Search

Bo Sanders: Public Theology

updating & innovating for today

Open Search
Category

Bible

>Clearing the Air – 4 changes

>

I have been doing Everyday Theology for the almost 3 years. I love it. Of all my projects, it is my favorite. 
As I continue my transition from being a local church minister (only) to an academic and a public theologian – things will necessarily need to change.
There are four changes that I just wanted to  “get out on the table” to talk about what is going on behind the scenes or what is driving this conversation from my side. 
Here are the four things:
  1. I believe that almost everything about the Christian faith needs to be updated for the world that we live in.  The first implication is that   
  2. we have to get rid of words like “supernatural” 
  3. I need to start quoting people by name for accountability and credibility  
  4. there are some big and/or fancy words that I need to get comfortable using. I will always try to define and explain things as we go – but some of these words are too good and too helpful to continue not using them.  
Number one is obvious. There is no aspect of our lives that has gone unchanged in the last 2000 years. From basic things like food and sex to more complicated things like politics and economics , everything has changed. 
It’s not that these things have changed entirely – it’s that nothing has gone entirely unchanged. 
Religion is in this category. Christianity, both in it’s revealed nature (revelation) and it’s organization (religion) has evolved, adapted, and transformed immensely. I think that is a good thing. The only thing about it that is not good is that some believe that is has not changed or that it isn’t suppose to change. That is where the problem comes.
In the coming month I will be floating some thoughts about prayer, biology and reading the Bible in light of these necessary and good changes. 
The second thing is an immediate casualty. There are many things that are gained by updating, but there will also be some things that get sacrificed in the transition. This involves moving away from the supernatural.
I do not believe in the supernatural. I still believe in miracles – just not in the supernatural. Neither the word or the idea is in the Bible and it is really hurting us in the post-modern (and modern) world.
sidenote: the fact that most people do not know how that is possible shows how limited our conversation has been around this issue. 
What we call the super-natural is really just left over language from the pre-natural mindset of ancient times.  I believe that God’s work in the world in the most natural thing in the world. It is not SUPER-natural, which really means UN-natural. It is just natural.  Everything is natural.  Praying for someone to be healed is natural.  Someone who you are in relationship giving you their car when they hear about your need is natural.  
It might be miraculous (surprising to us) but it is not super-natural or un-natural. It is just natural. It is how God works. [if you want to read something similar that I wrote about discerning God’s will click here]
The third change is quoting people. I have avoided this for three years because sometimes people are scared off by name dropping as it can seem too academic or highbrow.  I think that avoiding author’s and expert’s names has been the right decision up to this point, but that continuing to do so will be limiting. For both accountability and credibility I need to make this change. I know that some people will be turned off by it – but hopefully we can meet in the middle!
The fourth change is using some multi-syllable words. I have avoided this for the same reason as I have avoided quoting authors. But the simple fact is that this conversation is framed by some ideas that are encapsulated in good words. I need to become proficient is using these words well and being comfortable explaining them and integrating them. I will try to do this with clarity and caution – not for the sake of using the $10 word, but for  reasons that it propels the conversation forward in a good and helpful direction. 
I just wanted to clear the air. Two main points A) as I continue to learn and translate and participate in public theology, I wanted to show my cards so that everyone knew where I was coming from.   B) Sometimes people push back on me (which I enjoy) but are surprised that I don’t just repeat the same ‘apologetics’ answers that I learned in Bible College (Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Ravi Zacharias, etc.) 
I want to be really clear about what I am doing. I am participating in a great global conversation about updating the faith for the 21st century that is both: 
  • in continuity with the historical christian tradition 
  • relevant and has accounted for the realities of the world in which we live
If you want to know why I am doing this read this article by N.T. Wright – or on his website
If you want to check out the kind of thing I am after check out this article by F. Leron Shultz [link]
10

>Rob Bell Wins

>I watched the live- webcast of the Rob Bell interview about his new book “Love Wins”

you can watch the video of the event here

Here are two quick thoughts on it:

1) We are not having this conversation in a vacuum
2) rob bell is up to something

we are not in a vacuum and the context of this conversation is post-enlightenment / post-christendom. That means a couple of things:
a) everyone has their own bible
b) most people can read it
c) evangelicals do not have Popes or councils to make decisions on this kind of stuff 
d) for Reformed folks (Piper, Driscol, Keller, etc) the bible just doesn’t say what they need it to say for this thing to be air tight.

