Book Share: The New Christians by Tony Jones
Continuing on in my effort to share with you small portions of what I’m reading as a way of encouraging you to explore some of these authors, I give you a few excerpts from Tony Jones’ new book, The New Christians. If you haven’t read my glowing review of The New Christians here, then you need to do that and then go buy or steal this book.
“As is well known, the permissible range of issues that can be on the theological or ethical agenda at some conservative evangelical churches has been narrowed to two: abortion and gay marriage. In their salvos against other issues - such as global warming - evangelicals like James Dobson, Chuck Colson, and the late Jerry Falwell have said as much. A specific example of this kind of thinking comes from Ronnie Floyd. In the days following the April 2007 Virginia Tech shooting massacre, Floyd posted extensively about the tragedy on his blog, “Between Sundays.” He warned the American church to “get serious” and to “WAKE UP!!!” Thirty-three persons had died, he wrote, and they each went to heaven or hell. He then urged his readers to get busy with evangelism because “death is real,” and the job of Christians is to “bring others to Christ” so that they won’t go to hell when they die.
In Floyd’s blog posts about the Virginia Tech shootings, there was nary a word about Seung-Hui Cho’s ready access to guns and ammunition. No comment about the epidemic of clinical depression in our country. Not a mention of the prevalence of hurting people in our culture, often adolescents who are shrouded in anonymity, lost on college campuses with tens of thousands of other students. In other words, Floyd said nothing about the systemic issues that become acute to many of us during times of tragedy. Floyd’s question is not how this young man’s mind became so twisted in his own mental illness, how he fell through the cracks of our societal net, or how he was able to purchase two handguns and hundreds of bullets with no more than a driver’s license. The question was about whether he and his victims had invited Jesus into their hearts before they died.”
What are your thoughts? Agree? Disagree? Why is that we reduce everything down to what I perceive to be the lowest common denominator of “heaven when you die”? Why is that we are more concerned with the results or the effects and never the causes?
[...] 22 January, 2008 by Tony Jones For this week’s excerpt, journey on over to Josh’s blog. [...]
(Why is that we are more concerned with the results or the effects and never the causes?)
is it the same reason - that we stand in a Wal Mart line, Grocery line, restaurant or fast food line and wonder, “how can this person possibly move this slow” or “how can he/she be so disconnected with what they are doing” or “why can’t this person do more than one thing at a time” or “why can’t my server refill my tea when i need it refilled”? ? ?
as a start - it seems a lot of us practice this kind of reasoning/thinking quite often.
how often do we FIRST think - I wonder whats going on with this person? I wonder if their day has gone to shit and they’re just trying to survive this day, these (us) people? I wonder if this is theri only job?
Now why do we do this with destination - heaven? (Why is that we reduce everything down to what I perceive to be the lowest common denominator of “heaven when you die”?)
I can’t wait to hear.
Thanks J for the conversation.
Good post Josh. I definitely will check TJ’s book out. So far I’ve only read Brian McClaren’s books on the emergent / postmodern movement.
I think if evangelicals took there doctrine of Hell seriously they would either go crazy or be those folks that stand outside U2 concerts with megaphones warning our impending doom.
lowpocket - good point. Empathy & sympathy our too often ignored. We can’t help but feel we’re the stars of our own movie and everyone else are just co-stars and extras. We forget that they’re the stars of there movie too (an idea I stole from the book, “the power of nice”).
Why do they have to be mutually exclusive? I don’t know that this person doesn’t believe in helping the systemic problems that alienate a teenager. Would we say that someone who wants to improve material or relational conditions is unconcerned with eternal issues? Again, I don’t know any of these people well enough to make a sound judgment on their desire to see people blessed by at eternal reward because of the knowledge of Christ as exclusive of their desire to see certain conditions change.
And I’m not defending the lack of consideration of social conditions by evangelicals. There is some truth to that. But many evangelicals, while not politically liberal, are very concerned with social conditions. They just might have a different perspective on things that we can appreciate without rejecting.
Peace.
yeah I agree with britt…why the either/or? And maybe thats not what Tony’s doing. maybe he’s trying to bring some balance to the knee-jerk “did they do it?” emphasis on praying a prayer to get ass to heaven. Hopefully that’s what he’s doing, rather than simply shifting the conversation to systems over against salvation…
my 2 bits,
-jeremy
I think if evangelicals took there doctrine of Hell seriously they would either go crazy or be those folks that stand outside U2 concerts with megaphones warning our impending doom.
