Comments on: Brian McLaren – Q1 – The Narrative Question

By: Lisa

Lisa — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 03:45:49 +0000

I have been reading, A New Kind of Christianity, and find it interesting reading, new to me. However, God is a theistic concept created by humans to cope with consciousness of self and finiteness. Christianity is just one of the many world religions that further develops the theistic God concept. Christians, however, can gain a lot from reading Brian Mclaren’s book, primarily that of tolerance and compassion for those that do not believe as they do.

By: Ken Gritten

Ken Gritten — Thu, 13 May 2010 13:30:19 +0000

Thanks for your entry. It has given me quite a bit to think about. Thanks again!

By: Andres

Andres — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 15:43:44 +0000

I from Colombia…

Pleeeeeeease… Subtitle in Spanish…

Thank you…

By: Brian McLaren – Navigating Through A New Kind of Christianity | David Kenney

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 03:40:24 +0000

[...] Question 1 – The Narrative Question [...]

By: Don Berry-Graham

Don Berry-Graham — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 19:03:42 +0000

Dear preachingjesus,

I think that you have sumed up things very nicely. I am just finishing his book The Secret Message of Jesus. It is well written. Without a solid bible background one is easily convinced that he has the truth. But if one is well read and well trained one can see that there is nothing new in what he is saying.

Being a baptist I have always supported the priesthood of all believers even to the point of hiring only from within the body of Christ in the last few years. But after reading some of what I am reading not just from McLaren but others I have to admit that all that stuff that was so boring in Seminary proves to be very valuable. Somewhere there is a balance but we tend to live in the ditches. We either give too much power to the academics or not enough.

Keep preaching Jesus. I know that is what Brian wants as well. Hopefully we all come out stronger in the long run and the body of Christ is built into the image of Christ over it all.

By: preachinjesus

preachinjesus — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:00:21 +0000

Again, what is new about this? Absolutely nothing.

What Pastor McLaren is going here is simply regurgitating thought from other authors. If you deny that Paul’s view of Christ is an authentic one (which Pastor McLaren does here) than you have abrogated the nature of the inspiration and authority of the New Testament.

Then the suggestion that we can’t “clearly” see the biblical narrative because the Graeco-Roman socio-political-philosophical influences is just an ad hoc criticism. Where is the validation for that point? Where are the arguments? Is it all of the philosophers of these two civilizations or just one or two? Where did the influence come in?

Finally, how are we going to understand Jesus in the text if we start in Abraham. Is it a first Temple understanding or a second Temple understanding? Is it going to deal with the messianic implications of federal thought?

At some point one would expect Pastor McLaren to actually offer something new in his New Kind of Christianity. To date, he has not.

By: Sonny Mathew

Sonny Mathew — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 17:52:09 +0000

Dear Brain,
Why start from Abraham? Instead if we start from creation, then we can talk about GOD(not the “Christian God”, but God who oversees the complete His-torical narrative (In the begining…). Of course, the solution is Jesus Christ and His finished work on the cross which brings us back in the restored relationship to Him (GOD).
Sonny Mathew

By: Cody Stauffer

Cody Stauffer — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 20:25:45 +0000

Don and Jon, Brian also mentions in his book that a lot of what he is talking about comes from the overlooked traditions, like the Quakers and Eastern Orthodox- of course its not “new,” but perhaps the room we give for other voices and the ability to be open to correction from the “least of these” in terms of historic theological discussion is what’s new. I know that is what’s new for me!

By: Jon

Jon — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:22:22 +0000

Don, you sounds like you have it all figured out. Unfortunately, the rest of the main-stream church has not. I don’t think if you were to ask Brian if this stuff was really “new” he would say “no” and probably agree with you. I think his point is that it’s new for most of the Western Church. It’s not the way most of American Christians see the story of the gospel. Also, don’t forget that every great teacher that has been stood on also stood on another great teacher themselves. I personally believe Brian is one of the LEAST arrogant teachers out there and it shows in his humble demeanor.

By: Don Berry-Graham

Don Berry-Graham — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:06:35 +0000

What surprises me is that there is nothing new in what Brian is saying. Either I went to a great Bible College and Seminary that was ahead of the times or we have not been listening. The North American Church has been rewriting the gospel every time the culture has changed. Right now we are in that phrase where we don’t say anything negative. We need only positive statements. If we start with Jesus as is suggested we have a much different understanding of suffering and of failure than we see in books and print.

Secondly, I guess I am getting old because things are seeming to be recycled. Lots of stuff that is emergerent is really very old (40 yrs old) and all of a sudden we are hearing about it again. Take the kingdom idea that is supposed to be new but a School at the Toronto School of theology was talking about preaching the kingdom 40 years ago. (Name slips my mind getting old)

Lastly all of this is important to return to but we need to be less arrogant in thinking that we found it out all by ourselves. We really did not and there is nothing new under the sun. We we just as guilty of claiming new insights as Brown did in his Divinci Code. Lets give credit where credit is due. Brian is standing on the shoulders of other very great teachers and he is repackaging an important truth but it is still a repackaging.