1) Misunderstand or Oversimplify What the Author is Saying; 2) Not Letting the Author’s Universe Exist on Its Own Terms; 3) Choose Combat Over Conversation; and 4) Failing to Find the Redeemable in the Movie.
Saturday, March 06, 2010
Christianity Today Thinks Mark Driscoll Is a Fundamentalist
CT takes him to task—twice—for taking them to task over their Avatar review. (Video available at the links below.) Here, they think he's just sorta half-baked. But here, they damn him with the sort of accusations usually reserved for fundamentalists:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
You need to see their editorial on this topic as well (sorry for no real link):
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2010/march/6.53.html
Concluding paragraph:
"The reality is, the engagers could stand to learn a few things from the separatists, and vice versa, as both camps survey the pop culture landscape. The engagers have developed keen eyes to find Light in the most unexpected places. Yet the separatists, who have an instinct for sensing the subtly devastating aspects of culture, can quicken our steps on the path of sanctification. With the engagers' vision and the separatists' instinct, the church and its moviegoers can navigate Hollywood's muddled spiritualities with rigor and grace."
Nice catch Bruce. I guess that goes to show that CT is as schizophrenic as the rest of evangelicalism.
I thought Driscoll was a fundamentalist, too. I just assumed he wasn't very good at it. :)
Calling Driscoll a fundamentalist is fairly popular these days:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/valerie-tarico/sad-about-haiti-give-to-o_b_441125.html
Not sure why. Probably because fundamentalist is shorthand for "scary" these days.
Send link isn't CT. Looks like something called "Children's Ministry and Culture."
Post a Comment