SO – we have a couple of issues!
The BIGGEST issue is that we take passages like Matthew 7 (which one of the white women in Rob’s audience asked about) where Jesus says “wide is the road that leads to destruction” and we THINK that it is about Hell. It is not. We have been taught to read the bible wrong. We trade one word for another all the time.  I wrote about that here.

THEN – some one like Rob comes along and calls that into question (he is up to something) and people FREAK out.

Matthew 7 isn’t about hell. But we got so comfortable thinking that it was … now we are uncomfortable with how comfortable we were.

I’ll give you another example: Paul never mentions hell. In any of sermons (Acts) or letters. It is not there.  I wrote about its absence here. 

Here is another one: Revelation – which is not to be read literally – teaches (even to those who DO think it is literal) that hell is not eternal. Even in that scenario hell is temporary and is emptied into the lake of fire. They are not the same place or for the same purpose.  read Revelation 20:14-15.

But since many believers don’t know that… we end up asking “wait! if there is no hell … then why are we even doing evangelism or missions”. The answer is that we were doing them for the wrong reason. Some of it was colonial … some of it was worse. 

We should do evangelism and we should do mission – but not because of this understanding of hell.

So – I am not saying that Rob Bell is right. I am not saying that everyone will be saved. BUT the reality is that many have not taken these passage seriously.  Passages such as:

Colossians 1:20 “and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.”

Romans 5:10 “For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!”

2 Corinthians 5:18 “All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation”

What did YOU think?

5

>why are they walking away?

>My friend Rachel Held Evans – the amazing author and blogger – posted this on Facebook:

Lots of folks are talking about the future of young, disenfranchised evangelicals. I’d love your thoughts on this. What is driving them away? Where are they going? (Working on a post that explains the phenomenon from my own perspective – as a young, disenfranchised evangelical myself!) 🙂

I started to respond and it just took off!  So i thought that I would post it here and see what anyone else had to say.


For me it comes down to two things: epistemology and dualism.

The evangelical epistemology is rooted in an individualism that does not resonate with the worldview/cosmology that the Bible was written in. This Bible is suppose to be God’s Word (an elusive concept) and does not ultimately (long term)  provide the coherence of worldview, the continuity with tradition or the cohesiveness of experience (burning bushes etc.) that satisfy.
It feels disconnected after a while if you are thinking about it at ALL.

The dualism of us/them, in/out, heaven/hell, right/wrong, creation/evolution, republican/democratic, et al.  is so disjointed from our experience of the world that it becomes untenable to continue pretending that we believe something just because we were “told”.  It seems ridiculous. It gets to be embarrassing. SO instead of undertaking the arduous task of deconstructing without destructing – and then subsequently rebuilding… many just walk away.   Plus, where would you live during the renovation ?

 When you take these two and multiply them by things like the evolution of Finney’s new measures (alter calls) and the ‘christian music industry’ that many people have not heard about but somehow can SENSE the formulaic nature of modern christian religion … it gets – not just incrementally but -exponentially more challenging to hold onto it.

For me this gets no better when we try to ‘return’ to the past with yearly schedules, antique liturgies, and outdated lectionaries. That is no better. It may FEEL more mystical for a time but… in the end there is no more congruence with our ‘real life’ than being an End Times- Rapture ready – Bible thumper waiting to go to heaven who sings passionately on Sunday that God would ‘come down’ – as if God was not already ‘down’ and that the Copernican view got rid of the 3 tiered universe.

That’s the kind of realization that leads people to walk away.

[I was so fired up I forgot to mention two other huge issues: hermeneutics (knowing how to read books like Jonah or Revelation) and gender issues.]

– So that is why I think that many young people are walking away… why do you think that this is happening. 

