kingdom message, they are often likely to become judgmental and angry towards their brothers and sisters in Christ than they are to weep for those brothers and sisters. They become increasingly aware of the failures of the Church, of the compromises (large and small) of their friends, and more tenacious in exposing falsehood wherever they find it."

Hmm. I'm interested in a couple of things here Mark. Again, I love your writing, I think the self-criticism of the Christian radical is needed and your insights are profound.

1) I would say, though, that if the radical message of the Gospel is to identify with the poor and broken, then perhaps we ourselves need to try to embody that brokenness? In which case, this brings us back to the sin problem - i.e., that we are sinners, who - by the grace of God alone - are justified and made righteous through Christ alone. In which case, we would neither be jerks condemning our brothers and sisters in Christ, nor the hyper-pious alternative: pitying our brothers and sisters in Christ for not being as holy as we are.

2)If we would be sinners in need of righteousness, and we search for that righteousness in Christ - our Lord and Saviour - then he also becomes our teacher. And when he is our savior first and then teacher, we are radically transformed by his saving grace and then sanctified by his unfailing love and example as shown in the scriptures.

3) Not all of us have a prophetic call. There is a sense in which there can be so much advocacy of the "prophetic" toward the Church that we leave aside the need for ministry, for love, for healing, etc.