Archive | Doug Pagitt RSS feed for this section

Come on Pagitt!

17 Apr

So I was doing a little historical reading on “Solomon’s Porch” for church on Sunday and I came across this description:

Attached to the original temple of Solomon was “the porch of judgement” where king Solomon had constructed a large hall 50 cubits long and 30 cubits wide because of the enormous porch in front. Originally there was cedar from floor to ceiling. This was the hall of judgement where the king would make judgements and exercise justice.

It just seems a little mean to name your church after a place of judgment…or is that just me,  although I will go ahead and assume that he has re-imagined it, perhaps as the Porch of Yoga or something…

(Side note:  This post is meant to be ironic and funny,  not serious,  I repeat not serious.  Doug is actually with Jesus on this one, as Solomon’s porch was important not only in his ministry but in the early church as well.)


What I Like About Doug Pagitt…and Others Like Him

23 Jul

So today I get an email telling me that I am probably not saved because I said something mean about a group of churches…never mind that what I said was true, I was ripping on “the brethren”…so I was mean. I of course emailed the individual and pointed out what I thought was the folly of his email but he got more annoyed with me and kept repeating the same tired, “your a big hell bound meany” stuff. Then he emailed me and told me he would not read any of my emails and they were being deleted, this even though they were all only replies to his email. And of course even though the substance of the post he took offense to was that certain churches are ingrown and do not care about reaching people for Jesus, he kept telling me to stop being mean and get out and love people to Christ, which is more than a little ironic…He also seemed to have a problem with the fact that I own a computer and blog as he kept telling I spent too much time on my “fancy blog” and I was sitting around “waiting to write emails”…this again more than a little ironic given the fact that his critique was posted on said blog and he emailed me back immediately.

In the midst of this I tried to get him to deal with the actual issues in the post but he refused. That is annoying to me. This is where Doug Pagitt comes in, now I do not agree with him, (nor he with me it should be noted) but at least back a few weeks ago when I posted about him he was willing to discuss the issue. I guess in that sense there really is an emergent “conversation”. I appreciate that. People are so afraid to really talk about things. Smile everybody and pretend we all agree, I guess it is the Christian way.

So if I had to stand with one or the other…

4 Jun

So I am not usually one to throw in with those who are culturally ultra conservative…but I have been following a spat between someone named Ingid and Doug Pagitt…While following this fight I happened on Ken Silva’s site…Now the thing is that theologically I think that ole’ Kenneth and I could be boys…but I suspect that because I like to mix my reformation theology with still living in the year 2007 he probably would not like me…but anyhoo he was commenting on Doug Pagitt and wrote the following paragraph which is both funny and true. Unless of course you are Doug Pagitt, but hey if you are Doug Pagitt then the words have no meaning anyway, and if there is a meaning we can not really know it as we are trapped inside language so you should just re-imagine them for your own time and context.

Ken wrote these words in response to Doug posting on a blog essentially saying that Ingrid was being rude:

Doug Wrote:

At some point doesn’t this kind of talk become gossip and slander? I mean really.It seems to me that if people like me bother you so much you ought to just leave us alone and stop inviting us to be on your programs or be featured on your website.To equate people who are seeking to be faithful with those mentioned in Jude is beyond rude and enters into divisiveness.

And Ken Responded

O please Doug. Striving to be “faithful” to what? And we’re “rude” and practicing “divisiveness”? Aren’t you the superior Christians in the so-called emerging church who have defecated on the blood of the Reformation martyrs by dragging Gnostic contemplative spirituality from antibiblcal monastic traditions from apostate Roman Catholicism back into the Church of our Lord?

I have said it before and I will say it again: If you follow the Jesus of History and the Bible then Doug is really freaking dangerous. If not, feel free to imagine Jesus anyway you like, however I suspect that it might turn out to be an unpleasant decision upon your death. I think the fact that Doug tries to frame his theology as “Christian” that makes him dangerous, if he were just some dude starting a religion I suspect that he would not have a very big following…(as all his ideas have been around and died once before…)

Side note: I wonder what the followers of Peace-nik Jesus do with the Jesus they read about in Revelation.

Edit: Per Doug’s request links to his books: Books

Also as a random side note, I do not know Doug but I assume that he is a nice guy and that he is a Christ follower, I just think he is wrong, and that his ideas are still dangerous. I do know that he used to be a part of the same group of churches as me so that is something. Feel free to read his books, I did and they kinda freaked me out, but enjoy.

Also good news, Ken apparently would like me 🙂 and I am sure he is nice too…

Where are the McLaren protests? Why are we not Picketing the other MarsHill?