6

>Reading the Bible Better: Talents

>

We have all read the parable of the Talents
Matthew 25:14-30 (New American Standard Bible)
Parable of the Talents
 14 For it is just like a man about to go on a journey, who called his own slaves and entrusted his possessions to them.
 15″To one he gave five talents, to another, two, and to another, one, each according to his own ability; and he went on his journey.
 16″Immediately the one who had received the five talents went and traded with them, and gained five more talents.
 17″In the same manner the one who had received the two talents gained two more.
 18″But he who received the one talent went away, and dug a hole in the ground and hid his master’s money.
 19″Now after a long time the master of those slaves came and settled accounts with them.
 20″The one who had received the five talents came up and brought five more talents, saying, ‘Master, you entrusted five talents to me. See, I have gained five more talents.’
 21″His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave You were faithful with a few things, I will (I)put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.’
 22″Also the one who had received the two talents came up and said, ‘Master, you entrusted two talents to me. See, I have gained two more talents.’
 23″His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave. You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.’
 24″And the one also who had received the one talent came up and said, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed.
 25’And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground. See, you have what is yours.’
 26″But his master answered and said to him, ‘You wicked, lazy slave, you knew that I reap where I did not sow and gather where I scattered no seed.
 27’Then you ought to have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have received my money back with interest.
 28’Therefore take away the talent from him, and give it to the one who has the ten talents.’
 29″For to everyone who has, more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away.
 30″Throw out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.


 Here’s the thing:  what if we have not understood the environment and the context that Jesus was speaking to enough to understand what is going on in this parable?


 Several weeks ago I put forward two theories about our understanding of the Bible:

  •  we would benefit to know more about the first century context
  •  we would benefit to know more about the genres that the Scriptures were written in
 This parable is a perfect example of those two ideas.
 A talent was the largest denomination of currency available in Jesus’s day. It weighed 72 pounds and required several servants to carry. It was used once a year to pay estate taxes.
 When Jesus says that some servant received several talents his first century audience would have known that this was absurdum.  They would have known immediately that this was a political or economic lampoon.
 It is also interesting to note that the Jewish rate of interest was capped at 12%. Anything more than that was considered unethical.
 So when we listen to Jesus tell this fictitious story, there are two things that may not be obvious to us as 21st-century listeners:

  • The first is that those servants that are applauded/esteemed in this parable would have been perceived as villains and potentially booed or jeered by the original audience.
  • The second is that the servant that buries his treasure was the hero in this story!
It is possible that the servant who buries his treasure is the good guy both as Jesus tells the story and as it was heard by the first century audience!  Keep in mind that this is in an agrarian society  and that by sticking his money in the ground he has demonstrated to his master that money does not grow and will not feed his family. 
 In this sense, he is sticking it to the man by saying that participating in an predatory economic system of profit does not feed me and those I care about.  Money does not grow and you cannot eat it.  This guy might be the hero of Jesus’ story. 
Now-  Somebody might object at this point and say “he is called a wicked and lazy servant”, but I would point out that Jesus does not call him that… Jesus is telling a story where the evil landlord is calling him that.   This is a huge distinction.
Just because of the phrase “evil and lazy servant” appears in the text does not mean that Jesus is assigning it to the man. And this is where our lack of knowledge about the genre of parable betrays us.  If we do not know how to read a parable then we are in danger of mis-reading the parable. 
 It might be interesting at this point to note that the word “talent” did not come to mean what it does in our modern definition until somewhere around the 13th century.  This is one of the first instances we have of a word’s definition actually coming from an interpretation of Scripture.  Talent came to mean skill or ability in the 13th century because of this very passage.  Before that it had never meant what it means in our contemporary understanding.  Talent was a Roman denomination of money.  When Jesus told this story he was clearly meaning it as an economic teaching.
At this point, we have to be willing to come to terms with the fact that we may have been reading this parable exactly the opposite as Jesus meant it.

