It’s a bit stale now, but Jonathan Merritt’s post about New Calvinism made the rounds and seemed to reassure those outside the New Calvinist world that they were fine if they weren’t following John Piper’s tweets. I for one needed no persuasion about the New Calvinists’ ordinariness, but I was curious to see Merritt fault the young restless sovereigntists for being tribal. He also believes they are isolationists. Merritt thinks of tribalism as being unwilling to criticize members of the group publicly (well, there is Matthew 18, hello). Isolationism afflicts the New Calvinists when they fail to interact with other ideas:
One of the markers of the neo-Calvinist movement is isolationism. My Reformed friends consume Calvinist blogs and Calvinist books, attend Calvinist conferences, and join Calvinist churches with Calvinist preachers. They rarely learn from or engage with those outside their tradition. (My feeling is that this trend is less prevalent among leaders than the average followers.)
The most sustainable religious movements, however, are those which are willing to ask hard, full-blooded questions while interacting with more than caricatures of other traditions. When neo-Calvinists insulate and isolate, they hyper-focus on those doctrines their tradition emphasizes and relegate other aspects to the status of afterthought. The Christian faith is meant to be lived and not merely intellectually appropriated. This requires mingling with others who follow Jesus, are rooted in Scripture, and are working toward a restored creation.
Gregory Thornbury, a Calvinist and president of The King’s College in New York City, told me, “I think the ‘young, restless, and reformed” are different than the Dutch stream in that they tend to stay with authors and leaders that they know. It does run the risk of being provincial, but I don’t think it is intentional. There are universes where people stay, and they read the things they know.”
In other words, Merritt does not appear to approve of separatism (thus identifying himself squarely with the neo-evangelicals who did not like the limits that fundamentalists set for Christian fellowship).
The idea that Christians need to interact with alien ideas and people is also what drew Merritt from Atlanta to New York City:
New York is also a place where cultures and ethnicities and ideas collide. One cannot afford to self-segregate and self-insulate in comfortable cultural or religious echo-chambers like other places.
As White once remarked,
“A poem compresses much in a small space and adds music, thus heightening its meaning. The city is like poetry: it compresses all life, all races and breeds, into a small island and adds music and the accompaniment of internal engines. The island of Manhattan is without any doubt the greatest human concentrate on earth, the poem whose magic is comprehensible to millions of permanent residents but whose full meaning will always remain elusive.”
There are also spiritual impulses behind my decision. Christians have formed a felt presence in New York City for as long as its existence, but in recent years, the city’s evangelical community has quietly flourished. In some ways, New York City represents the fringes of the Kingdom. The faithful there are asking questions that others are not yet asking and attempting to discern what following Jesus might look like in a pluralistic, postmodern context.
This excites me because my work as a writer—particularly my column at Religion News Service—is devoted to exploring those spaces where the Christian faith intersects culture. In New York City, religion collides with music, art, politics, public opinion, and current events with regularity. Rooting myself in this richly diverse context will enable me to better probe the questions of faith others may be afraid to ask.
We may conclude, apparently, that Merritt favors cosmopolitanism to sectarianism.
But what sense does this make of biblical calls for God’s people to isolate themselves. The Israelites weren’t exactly interested — or weren’t supposed to be — in a Jerusalem that featured the best pork barbecue in the Middle East or that encouraged Plato to relocate his academy there. The New Testament threw out the older ethnic hostilities between Jew and Greek, but Paul’s instruction that believers should be separate and distinct from non-believers (2 Cor 6:17) is not necessarily a call to go cosmopolitan. Some believers like Merritt may be strong enough for the collisions with a spectrum of ideas and artistic expressions. But is he a pastor looking out for the good of his flock?
After all, even politicians know that tribalism is what makes groups tick. As Nick Clegg, the British deputy Prime Minister, recently admitted, “at the end of the day, you’ve also got to look after your own side, your own tribe, your own values.” Merritt should not fault New Calvinists for doing something so basically human, not to mention something so obviously important to the integrity of the church, unless he expects Christians to live like writers who reside in New York City.
Old Life 
Why, Mr. Hart, I do believe I’m beginning to influence you:-)
LikeLike
Alexander, it’s hard not to feel tribal in the UK’s broom-closet sized showers.