Or outside of the Rob Bell “The God’s Aren’t Angry” tour.
That was a fun experience. Too bad I see one of those guys that was out there on a nearly daily basis anyways.
“Some conservative evangelical churches has been narrowed to two: abortion and gay marriage.” Josh - this is such a painfully general statement. What happened to being generous? Some churches - what… 3 or 4 down in Spiderbreath Mississippi? Oh please man!
Josh, we’re all different - some Christians are wired (or called perhaps?) to be concerned about the here and now, (feed and cloth the bretheren) others are wired to look at the people around them with an eternal eye. (what is it to gain the world but loose the soul).
Dude, why must it be one or the other? I am so thankful that there are missional Christians with a zeal for the here and now! I am so thankful that there are missional Christian with a zeal for the eternity of our souls! And yes, I am so thankful that there are missional Christians that long for life of an unborn child above death. I am so thankful that there are missional Christians with a zeal to maintain marriage as our God describes it in his Word.
Emergents boast about a broad stroke and an open mind, and what I too often see is an exclusion of so many missional Christians that reflect an honest and fruit-filled diversity.
no offense tony, but that’s kind of a blind side. i didn’t attack anybody. i quoted a book. i’m not banging on evangelical churches. i quoted a book and asked for feedback.
on this particular issue . . . the quote from the book . . . it seems that everybody hated Seung-Hui Cho after the VT shootings. and the only questions and commentary evangelicals were giving was commentary related to the afterlife. tony’s push back (and i agree) is that where were the questions about the larger systemic issues of access to guns, violence in media, depression, isolation, etc.
i didn’t hear one evangelical leader talking about those things or asking those questions. instead all i heard was the guy was whacko and he got demonized. and i’m in no way making him a saint by simply asking where are the comprehensive questions and solutions coming from? and not from the evangelical right. who do seem overly preoccupied with abortion and gay marriage.
when was the last time you saw an evangelical of a major denomination or megachurch stand up and talk about a consistency of life for abortion and the death penalty? abortion and war? the afterlife and gun control? the afterlife and depression?
you don’t. all you hear about is evangelical leaders (like floyd, piper, etc) bitching about how people went to hell that day and that we should make sure we don’t go to hell like they did.
give me a break! are you kidding me? you’re banging on me for asking the question of how come it’s never a both/and?
next time floyd or piper or stanley or dobson stands up for the rights of children who lose fathers in iraq while simultaneously standing up for children who aren’t even given the choice of life . . . then i’ll be with you. or when you hear an evangelical talk about the systemic issues that would cause a woman to even want to have an abortion to begin with.
that’s what’s messed up. and the only thing that makes it worse is when other evangelicals defend their idiotic leaders who lack zero consistency and then bitch out “emergents” who are at least trying to be consistent and think broadly.
people who are more concerned with the “heretics” who dare to raise the consistency question than the apparent contradictions every time one of the big boys opens their mouths.
so don’t talk about diversity and throw that back on me like i’m close minded. you guys sure do love throwing that one out there the second any of us pushes back on the empire that you’ve established over the past few years.
hate to be rude, but i’m really tired of you ken silva cronies jumping off of tony and doug’s site coming over here and just stirring stuff up.
Josh -
My intent is not to stir “stuff” up - I’m trying to be part of the conversation. I’m certainly not a Ken Silva cronie either, and by your tone, you’re obviously pretty angry.
I know many right-leaning evangelical leaders that talk with consistency about the issues that you raise. Most of the leaders I know, in fact. You sight the obvious targets like Piper and Dobson, and verbose opponents like Silva, painting a broad stroke across all conservative evangelicals and putting them all under one banner. Your generalizations and anger are furthering the divide from within. Your generalizations and anger are “equal” and “opposite” to those of Piper and Dobson.
Everytime I try to engage in dialog, I get the rude kick-in-the-ass accusation of being a cronie and only wanting to stirr up the pot. If you don’t want the perverbial pot stirred, then mediate idiots like me out of your post. Relax Josh - as iron sharpens iron, so one man will sharpen another.
As usual, I think TJones makes a great point.