The man who buried his treasure may actually be the hero of this story! And the servants who derived income from a double percentage gain may have been a wicked participant in an oppressive system. 
A capitalist reading of this passage may actually result in an exultation in the exact opposite purpose for which Jesus meant it.  This is a grave realization. 
If the man who buried his treasure is indeed the hero of this story and he is – by means of a prophetic act – demonstrating the fatal flaw of an opportunistic (predatory) economic enterprise… then we may have been sold a  faulty view of both the kingdom and the financial enterprise of this world.  This is a sobering possibility.
Most people that I talk to do not know that the talent was a denomination of money. They do not know that it weighed 72 pounds. They do not know that it required several servants to carry. They do not know that it was used as an estate tax once a year. This is information that radically changes the way we read the parable.
I am not a fan of either/or, this or that, in or out, us or them, dualism and binary thinking. That is well-established. In this one instance, however, it is clear to me that these are two very different readings and that one reading supports the status quo of Imperial economics and the other is a subversive reading that undermines the way things are and the ‘powers that be’ !
Jesus does not call the servant who buries the money a “wicked and lazy servant” he puts that phrase in the mouth of the wicked landowner.  When people say to me that “the Bible says… that man was a wicked lazy servant” they are misunderstanding the very purpose for which the parable was spoken. We must acknowledge that it is the wicked landowner who calls the servant by that title.
On a side note –  think about what we are saying about God if we think of the wicked landowner as God.  We are saying that God is absent. We are saying that God us harsh. We are saying that God is ruthless.  Is this really what we want to say about God?
 Is this what we think God is like?
I am not blaming those who have been taught to read the Bible this way –  but the simple fact is that it is not how Jesus meant it in the first century nor is it how his original audience would’ve heard it. 
 If we are going to read the Bible better we have got to know more about the first century and we have got to know more about the genres that Scripture is written in.
 This is simply a snapshot of how our ignorance of those two areas … and how 2000 years of dust have blurred the original picture. 
0

>a hellish week

>

Well this backfired! Last week was “hellish” and I was so excited to tackle the subject that I re-arranged the next month of posts to get to it!  

We were having a wonderful conversation here about it last week and then on Friday, the Rob Bell “Love Wins” rumors started and I researched all weekend and followed the buzz. I was all ready to go to town in this week’s post. Here is how it was going to start:
Do you need to believe in Hell to follow Jesus?
Do you need to believe in Hell to be a Christian?
Do you need to believe in Hell to go to Heaven? 
Is there a difference between following Jesus, being a Christian, and going to heaven?

The answer the that last question is “yes” there can be a difference between those three.  
This is a very tricky set of questions and I want to be careful with how we chat about it.
Let me say right up front where I am on the issue. 
  1. I do believe in an existence called “hell”… mostly because of the verses in the Bible.
  2. I do not believe that it is necessarily what has been pictured in Dante’s Inferno or what has been described in Fire and Brimstone sermons over the years.
  3. I am not sure that all the humans souls that I was taught would go there will end up there.
  4. I am not convinced that Hell is only a place after you die.
  5. I do not think that the Gospel is to get you to pray one prayer, one time, so that one part of you (your soul) will not go to hell after you die. 
I was off to a good start. 


I read posts by Rachel Held Evans, and by Tony Jones , a whole bunch of conservative blogs and then this one on hell. 
I was rounding the corner – I was going to talk about how Hebrews 9:27  “Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment” does not settle the matter in a single verse.
I was going to try and connect with historical views of Biblical words and concepts that have so much variation and how exciting it can be to think outside of the one dimensional “Heaven and Hell” we have been given to see that God’s love and God’s justice are not two different things.
I got in Facebook debates where I said things like 

“ It comes with a deep misreading of the NT texts and especially the Apocalyptic literate of books like Revelation. but that is for another conversation…  as far a Bell’s book goes: what if he comes out and says that God’s love seethes in a holy judgment against injustice and burns away our sin and shame in the end? That would be cool.”

and 

I am not a universalist. I am not saying Rob Bell is right. I am not saying that Love Wins. I am simply saying that A) maybe it is not as cut and dried and we have been told and that B) maybe we missed the good news of the Gospel and think that it was the suit & tie preachers say through the microphone.

I talked to friends and family on the phone about it. Then I rounded the corner into the week and …  I just petered out.  I start my new job this week. I have several projects coming due at school and with different partnerships I have been developing… and I  just don’t feel like constructing the smorgasbord I had planned on. I am just not feeling it. I lost the steam. 
I mean – I could say again that I think it is odd how the Apostle Paul never – not even once – in all of his letters or sermons in Acts – uses the word ‘hell’ and that it does not seem to be a motivating factor for him for preaching the gospel or for the work of salvation.  
I could reiterate the verses about Christ’s work of reconciliation that seem far more relevant this week than they even did last week when I used them.

  • Colossians 1:20 “and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.”

  • Romans 5:10  “For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!”

