On Pushing the Liberal Hot-Button

Often in Theological discussions, I hear the claim that a certain view is "Liberal" and "Spiritualizing" and does not adhere to a 'literal' interpretation (thus it should be ignored). Now, there are three BIG problems in taking this approach to different views of scripture:

First of all, it does absolutely nothing to refute their arguments. Slapping a particular taboo label on someone does not change the validity of their arguments. Call 'em liberal till you're red in the face and gasping for air, but you've not even come close to refuting your opposition. If you want to expose someone's view as wrong or dangerous, you show that with sound arguments and evidence (specifically from scripture), not with taboo labels.

Second, those who do this often come off as immature and insecure of your own views. Calling someone's view a Liberal/Spiritualized, especially if done in multiple instances, not only indicates that you're lacking in valid refutation, it also reeks of having no case of your own (or a very shoddy case). On top of that, it's really no different than calling someone a 'fatso' or a 'doo-doo head'. It's just name calling, pure and simple. This sort of thing is to be expected from Kindergarten kids, not from (young) adults who are discussing Theology.

Lastly, it's irrelevant. Ultimately, it's not a matter of whether or not something is literal, but whether or not it is Biblical. A figurative interpretation of certain passages, contrary to popular claims, does NOT undermine Christianity or the whole of scripture. If we were talking about making the gospels figurative, then that's a whole new shooting match (since we have clear evidence that they were in fact intended to be taken as historical. When it comes to passages like Genesis 1-11, not so much).

All in all, can we quit the name calling and label-slapping and get down to the points we've got to make?

Have we Forgotten to Listen to the Beatles?

A while back, I was listening to a radio interview between Alice Cooper and Ozzy Osborne, and part of it was their musing upon why a lot of modern music sucks. They eventually came to this conclusion: a lot of modern artists have forgotten to listen to the Beatles. They commented that, whilst not always lyrically great, the melody of the Beatles was phenomenal.

I think we as Christians have done the same, but with our literature. There's a lot of Christian non-fiction literature available to the average joe that just plain sucks. Their research is horrific, assuming they even did any, and their ideas and use of scripture would probably make the great Christians of the past spin in their graves. Of course, the reason for this problem is the same with a lot of modern music: "We've forgotten to listen to the Beatles" of Christian Literature. We don't have to agree with what they teach (for even they disagreed), but what I've read their work is of a much higher quality than a lot of the new stuff I've read.

In all honesty, I think one of the reasons why the western church is in such a crappy condition today is the fact that we've forgotten to 'listen to the Beatles' of our history. We've forgotten to read the greats of Church history (like John Wesley, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Augustine, and Aquinas, just off the top of my head). Heck, we've even neglected to read THE Book. You'd think we as Protestants would be especially eager to read the Bible because we (supposedly) adhere to Sola Scriptura, which kind of makes we wonder if preachers should start doing a series on reliability of the Bible (not to mention a good sermon or two as to what Sola Scriptura really is; I'm pretty sure a lot of the church today doesn't have a clue as to what SS is really all about).

The Solution is, of course, to start 'listening to the beatles' of our Christian heritage. Another thing we should do is start reading our Bibles. You know, those big honking books that have "READ ME" written in the layers of dust they've collected.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go read some more of the Systematic Theology I'm working on.

My Two-Bit Musings on a Podcast

I know I already posted this in a note on Facebook, but this is for those who don't have Facebook.

http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/index.php/episode-025-stop-being-a-christian-and-start-being-a-person/#comments

This is just my two-bit reflection on the latest episode of "Say Hello to my Little Friend: The Berettacast" by Dr. Glenn Peoples.

To Summarize, if you're too lazy or don't have 45 Minutes to to go the website and listen, this Provocatively titled Podcast episode is about how Christians need to stop picking label over quality.

And I (strongly) agree with him.

Too often I've seen Christians pick some really crappy stuff over the stuff that's truly excellent, simply because it has a Christian label on it. Sometimes the Non-Christian stuff is of better quality than the stuff with the 'Christian' label on it (I'll note here for those who didn't listen to the podcast that Dr. Peoples also uses some interesting examples to show this... it's the first time I've ever encountered someone comparing the lyrics to a Skillet song to the lyrics of a Megadeth song). Now, I'm not saying that all Christian stuff is of a lesser or poor quality (and neither does Dr. Peoples for that matter), but I don't think that it can't be ignored that Christians in general have the tendency to throw "Is it Good?" out the window when it comes to picking Christian stuff over Non-Christian, whether it be Art or Argumentation (yes, Non-Christians can put forth arguments of a higher quality than Christians. It doesn't necessarily mean their arguments are true, however).

Now, of course, I'm going to apply this idea elsewhere and say that this sort of partisan hackery isn't just exclusive to Christian/Non-Christian labels. I've seen it in Politics ("Is it Conservative/Liberal/Indep

endent/Libertarian?"), Theology ("Is it Futurist/Dispensational/Idealist/Preterist?"), Gaming ("Is it Mario/Mega Man/Sonic/Street Fighter?"), and even Movies ("Is it Star Trek/Star Wars?"). I probably wouldn't be wrong if I said that this sort of thing is found in every aspect of life.

The biggest danger of partisan hackery like this is that it tends to lower the bar for quality expectations. People won't try to present good argumentation or produce excellent music if they know that it's going to be a Best Seller simply because they are claiming to have a particular affiliation.

To Finish bluntly, I think this sort of thing needs to stop. People are missing out on things of excellent quality (and lowering the bar for future generations) simply because it doesn't have a particular label on it. Just because someone or something doesn't share the same ideas or views as you doesn't mean that their work is of poor quality. So if you're reading this, I encourage you to try something (and so does Dr. Peoples, IIRC):

Ignore the Labels for a change; tear them off (figuratively of course) and instead ask yourself, "Is it Good?"

You will probably be surprised as to what you find...

[By the by, if you're reading this for whatever reason, Doc, I sincerely hope I didn't misinterpret anything you said. If I did, correct me on it and I'll gladly change it.]