2 Dec

So here is what I am learning. Apparently to some people the biggest sin in the world is being a big “meany”. Apparently the collective panties of many a blogger are in a a bunch because they thought Mark Driscoll made a point they disagreed with in a “strong” way. Boo hoo. Moral of the story in our generation seems to be “Be nice, it is all that matters.” The question posed by the collective “WWJD” bracelet of this generation seems to be answered by “Be nice, smile a lot and pat you on the head.” Welcome a world where people are so desperate to be affirmed that the truth stated is a harsh way is now way more offensive than than teaching complete falsehood about God. Because if truth mattered at all we would be protesting this morning in Doug Pagitt’s bathroom, or greeting Rob Bell this morning over his grapefruit and cheerios with protest, outrage and placards, perhaps painted on velvet.

Oh well, preach on, be strong Mark, part of why your preaching affects people is because it flows from who you are, don’t let whiny heretics steal that from you. What you are preaching is centered in Christ and therefore has power to save people from sin and death. The Preaching of others in our generation is centered in a human desire to be God, or a human desire to define and control God and has no such power. Oh course they get offended when you speak, you continually point to Christ and the coming of his kingdom…and that never bodes well for people who are busy setting up the kingdoms of this world, and especially dangerous when those setting up these false Kingdoms are doing it in Jesus name, because when you preach Christ it inaugurates Jesus kingdom and Jesus himself into our time and culture and it is much harder for these false kingdoms to flourish when the real Jesus is standing in the room.

Doug Pagitt, Kuyper College, and Marcus Borg…

15 Oct

So I almost accidentally typed in Dung for Doug..that would have been a Freudian slip huh… Just some quotes from the Dougster, (or Emergent’s other white meat, as I like to call him) and Some from Marcus Borg, who among other things believes:

1. Most (perhaps all) of the “exalted titles” by which Jesus is known In the Christian tradition do not go back to Jesus himself. He did not speak of or think of himself as “the Son of God,” or as “one with the Father,” or as “the light of the world,” or as “the way, the truth, and the life,” or as “the savior of the world.” Only two “exalted titles” might possibly go back to him: “messiah” (about which “cutting edge” scholarly opinion seemed to be negative), and “Son of man” (see “9” below).

2. It follows that Jesus message was not about himself or the importance of believing in him.

3. Jesus was an eschatological figure. He expected “the end of the world” in his own generation. This expectation was quite literal, involving the coming of the Kingdom of God “in power,” the gathering of the elect, and judgment. This expectation was central, not peripheral, to shaping and animating Jesus’ ministry and message. This point, along with the next three, has fallen away as a foundation to my work.

4. His central message was the imminent coming of the Kingdom of God, understood eschatologically.

5. Jesus also spoke of “the coming of the Son of man,” whose advent would be associated with end of the world events. Scholars were divided about whether he was referring to himself (that is, to his own future role), or whether he was speaking about a figure other than himself (that is, though he expected “the coming of the Son of man,” he did not identify himself with that figure).

6. Finally, we cannot know much about Jesus. Any very specific claim about him is highly problematic.

Anyhoo Here are the comments from the “D” (courtesy of the Grand Rapids Press)

“Christianity is not something to be taught and believed, but something to be lived and re-imagined with every generation.

“I don’t see something wrong with understanding the gospel through a cultural lens,” he said.

“Faithfulness is as much situational as enduring.”

And here is one From the Borg:

I now see that the Christian tradition—including its claims about Jesus—is not something to be believed, but something to be lived in. I see that Bible and the tradition as “icons,” mediators of the sacred. The point is not to believe them, but to be in relationship to that which they mediate: God, the Spirit, the sacred. My own journey has thus been “beyond belief.” It has moved from belief through doubt and disbelief to relationship. For me, to be a Christian is to be part of a community that tells these stories and sings these songs. It feels like home.

Always good to know that those who have abandoned the Gospel agree I guess. Also good to know that Kuyper College is inviting them to speak to their students. That’s beautiful. Was James Arminius not available? Perhaps Anton Levay (not that I am suggesting that Doug is the head of the church of Satan mind you). But you would think that a college (Formerly Reformed Bible College) named for a reformed luminary…might not invite someone so at odds with it’s basic doctrine to have so much say on their campus, but perhaps as George Castanza might say they are “down” with the whole emergent thing…Their Student are, as evidenced by the following quote:

“All I know is I like what he’s saying and I’m hopping on board,” said Nate Heyboer, a 24-year-old student from Zeeland. “Doug comes in and kind of connects the dots for me.”

As a final note, isn’t it funny how guys like Pagitt say things that set up false choices: i.e. Christianity isn’t something to be believed it is something to be done. I don’t get it, isn’t it possible that it is both?

Or Perhaps Christianity is a relationship. With someone whom you love and believe in so much that you would do anything for him. Anything he wanted. And while you are  doing anything he wanted, perhaps you might realize that it is not your job to re-imagine him for your culture and time, but rather to understand his revealing of himself and how it can transform you in your culture and time. Or perhaps I could re-imagine what he meant when he said he was the same, yesterday, today and forever…