  • 2 Corinthians 5:18  “All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation”
I could go a number of directions with it… but in the end I guess I will just put it out there and see if anybody has an aspect of this that they are especially interested in talking about?  
… otherwise I will just wait for the “Love Wins”  book to come out at the end of march and we can take it up then. 



6

>a couple of (quick) things

>I am running a day behind.  Between the Rob Bell controversy and getting ready for my new job …

so here are a couple of things that you may want to look at in prep for tomorrow. Our topic will be “Do you have to believe in Hell to go to Heaven?”

So here is the Rob Bell video

Here is a blog series that I am doing for Hombrewed about the new Brian McLaren book.

Here is something that I wrote about ‘Perfect Theology‘ (hint: there is none)

see you tomorrow!

0

>Friday Follow up: thoughts on following

>What a great week of discussion! After honing this down a bit, I wanted to post it and get some thoughts:

In John 14:6, when Jesus says  “I am the way”  – that Jesus’ way is the humility that we see in John 13 (washing the disciples’ feet)

When he says “I am the truth” – that Jesus in the revelation of God.

When he says “I am the life” that it is Jesus’ life that reconciles ALL things to God.
I get that from verses like:

Colossians 1:20 “and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.”

Romans 5:10 
“For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!”

2 Corinthians 5:18 “
All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation”

When he says “no one comes to the Father but through me” – he is saying ‘everyone who comes to God comes through me’. Jesus reconciled ALL things to God.

This is built on the previous understanding that:

In was in response to Thomas asking about “where you are going”. Thomas would not have had the concept of the after-life that we have. He was a first century Hebrew.

So Jesus says ‘it’s not about the way to where I am going – I am the way’. Jesus is clearly not talking about “life after you die”. 
When Jesus says “no one comes to the Father” – IF we think that the Father lives in heaven (3 tiered Universe) , then we think that Jesus is talking about Heaven only he is saying ‘the father” . So the Father = heaven.
But I don’t believe that ANY of that is what is going on in that passage!
Just think about these 4 ideas:
  • the word Hindu does not appear in the Bible. So the Bible has nothing to say about Hindus. If we do… then we are INTERPRETing things that are in the Bible and APPLYing them to Hindus. 
  • as a 1st century Hebrew, Thomas was not asking about our concept of heaven.
  • Jesus was not talking about “life after you die”
  • Jesus was talking about a KIND of relationship with God (the way he had) before you die. 

Instead, it was an invitation to a caliber of connection with God that is only found in Jesus’ way (servanthood) and Jesus’ life (that reconciled all things to God). 
Now, some have asked about the possibility of this verse being about both the relationship here and also affecting eternity.  I could go with that… as long as we begin by acknowledging that it is not primarily or even initially about eternity.  
That passage in John 14:6  is about how we live now (Jesus’ way), the radical impact on our whole existence (Jesus’ truth) and  the entrance to that (Jesus’ life).  
14

>Black Women, Jews and Hindus

>We need to address how we read the Bible. There is a whole study of how we interact with and interpret texts – it’s called Hermeneutics. Many of us (most? ) are taught one way to read the Bible – that can be devotionally, ‘literally’ *  or allegorically, etc.

There are many ways of reading the Bible – I am not going to pretend that every way is good or that any interpretation is equally valid, helpful, or faithful.  This is why we need to talk about how we read the Bible.

Last week we talked about Jesus and Rome –  pigs and water.  [link here]

I would like to try and build on that for our conversation here.

 Jews

One of the truly horrific aspects of Christian History is the anti-Semitism that has plagued the Church
for 1900 years.  It started early on in the 2nd century** and it peaked in the Holocaust of WWII. There is no way to escape the incriminating evidence of nearly two millennia but I would like to address something rather odd in the argument that lies behind it.

The Jews did not kill Jesus.  This accusation that ‘the Jews killed Jesus’ has been around for 1800 years.  It is ridiculous.

Let’s be clear about two things:

  1. Jesus laid down his life willingly.  In that sense no one killed Jesus. In John 10: 17-18 Jesus says “ The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.”
  2. If anyone did kill Jesus (which we already established that they did not) it would be the Italians. Romans are the one who nailed Jesus to the cross! The Italians killed Jesus (if anyone did).