LikeLike
How much space do you Yankee-doodle-dandies need for a shower (and your washcloths!)?!
LikeLike
Off-topic: D.G.is there anything interesting we can expect from the OPC GA this year?
LikeLike
Alexander, have you seen us recently?!
LikeLike
“The most sustainable religious movements, however, are those which are willing to ask hard, full-blooded questions while interacting with more than caricatures of other traditions”
The (ahem) Callers (ahem)…
LikeLike
“A poem compresses much in a small space and adds music, thus heightening its meaning. The city is like poetry: it compresses all life, all races and breeds, into a small island and adds music and the accompaniment of internal engines. The island of Manhattan is without any doubt the greatest human concentrate on earth, the poem whose magic is comprehensible to millions of permanent residents but whose full meaning will always remain elusive.”
Let’s just hope everyone is wearing deodorant.
LikeLike
It’s the 60th anniversary, at the very least, of people in North America taking for granted that indoor plumbing and hot/cold water (on demand) is a right of those who work for a living.
LikeLike
” In some ways, New York City represents the fringes of the Kingdom. The faithful there are asking questions that others are not yet asking and attempting to discern what following Jesus might look like in a pluralistic, postmodern context.”
Indeed, try getting a decent bagel with lox in Grand Rapids.
LikeLike
Considering launching a search for the Christian who lives in NYC who doesn’t suffer from the compulsion to draw a tremendous amount of attention to himself.
“Hey, look at me! I’m a Christian and I’m living in New York!”
New York doesn’t care, but apparently we’re all supposed to.
LikeLike
The life of a busy professional in a metropolitan area doesn’t allow much time spent on worrying about one’s image to people one will never meet.
LikeLike
Heating for cold times and air conditioning for hot times are also taken for granted by those who work In North America.
LikeLike
Alexander, I’ve found that the amount of bellyaching a ‘Merican does about European facilities is directly proportional to their bourgeois quotient. Being surrounded by great cultural treasures has its price and it’s worth it. Heck, where I live every other double-wide trailer has a “glamour bath” and an above-ground swimming pool. But no one is paying to stay in the neighborhood.
LikeLike
“The faithful there are asking questions that others are not yet asking and attempting to discern”
As in: “You said the rent on a 300 square foot efficiency is how much?!”
LikeLike
Christians in NYC are either:
(1) Professionals who earn a nice income and can afford to live there, in which case I may be impressed by their profession, but not by their Christianity (Professional Jews, Muslims, atheists, etc. also live in NYC).
(2) Living off of mom & dad’s money, in which case I am not impressed.
(3) Living in squalor or in the boroughs, in which case I am not impressed.
Have I mentioned that I’m not impressed by Christians living in NYC?
LikeLike
Alexander,
We also have these people called “orthodontists” in America.
LikeLike
What this NYC fetish arises from is the fact that these people basically have an inferiority complex about being Christians. If you have spent time in major universities, graduate programs, and professional schools and don’t have a backbone you become cowed by the cosmopolitanism and secularism that typifies so many of these places. You start to think if you can only shake off your roots growing up at Buffalo Breath Bible Church in Boone, Iowa or Fayetteville, Arkansas and move to the big city you will have finally arrived and will be taken seriously by those you have felt slighted by in the academy.
The truth, however, that where you grew up or worshipped as a kid has little to do with how seriously you’re taken. Want to be taken seriously? Be the best at your profession and don’t apologize for your church, your upbringing, or where you’re from at all. Any snob who looks down on you for those things can stick it. We still live in a meritocracy in the U.S. and these flimsy externals shouldn’t count for jack squat. That is the beauty of free market capitalism in a nutshell.
LikeLike
Plus, NYC was founded by shrewd Dutch Calvinists who put the screws to the Indians when they bought the place, so put that in your hookah pipe and smoke it, you latte-sipping weenies!
LikeLike
Good line: “Buffalo Breath Bible Church in Boone, Iowa”
He’s here all week folks, drinks 1/2 price.
LikeLike
Does this mean it’s not enough for Greg Thornbury to move to the city, but that he also has to give up “sectarian baptism” ? To become truly catholic and cosmopolitan, does he have to give up “sola memorial”, and begin to deny that the Supper is only remembering?
