Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Books / Publications Forum' started by SaggyWoman, Aug 30, 2013.
Have you read any and what do you think?
His books are deceptively captivating - he draws me in and ultimately disappoints me.
I often agree with his premise but strongly disagree with his doctrine and methodology.
Interesting commentary....however Im not connecting the dots....could you be a little more explicit so I can understand?
He is am extreme post modern theological liberal
I find he often has a bait-and-switch method of using a common term and subtly (and sometimes not so subtly) changing its meaning as he develops his point.
I've not got his books in front of me now so I can't be more specific than that.
I’ve read a couple. A New kind of Christianity and A Generous Orthodoxy.
McClaren writes very well, and he is engaging. I believe his theology amounts to heresy (i.e., while admittedly unorthodox his theology, IMHO, is a barrier to salvation).
God’s revelation, according to him, is a grand narrative - an ongoing conversation. (e.g., OT cultures were violent and therefore portrayed a violent God. A god who expressed his wrath by killing people while saving Noah would be guilty of genocide and not worthy of belief, much less worship.)
He teaches a dangerous theology which is even more dangerous as it encompasses much of the contemporary mindset.
Like any radical liberal, stay away from reading their junk unless you are prayed up and reading to see what error is. Reading stuff like his works and Rob Bell can damage your faith unless you are well grounded in Scripture.
McLaren does not believe that Scripture is useful in instruction, but instead that its relevance lies in the contemplation of the believer as one is challenged to think and thereby gain wisdom. He believes in what he calls biblical inherency – the Bible is not the Word of God, but the Word of God is contained within Scripture (God’s inerrant Word inherently in the Bible). Scripture is therefore a “community library,” it is something God has “let be,” and so is at once God’s creation and the creation of the cultures which produced it. The Bible is, to McLaren, subjective stories of God and not objective revelation. Inspiration is an ongoing process that builds upon itself.
This is seen in his assessment of Paul’s letters. McLaren challenges the idea of justification by grace through faith. He views this idea as an interpretation of Jesus in light of Paul. Romans, according to McLaren, is an expression of the free flow of thought and feelings of Paul as he speaks to Tertius. Paul spurs the imagination to justify the gospel as good news for both Jew and Gentile. It is a contextualization of the gospel specifically for Paul’s audience. To McLaren, the gospel of Jesus is the new way of life that carried good news to all people of every religion; a new kingdom that would accommodate many religious traditions. He contends that his view of Christ as the Liberating King cannot coexist with the traditional view of the gospel – hence the need for “A New Christianity.”
For one week in the summer of 1976 I attended a Plymouth Brethren Bible Conference (of course they wouldn't openly declare in so many words that nomenclature). Brian was a 19 year old young man. He carried himself well. He was mature and good-natured. We had several talks about the Scripture. We worshipped together. Many years passed. I learned how liberal he had become. Maybe the term "liberal' isn't strong enough.
Anyway,when he was recognzied as being one of the 25 most influential evangelicals in America in 2005 I wrote him. I said that he certainly gained a lot of noteriety in the intervening years. I wanted to keep it short,respectful and blunt too. Brian,what happened? Why did you depart from the old paths?