So the question has to be asked: why have the Italians not come under condemnation and persecution for the death of Jesus?  The answers to that are revealing.

The seat of Catholic power (the Vatican) is in Rome… said another way – those who are in power are in charge of the narrative
It is difficult to punish descendants for the actions of previous generations. (unless they participate in the same oppressive activities)

The reason that the Italians get off scott-free tells me something. It tells me that Jesus and the Bible have almost nothing to do with the treatment of the Jews in Church History. This is one of those cases where we do what we would have done anyway and just find Bible verses to hide behind.

 Hindus

Whenever other religions come up in conversation, somebody will invariably go immediately to John 14:6 where Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

Now, I love this verse as much as the next choir-boy [I have written about it multiple times]  but there are a couple of things that need to be addressed before it is applied thickly to whatever religious wall we are erecting.

Jesus probably did not know about Hindus and definitely did not know about Muslims***.  Therefore we can say with a fair amount of confidence that Jesus was not – in any way – commenting on whether Hindus or Muslims had a relationship with God.

Look – Jesus was not commenting on Hindus or Muslims! He was making a positive statement about the potential of having a certain caliber of relationship with God – he was not saying something negative about Hindus or Muslims … ALL that I am saying is that you can NOT use John 14:6 for a proof-text of something that Jesus was absolutely NOT addressing.

Go back and read the story in context. Ask yourself “what was Jesus saying – what was he talking about”.  Then draw a circle around it and on the other side of that circle write “everything else” and that is what Jesus is NOT addressing in John 14:6.

 Black Women

There is no easy way for me to ease into this. There is no clever anecdote for me to wade into the subject, so just let me spit it out.

Times have changed… things are different … and we need to learn to listen.

Now, we can all agree that the Copernican Revolution affected the way that everyone – even modern Christians – see the universe (cosmos).  Then there is the influence of people like Newton who deeply impacted our understanding of the world and how it works. Said another way …

between the Telescope and the Microscope we know that the world works very differently than those who wrote the Bible thought that it did.

And that is ok! We are fine. Faith is still possible and the church is still intact. We can deal with new realities and we can adjust to new information.

All of this is to say that we know that the world works differently and we admit that things are different than they were when the Bible was written. This is why it is so important that we listen to people when they talk to us about the impact that the Bible has had on them and their communities.

When women talk about passages in the Bible that have been oppressive or hurtful to them…we need to listen.

When African-Americans talk about passages in the Bible that validate or at least assume slavery… we need to listen.

They are telling us something. They are telling us that the world is not the same as it was in the 1st Century and though it may be less ‘scientific’ than the microscope or telescope – it is not less profound, impactful or true.

I have lots to say about how Paul was (in my opinion) a voice of liberation and progressive freedom in his day.  But what I have to say about Paul in the 1st century is not as important as what black women may have to say about the impact of those same  passages in the 21st century.

*   we have discussed over & over again how no one actually reads the Bible literally.

**  there are many scholars who say that it started in the Apostolic age already in the 1st century.

*** Islam started in the 7th century.

18

>Bo’s Blogs: week in review

>I had a little extra time this week (with the Big Tent event over)  and I had a back log of ideas I needed to get out.  I was able to pace myself and put one idea out in each of the projects that I am a part of.

Ethnic Space and Faith: I wrote about this bizarre story out of Mississippi where a community descended from freed slaves is in really trouble and was saved by… bird watching.  
            http://ethnicspace.wordpress.com/

Everyday Theology: I started a new month long series about “Reading the Bible Better” and we got right into it with the story of Jesus and Legion.  My theory is that we need to know two things to read the bible better A) about the 1st century and B) about genres of the books. A lively discussion on politics followed. 
            http://aneverydaytheology.blogspot.com/2011/02/jesus-and-pigs.html

Homebrewed Christianity: reflections on the Big Tent Phoenix event.
           http://homebrewedchristianity.com/2011/02/18/big-tent-phoenix/

Lead from the Fringe: and LA Times article about men and the new phenomenon of being a “Lout” got me to write a little on masculinity and relationships.
           http://leadfromthefringe.wordpress.com/

That was a good week.  Now I need to get some homework done and (hopefully) get ready for a change of seasons on the job front.

peace to you    -Bo

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