To overcome fundamentalist separatism means more than reading Carl Henry and papists like Chesterton. Must one also “accept the reality” that a visible congregation cannot be gathered merely on the basis of people’s confession of having been called, and therefore agree that the Supper is what God does (to bless or to curse) those within a mixed and therefore conditional “the covenant? Must one learn to exchange separatist experience in order to gain sacramental experience?
The mere word of the gospel and its doctrines about Christ and His benefits will no longer be enough. To be “united” with the person is to remember that being “united” is a “not-yet” process, always with a future aspect— Only a theology of glory would say that we are already completely justified….
“This banquet is a spiritual table at which Christ communicates HIMSELF to us with all his benefits. At that table he makes us enjoy HIMSELF as much as the merits of his suffering and death, as he nourishes, strengthens, and comforts our poor, desolate souls by the eating of his flesh, and relieves and renews them by the drinking of his blood.”
To eat the crucified body, and drink the shed blood of Christ is not only to embrace with believing heart all the sufferings and death of Christ and thereby to obtain the pardon of sin, and life eternal; BUT ALSO BESIDES THAT to become MORE AND MORE UNITED to his sacred body….
LikeLike
But how are we going to obey our cultural mandate to have dominion over war and the nation-state if we don’t begin by taking over the big apple?
Click to access 2003julyoutlook.pdf
Mark Karlberg—“The state does not have the duty and responsibility to endorse the Christian religion (or any religion). Its God (predestined) task is to protect and provide for its peoples (ensuring their general health and welfare), including the free expression of religious belief and practice by all living within its borders. Magistrates… have not been given the mandate to establish true
religion (i.e., biblical Christianity) as the confession of the state.”
MK—“As a theocracy, ancient Israel was in a unique position — divinely constituted and divinely ordered. So long as Israel was faithful and obedient, that is, so long as Israel kept the law of Moses, she was promised blessing and prosperity in the land of Canaan… The Psalmist declares, Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord (33:12) That affirmation of faith belongs exclusively to Israel of old.”
LikeLike
Daniel, one item of potential note is an overture to establish a study committee to examine the republication idea.
LikeLike
” In some ways, New York City represents the fringes of the Kingdom. The faithful there are asking questions that others are not yet asking and attempting to discern what following Jesus might look like in a pluralistic, postmodern context.”
And the answer is: Aussie Holy Rollers
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/03/inside-manhattans-most-hipster-y-megachurch/
h/t Real Clear Religion
LikeLike
Good questions for Harry Pott…er , Greg Thornbury, McMark.
LikeLike
Speaking of overtures, word out of Visalia is that the supporters of the overture on Belgic 36 have gone bad Patty Hearst a/k/a “Tania”, locked down the assembly hall, closed the restrooms, and are refusing to let anyone leave until their preferred version is adopted.
O.K., that might just be a rumor I started.
LikeLike
“The faithful there are asking questions that others are not yet asking and attempting to discern what following Jesus might look like in a pluralistic, postmodern context…the questions of faith others may be afraid to ask.”
Puh-leeze. How old is Merritt anyway, and how widely read? Just what questions is he talking about, since the ones that seem to be constantly floated these days are hardly new? What does seem new is the self-congratulatory element among millennial evangelicals, who like to be quite vocal about whether or not there is reason for them to “stay.” The pieces on “Q” in First Things are indicative of the inward infatuation that he wants to suggest is unique or particularly strong amongst New Calvinists.
It’s not. It’s just that of all the younger groups, the NCs are the most theologically focused and consistent: they actually *have* a systematic theology. As for reading only or primarily within your circle, I hardly think people like Piper or Al Mohler are guilty of that. In the case of followers, how many ever do much reading at all… So of course what they do read is going to “tribal.” So what? Does he think the Sojourners crowd is busy checking out what Os Guiness or Carl Trueman have to say? Or is Roger Olson busy shopping at P&R? Meanwhile, the Gospel Coalition actually plugs Fred Snaders, not a Calvinist. Merritt’s whole lament is just more navel-gazing amongst the literati, who veer liberal by default. I know, there goes that terrible use of ‘lebels’ again. (Besides, NYC hipsters are their own crowd, as anyone who has hung with them is painfully aware.)
