tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5889273130538079565.post4107879054864112953..comments2023-09-21T09:49:25.435-04:00Comments on Post-Restorationist Perspectives: Speaking a Missional Gospel? (Part 3)Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03708322695991246818noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5889273130538079565.post-61229916470830560662009-09-14T16:55:59.821-04:002009-09-14T16:55:59.821-04:00Adam,
"Ours is a story that must be embodied...Adam,<br /><br /><i>"Ours is a story that must be embodied as well as heard. May we resist the urge to promote a god created in our own image"</i><br /><br />Can we really resist that urge and yet still almost exclusively use anthropomorphic language and anthropomorphic theological constructs about "him"? <br /><br />Rob<br /><br /><i>"I reject the metanarrative of scripture, but accept the metanarrative of history."</i><br /><br />I wonder if you see any problems with a concept of "the metanarrative of history". <br /><br />That is packed with irony. I don't know you well enough yet to know if you meant to do that or not. Please explain.Mike L.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15978997781556741350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5889273130538079565.post-62864170771619294492009-09-10T01:36:38.887-04:002009-09-10T01:36:38.887-04:00to continue the previous, and refine my definition...to continue the previous, and refine my definition of "gospel" (which I just lost because strayed in my sophistry)<br /><br />the OT very much defines God as a "power-over" God, and I think you would be hard-pressed to show that this is NOT true in the Talmud. They were wrong, and Jesus told them that they were wrong by specifically refuting tenets of the Mosaic Law, and specificaly refuting the idea that the Way was one of military triumph. It had, previously, even a hundred years ealier with the Maccabees, been one, of that. but that is not the history of the Jews. why? is God trying to show us that this is not the Way? <br /><br />many Jewish people recognize this today, of course, but how can they reconcile that with the Holocaust, the Crusades and the dominance of Israel (militarily) in the past seventy years? they can't, so they stop believing in the OT Yahweh.<br /><br />Adam, this is your best post that I've read, and the most profound of the three (though they were all profound)<br /><br />I think that you expostion of and rejection of the Gospel as a transmittal of information is very profound. If it were just that, it would not have had so big of an impact on me. I had been lucky to have many men in my life who had already witnessed that to me, so when I came to believe in the information of it, the application became so much more real and deep and Holy.<br /><br />The "Partnership" is the key idea that you are talking about. that is not easy, it is not nominal or passive, partnership requires real commitment on our part. I don't want to guess how many people in today's church are truly partnering with God for their lives, but your call for more to do so is prophetic.<br /><br />Rock On.rob the redbeardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12251258589328929102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5889273130538079565.post-5998711088120289892009-09-10T01:00:58.847-04:002009-09-10T01:00:58.847-04:00I think I would like to suggest an idea, which to ...I think I would like to suggest an idea, which to me is not so far-fetched -- of a "Dualism of meta-narratives" (copyright 2009 R. Sheridan :>)<br /><br />The postmodern christian ideal that the gospel stories, (which are, on their face-value, obviously contradictory and even error-containing) -- are one large story, which was whispered by God to the People, even allegorically as chapters in a book (as opposed to books in a library) is a historical wrong, and a literary and theological wrong. <br />It "the Bible" is Us "the Body" writing about Him. It is obviously not Him writing to Us. It would be much more profound, if it were. Still, because it's about God, and earnest, it's the most profound thousand-page book ever written. It is our record of the real interactions that a people have had with the True God, as we tell it and remember it.<br /><br />That's okay! That's what we have. within that perspective, the majesty and triumph of Christ is apparent as the Word. John was not wrong. I evaluated the NT from a very critical perspective and concluded, much to my chagrine, "no, dude....that's God"<br /><br />I reject the metanarrative of scripture, but accept the metanarrative of history. Not as all God's Plan, (because most of human history has been pretty horrible) but rather as all watched, known to, and interacted with by God.<br /><br />I don't think we should lose sight of the Star Trek concept (call me a nerd, see if I care...) of the Prime Directive here. God is obviously NOT interfering in our history in terms of politics and wars and borders. that's where the Old Testament concept of Yahweh had it wrong. He's NOT like that. Jesus proved that by reframing the very concept of messiah and by His teaching on the Tower of Siloam <br />(Luke 13 - repent, or you'll all die a random death, but a random death wasn't even their fault)<br /><br />The metanarrative of the OT is about God manipulating the middle east to punish both His People and their enemies, intermittently. (if you need proof, open up your Bible to the first 700 pages)<br /><br />the metanarrative of the NT is one of God contradicting that, revealing what is truly important (Galatians 5:22-23) and espousing a system in which enemies are to be prayed for, God is not present in the random events of this world, and Evil may indeed triumph (temprarily) at any moment.<br /><br />what is important is our handling of it.<br /><br />the NT is more about reality, the OT is more about tribalism and tribal triumph.<br /><br />we are better than that.<br /><br />that's why we are New Testament christians.rob the redbeardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12251258589328929102noreply@blogger.com