banner

Some Church History

05/30/08

Permalink 05:53:03 am, by dissidens Email , 392 words, 330 views   English (US)
Categories: Old Main

Some Church History

Following the publication of Schweitzer's Quest for the Historical Jesus,

The majority of leaders in the American church embraced these academic trends. These were the mainliners, and they were in the majority. The only other choice in American Christianity was fundamentalism, and this was the backwoods, snake-handling, poison-drinking, Bible-thumping version of fundamentalism.

This is the informed opinion of Tony Jones as preserved for us in The New Christians, page 12.

Savor the ignorance.

I am picturing in my mind a small room in Philadelphia. I'm thinking somewhere on Chestnut Street, not a ten-minute stroll from City Hall. The year is 1929. In that room are four men: J. Gresham Machen, Oswald T. Allis, Cornelius van Til and Robert Dick Wilson. They are passing a snake amongst themselves, and each man sips consecutively from a common chalice containing a beautiful green liquid. They exchange anecdotes about gastric lavage and discuss possible locations for a new seminary.

Allis suggested some property along the Schuykill which was suitable for mass baptisms, but Wilson favored a tract of land north of downtown and closer to the Baker Bowl in honor of Billy Sunday who had been traded by the Pittsburgh Alleghenys for two players and a thousand dollars 39 years earlier. Van Til argued less persuasively that a school located some distance west of town (near Upper Darby) would help encourage the struggling bus ministry. Machen was trying to tie the snake in a Clove Hitch knot and wasn't much following the arguments other than to take strenuous exception to the mention of any kind of Darby, Upper or otherwise.

Edmund P. Clowney (as I'm sure Tony well knows but fails to mention in his estimable volume) was the first president of Westminster, the seminary funded largely from the proceeds of their gratifyingly lucrative tent-meetings. His messages are still available on the internet today. Look him up. Unless my mind is playing tricks on me, I recall during my childhood hearing Clowney himself preach a sermon entitled, Snake-handling, Persuasive Bible-thumping and a Few Thoughts on Infant Baptism.

I don't know if that particular sermon has made it into the archives of the worldwide web, but I recall feeling strangely moved to consider a missionary call to Africa where the snakes were large and plentiful and where one could extend an altar call from the roof of a Land Rover.

Trackback address for this post:

This is a captcha-picture. It is used to prevent mass-access by robots.

Please enter the characters from the image above. (case insensitive)

Comments, Trackbacks, Pingbacks:

1 Comment from: exlibris [Visitor] Email
Wait!

I thought they were incredulous of meta-narratives. Perhaps they have their incompetence in separating fantasy from reality to blame for this.

While reading Smith's Radical Orthodoxy, I found the same tendency. He feels compelled retell the whole of history to fit his premise. He asserts interpretations of history all over the place and thinks that a footnote citing a lone author who agrees with him to be adequate support.
PermalinkPermalink 05/30/08 @ 13:38

Reply to comment 5187 by exlibris

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 Comment from: dissidens [Member] Email
This guy is as mad as a hatter.
PermalinkPermalink 05/30/08 @ 14:27

Reply to comment 5188 by dissidens

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 Comment from: victor eremita [Visitor] Email
Mad? How about invincibly ignorant.

You think editors would have the courtesy ro prevent authors from making arses of themselves.

This is what I'm talking about: what person would had read, say, one good book could read a book like Tony's and take it seriously? The people who take this guy seriously can probably barely get through a blog.
PermalinkPermalink 05/31/08 @ 10:13

Reply to comment 5189 by victor eremita

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 Comment from: GLW Johnson [Visitor] Email · http://churchredeemeraz.org
Regrettably. this canard is now surfacing in circles that proudly boast some Reformed credentials- a recent graduate of WTS has written a book declaring the Old Princeton/Westminster postion on inerrancy to be not only misguided but positively harmful to one's 'spiritual formation'. The author celebrates the 'critical scholarship' of nortorious individuals like C.A. Briggs and protrays defenders of inerrancy as backward fundamentalists.
PermalinkPermalink 06/01/08 @ 07:27

Reply to comment 5190 by GLW Johnson

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 Comment from: dissidens [Member] Email
Many have traded in stereotypes for so long that there is no doubt that McLaren/Jones/Pagitt will find an eager and gullible following. Evangelicalism clearly has not kept house. That this glowing falsehood should come from someone as pig-ignorant as Tony Jones is not a thing that ought to pass by unremarked.

Contrary to victor’s assumptions, an academic reply to postmodern ideas is not an adequate response to Emergence.

My church emerged on Pentecost; Jones’s church hasn’t even noodled its way through the New Birth.
PermalinkPermalink 06/01/08 @ 08:22

Reply to comment 5191 by dissidens

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 Comment from: exlibris [Visitor] Email
dissidens,

You said: "Contrary to victor’s assumptions, an academic reply to postmodern ideas is not an adequate response to Emergence."

I'd like you to comment on that more fully. My suspicions follow closely on this idea.

A popular (Emergent) movement seems to claim postmodernity but only because it seems to be the latest in a long history of shtick appropriation. (i.e. Doug Pagitt)

Then, another variegation exists in evangelical academia that seems to like postmodernity, but also seems to be very cavalier about its potential dangers - even if they do seem to pay lip-service to the recognition of its most blatant dangers (i.e. Jamie Smith).

Yet another variegation stems out of this postmodern evangelical subculture that looks around for a church home that is open to ideas that violate evangelical shibboleths. It lands on the emergent movement (i.e. Kevin Corcoran).

Ahh...librarians and taxonomy. Now, this is an extremely backward concept from the vantage point of postmodernity.
PermalinkPermalink 06/01/08 @ 13:50

Reply to comment 5192 by exlibris

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Leave a comment:

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.
Your URL will be displayed.

Allowed XHTML tags: <p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small, a>
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email and url)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will NOT be displayed.))
This is a captcha-picture. It is used to prevent mass-access by robots.

Please enter the characters from the image above. (case insensitive)

Remonstrans

August 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 << <   > >>
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

Archives

Search

Categories

XML Feeds

What is RSS?

Who's Online?

  • Guest Users: 74

powered by
b2evolution