LikeLike
Hopefully they at least let Alan use the bathroom:
“One of the blessed privileges of Synod is to receive warm fraternal greetings from representatives of various federations and denominations with which the URCNA shares ecumenical relations. Dr. Alan Strange addressed the body on behalf of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC). He brought attention to the decisions of the respective federations in the mutual cooperation between the OPC and URCNA to labor together in the construction of a common Psalter and hymn book for use in corporate worship.”
LikeLike
And the question about inheritance by works in the Mosaic covenant is a quest to find who in the OPC still talks about Christ’s merits as satisfaction of God’s strict law for the elect alone Leviticus 18–do this and live….
http://theaquilareport.com/overture-proposed-to-opc-presbytery-seeks-study-on-republication-of-the-covenant-of-works-in-the-mosaic-covenant/
Beale, New Testament Biblical Theology, p 516—(My) view is compatible with Snodgrass–“Justification by Grace–to the Doers:An Analysis of the Place of Romans 2 in the Theology of Paul…Snodgrass holds that justification excludes ‘legalistic works’ done to earn justification but includes an evaluation of imperfect works done….”
mark: Does being “united” to Christ mean that the distinction between promise and demand is removed in such a way that those justified still need to be justified by the instrumentality of works done after one is justified? Now that we are “united” to Christ, Is the promise of the gospel not different from the demand of the law that we do what God says to do in order to stay “united” to Christ or to be “more united” to Christ?
LikeLike
The Law is Not of Faith, P and R, 2009
p 73—dgh quoting De Jong—Edwardsians rejected the federalism which regarded children, especially infants, as guilty before God…. For Calvinists, the vicarious atonement was bound up with the idea of imputation, representation, and substitution. But after Edwards the emphasis fell on man’s moral relation to God and paved the way for the governmental theory of the atonement…
p 253–David Gordon, contrasting Sinai and Zion, asks: “Promise does not differ from law. Is not promise by definition unconditional? Blessing is not different from cursing? Those of faith are not different from ‘those of works of the law’? A covenant that justifies is not different from a covenant that does not? “
LikeLike
For Machen’s interaction with New York City culture, from the top of the Empire State building, check out his “Skyscrapers and Cathedrals”
Click to access 9780875526379.pdf
LikeLike
@Erik Charter:
Plus, NYC was founded by shrewd Dutch Calvinists who put the screws to the Indians when they bought the place, so put that in your hookah pipe and smoke it, you latte-sipping weenies!
**********
Don’t you know that “Manhattan” means “Worthless Ground” in several Algonkin dialects? Seems that the shrewd Walloon Minuit was the guy who got snookered in that 17th century deal.
LikeLike
from the Northwest Presbytery question to the OPC—Certain views and formulations of the Mosaic covenant… distinguish the Mosaic covenant from the Abrahamic covenant. The former is referred to as a “law covenant”, a “republication of the covenant of works”, or a covenant with a “works principle”; the latter is described as a “promise covenant.” The use of this language is confusing, since it seems to imply that to some degree the nature or substance of the Mosaic covenant differs from the other administrations of the Covenant of Grace (e.g., the Abrahamic covenant).
Galatians 3: 6 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his seed… who is Christ. 17 This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void.
mark: That part after “this is what I mean” is confusing, because it seems to say that the added law is not the same as the covenant previously ratified.
Galatians 4: 21 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not listen to the law? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and one by a free woman.
mark: It is certainly is confusing to tell us that Abraham had two sons. Does this mean that Abraham had two kinds of children? Does this mean that the Abrahamic covenant had more than one promise?
LikeLike
I see Scott Clark picked up on this post at his blog.
Scott – Are you at Synod Visalia? Are you being treated well? Blink twice if you are unable to communicate freely in the midst of your captors.
LikeLike
Following the press releases from Visalia. Either I’m getting a sanitized version or so far the get together has all the excitement of a ladies’ sewing circle.
LikeLike
I was at least expecting that the fire department would have to be called in to the Committee considering the Belgic 36 overture.
LikeLike
as we all know, Erik, tough talk is really easy on the internet….
LikeLike
I wish I was there to see the look on the faces of the delegates who don’t come from places that are 75% Conservative Republican when the overture and explanation of the meaning of a robust Belgic 36 are explained. Sometimes we take things for granted when we live in a bubble that not everyone occupies.
