For a culture to work one cannot proceed by disavowing the shameful bits of the movement, defending the bits he's familiar with (or the bits he's chosen to become familiar with), or commending only those bits he decides are worthy of the name. Wouldn't it be grand if we could all do this? The neo-evangelical could disavow the goofier statements of Harold Ockenga, the seeker-sensitive could disavow the premature confessions of Bill Hybels, the fundamentalist could disavow the scandalous behavior of Richard Hand, the emergent could disavow the happyface piffle of Tony Jones....
Saturday, April 12, 2008
"Serious men are not indifferent to any of the facts of history."
Dissidens makes a good point. Here's the punchline:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
maybe it's a good point, but i wonder if minnick's answer to the question "what can we learn from the christian fundamentalists?" is really a good example of being indifferent to some of the facts of history. are there any fundamentalists who deny the validity of primary separation?
who is Richard Hand?
Anonymous said...
who is Richard Hand?
the bju professor who spread unsubstantiated claims that mccain had a child out of wedlock.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0002/14/ip.00.html
i don't see how he has anything to do with dissidens' point about minnick's statements about primary separation on 9marks.
If Mr. Diffidens said it, I believe it. I consider him Moses, David, Solomon, and George Washington - wrapped up in one. How dare we even question anything he says.
My reaction to this quote from Dissidens was opposite yours.
I've never thought his views and commentary on separation and unity (theoretically) were particularly compelling, since he does not appear to strongly identify himself with any living group of believers, including a local assembly. (To my thinking there's no way to love the people of God in the abstract, but not love the churches and individuals who make it up.) He provides no model for how to walk together in love with other believers who will undoubtedly get it wrong some of the time.
It is no small irony, that Dissidens--who disavows the modern church--feels qualified to offer opinions like this.
Finally, I don't think Minnick fits Dissidens' caricature of a fundamentalist leader. To be fair, I'd guess that Dissidens does not know much about Minnick, so he's just making assumptions. I'm swamped with school right now, but I hope to expand on this point over at his place.
Post a Comment