Todd Friel interviewed Doug Pagitt on Way of the Master Radio. The topic Friel tried to focus on was judgment and hell.
I continue to be frustrated by the word games, the lack of clarity, and the inability to be straightforward that I see on the part of some emergent leaders. I'm actually embarrassed for Pagitt, listening to this. It's fine for him to disagree--even vehemently disagree--with Friel, but why can't he do this openly and clearly? Why would he pretend like he can't even understand what Friel is asking?
This interview is a great argument for why we, as Christians, need to A) know precisely what we believe, B) be able to explain clearly what we believe, and C) be able to meaningfully translate what we believe into the language of people who have very different worldviews from our own. If we cannot do this, our conversations with people who disagree with us will end up being as fruitless as this one.
Her is a link that might be of interest.
http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/10/26/smugness-as-theology/
Posted by: William Wilcox | October 30, 2007 at 06:09 AM
"Yeah, it stinks that some men are horrible."
Hi Amy, and they tend to form horrible cultures. In a lot of ways, Judaism was an improvement over its near and far neighbors but we should never lose sight of the fact that we are still dealing with Bronze Age cultures who knew a lot less about things than we do and patriarchal societies will always treat women, to some extent, as property.
Explanations are not enough here; a little judging is in order. There is a lot of good stuff in Leviticus but some of it is really primitive and not so good for women, gays, etc. My interest in the comments is tied to the failure of many to see that the underlying reason behind the PBA bill and the Carhart II decision is the diminishing of the status of women. BTW, we shouldn't forget that there were laws protecting slaves to some extent. They were still property.
Posted by: alan aronson | October 30, 2007 at 08:30 AM
Where is the blog about Koukl going on the Stu Epperson show with Bob Enyart to discuss voting for a good candidate or the candidate that is the lesser of two evils as Koukl maintained we ought to do?
Why is there nothing about that long discussion on here? Thought you would want people coming to this site to be able to hear that enlightening discussion.
You can listen to the entire discussion here.
http://www.kgov.com/bel_56kbps/20071026
Posted by: Quinn | October 30, 2007 at 11:51 PM