LikeLike
Reading about last night’s productive discussion between people with differing views was encouraging
LikeLike
What exactly do the CanRC and the URC disagree about? One thinks 2K is really bad and the other thinks 2K is really really bad?
LikeLike
URC is a little more strict on certain office and worship matters
LikeLike
Deuteronomy . 6:16-19: “You shall not put the LORD your God to the test, as you tested him at Massah. You shall diligently keep the commandments of the LORD your God, and his testimonies and his statutes, which he has commanded you. And you shall do what is right and good in the sight of the LORD, THAT IT MAY GO WELL WITH YOU AND THAT YOU MAY GO IN and take possession of the good land that the LORD swore to give to your fathers by thrusting out all your enemies from before you, as the LORD has promised.”
Stephen Marshall:—–The very land being figuratively holy, and a sign of God’s presence, the resting of God’s people there, a sign of their eternal rest…neither did the Lord promise them entrance into, or continuance in that Land, but upon the same CONDITIONS upon which he promises eternal life, as true Faith in the Gospel, with the love and fear of God, and obedience of his Commandments.
Thomas Boston—There is an entering heaven by obedience. `I know,’ said Jesus, `that his commandment is life everlasting.’ There is a personal way to heaven, that is, the commands of God, called everlasting life, because they certainly land the soul in heaven, and there is an infallible connection betwixt true obedience and glory. Christ is a captain as well as a Savior, a king as well as a priest, and must be obeyed as well as believed in, Hebrews 5:9
LikeLike
Arguing against Merrit because of the practices of the Israelites is to forget the redemptive-historical differences between that time and now. And to say that Paul called the NT Christians to isolate themselves from the world is to forget that Paul didn’t say that in the first place. When talking about not associating with those who are immoral, he was careful to say that he only referred to those claiming to be Christians otherwise one would have to leave the world.
I don’t think tribalism is the real issue here for the leaders of the Neo-Calvinist movement. I think authoritarianism is. After all, authoritarianism determines truth not by what is said but by who says it. And to limit the exposure of Christians to only Christian sources is designed to move Christians to enter an authoritarian relationship where what certain teachers say is automatically accepted while what is said by all others tends to be rejected. This keeps people in the fold but destroys our credibility before nonChristians among other effects.
As for the tribalism noted by Merritt, it is there. And an indication of tribalism is when we employ double standards. So when we criticize those outside of our group while remaining silent on the wrongs of those practiced by our group, that is a sign of tribalism, among other things.
LikeLike
Curt Day, and when do the New Calvinists ever criticize anyone outside their group (rather than merely assuming their superiority). If they did criticize evangelicals or Old Calvinists, they’d be a lot more interesting. Heck, if they were tribal they’d be interesting.
LikeLike
DG Hart,
So after defending tribalism in your article, you are now saying that they are not tribal? Confused.
So, as Merritt noted, the neo-Calvinists did not criticize Donald Miller? How about Leithart? Or, as I heard Keller say enough times, how about calling those outside the faith who work for social justice “arrogant.” He was careful not to name names. And if you consider Tchividjian as no longer among the neo-Calvinists, don’t they criticize him? And yet there was a prolonged silence over Sovereign Grace Ministries.
And if we direct fellow believers to only read those from an approved list of fellow believers and then send them out to interact with the world, aren’t we saying to the world what Martin Luther King said about the West in his protest against the Vietnam War. He declared that the “Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach other and nothing to learn from them is not just.” And the strange thing here Is that teachers in the new-Calvinist movement do read outside the tribe, but it seems that there is little encouragement for followers to do the same. So leaders are open to outside sources but followers flock together because of tribalism?
Don’t get me wrong, there are things I like about the new Calvinists. They are fellow believers and they teach some reformed things. But I see some tribalism in them and it is wrong simply because the world is killing itself with tribalism and so it seems that to be separate from the world while fulfilling the great commission, we need to be different, not the same regardless of how good tribalism is for groups..
Thank you for the response though
LikeLike
Curt Day: the new Calvinists. They are fellow believers and they teach SOME reformed things.
Ergo they are not Reformed and should stop saying they are.