For the record, I’m a big fan of eternal life (who isn’t?). I’m even taking harp lessons because I just can’t wait and I am aspiring to sit in front of the dispensationalists that hated me for hating Left Behind. That said, it’s true that more pastors need to address some more of these “earthly and temporary” topics such as depression, identity issues, bullying, even gun-control, as we do on abortion (which I despise as much as Dobson does).
Few want to hear that because it’s easier to hate and blame a Seung-Hui Cho then addressing and resolving to struggle (and I do mean struggle) with solving the issues that Cho and the millions of others struggle with, like depression.
This being a comment on a blog, my real point is in agreeing that this is a problem and as believers and as churches, among other things, we need to speak/teach/preach/ on the broader temporary issues as we do the eternal. Like if Floyd had graciously reminded us to mourn/pray the lost and love the killer, and to love and serve those who we see from this point on, Tony may have needed to use a different example.
Part of the problem, part of the solution,
Tim
ps - appreciate what you’re saying Josh.
–As is well known, the permissible range of issues that can be on the theological or ethical agenda at some conservative evangelical churches has been narrowed to two: abortion and gay marriage.–
Rather simplistic, I would think. Let’s see, I go to a conservative evangelical church, and I can remember: a choir from a home for the mentally handicapped; accounts given of missions trips church members had taken over the summer; the announcement of a new ministry to the poor of the town started I think by members of that church.
I even one time visited another church in that town that seemed conservative and evangelican, though more charismatic, and they were talking about their Thanksgiving food giveaway and outreach.
Wow, I think TJ may be a bit biased in his summation there. Just because most of us are too smart to jump on the Gore-wagon doesn’t mean we don’t give a rip.
–A specific example of this kind of thinking comes from Ronnie Floyd.–
Maybe I’m just ignorant, but is Ronnie Floyd that big a name in the blogosphere? Does his opinion necessarily meant that everyone else has that same opinion?
–Thirty-three persons had died, he wrote, and they each went to heaven or hell. He then urged his readers to get busy with evangelism because “death is real,” and the job of Christians is to “bring others to Christ” so that they won’t go to hell when they die.–
Actually, that’s pretty good.
–In Floyd’s blog posts about the Virginia Tech shootings, there was nary a word about Seung-Hui Cho’s ready access to guns and ammunition.–
So, is Jones pimping for gun control? What about that Constitutional rights thing? If he can take away my gun, can I take away his freedom of speech?
–Why is that we reduce everything down to what I perceive to be the lowest common denominator of “heaven when you die”? Why is that we are more concerned with the results or the effects and never the causes?–
These are your questions, Josh.
Why is the question of Heaven and Hell considered by you as a lowest common denominator? As is in the Bible, our lives are like vapor, rather short. Sorry, but life-after-death is hardly a fringe issue.
Why do not care about causes? That’s are rather bold statement. Care to give any support that we don’t care about causes?
But then, causes are rather many and varied, and no doubt many we may never know. Jones seems to think that easy access to guns and bullets was a cause for the shooting. Was it, though? Last I checked, guns and bullets are merely objects, and don’t do much until a person puts them to use.
Causes also tend to take on political clothes, too, like Jones’ comments about access to firearms.
I care greatly about the causes - this is why I share my witness of Jesus with others. I’ve known lots of very troubled, very ugly people - and you know what, those that found the Lord (and many because they questioned what would become of their eternal souls) repented! Did a 180 degree turn! And when they left lock-up, they never went back. Should we care about cause? Indeed we should. What about cure? It’s not enough to “raise awareness” and “care” about the issue. And if we don’t have the capitol or the drugs or the psychiatry or the know-how to do something about - we still can. Confess Christ! I would venture that more lives would turn around if more of us had the guts to witness thr Truth of Jesus to others. ANd by the way, true followers of Jesus that own guns don’t shoot people.
“true followers of Jesus that own guns don’t shoot people.”
I thought it was accepting Jesus into your heart and the eternal position of your soul that decided if you are a true follower of Jesus,.. not the twitching of a finger on a trigger.
… are there no Christians in the military?.. or does it not count when “vee are just following ze orders”?
Sorry.. felt like being cheeky
Thanks for offering up the dialogs here Josh. And thanks to Tony for the coming book… Although I have to wait to read it until May… because I asked for it to be delivered along with slowpoke Doug’s. Bastard.
Aww heck yeah. The no true scotsman fallacy!!1