LikeLike
Curt, I’m saying everyone is tribal. It’s the way we as humans live. None of us is cosmopolitan. So Merritt’s critique was a cheap shot since he is at some level as tribal as the young sovereigntists. If the latter were actually churchly, then they’d have a mechanism and justification (ecclesiology) for their tribalism. But they don’t.
Simply to blame them for having problems is like saying the Dude has a beverage here, man.
LikeLike
D.G. Hart,
Perhaps our disagreement here can be partially explained by our definitions of the word tribal. Certainly we all belong to groups. But from what I have read, tribalism doesn’t come into play until we display a high degree of loyalty to the group(s) we belong to. Since that definition is still ambiguous I add the following: Tribalism is where our loyalty to group exceeds our commitment to principles and morals. If Merritt is using a similar definition as mine, he is pointing out a trait that isn’t necessarily shared by all. That might be why he criticizing neo-Calvinists for their willingness to criticize others but not themselves. And if Merritt is using a similar definition of tribalism as mine, then I think we are directed by the Scriptures to be more cosmopolitan than tribal. In fact, this would direct me to favor Marx’s internationalism to patriotism.
LikeLike
Curt, who would ever say that their attachment to group transcends morals? Oh, that’s right, Marxists.
Marx’s internationalism!?! Are you kidding?
LikeLike
First, more people practice compromising values because of group loyalty than say they should.
Second, your criticism of Marx and some Marxists is correct and is one of the criticisms Martin Luther King had of Marx. I like Marx for his analysis of Capitalism but not for his solution which is nothing more than the other side of the same coin.
And yes, Marxism emphasized the international rather than nationalism. THat there should be a solidarity between workers around the world rather than people with the same national identity.
LikeLike
Curt Day, “more people practice compromising values because of group loyalty than they should.”
Isn’t this fairly obvious? Isn’t this what makes federal, state, and urban politics go? So why beat up on the little new young sovereigntists?
LikeLike
Why criticize corruption or violence either? After all, that has been around since the beginning of time.
If we are truly concerned about God’s Word and morals, it seems that we should call everybody out who practices tribalism and that includes new and old Calvinists alike. Simply speaking, the world is destroying itself through tribalism. How is it that we are following God if we follow the world here?
LikeLike
Curt, okay, but when are you going to eat with all that calling?
LikeLike
We’ve been needing a Marxist around here for a long time. Or not.
LikeLike
Cue the Monty Python soccer game.
LikeLike
Both before and now that I am retired, I have had plenty of time to eat. But the issue is not just whether one criticizes but how. Do we seek to beat people into submission or win people over? Since part of the Church’s commission is to preach repentance and since tribalism practices preferential treatment as well as engages in self-idolatry, I am not alone in calling on others to repent. In addition, there are plenty of people on the Left who are already doing that calling with me. And please note that the Democratic Party is not even close to being the Left.
LikeLike
Curt, do you know Jeff Lebowski?
LikeLike
Never heard of him but I just looked him up. What about him?
LikeLike
LOL
(much needed today)
LikeLike
Curt, Jeff Lebowski was the co-author of the alternative Port Huron statement. He might be a worthy comrade.
LikeLike
D.G. Hart,
Could you explain why would a fictional character be a worthy comrade of mine?
LikeLike
Curt, I’m having a laugh because you seem fictional.
LikeLike
But isn’t your comment here confirming what I wrote about authoritarianism being the main issue. Rather than discussing the facts and logic involved as peers, you have to introduce hierarchy. And you do so through ridicule to someone who is a fellow member of the OPC. Nice touch.
LikeLike
Curt, why didn’t you say earlier you are OP. That changes everything. Marxism? Brilliant!
LikeLike
D.G. Hart,
You can mock if you want. Just ask yourself which fruit of the spirit you are displaying.
In addition, you can also ask yourself the degree to which Marx was right when talking about the bourgeoisie:
it has left remaining no other nexus between man and man than naked self-interest, than callous “cash payment.” It has drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervor, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy waters of egotistical calculation.
BTW, as I wrote before, I agree with Marx’s analysis but not his solutions.
LikeLike
Curt, you missed out on the era where Freud and Marx were put into every conversation. Fortunately that era died for all eternity decades ago.
LikeLike
Hey, you may say Curt’s a dreamer, but he’s not the only one. Some day you will join them, when the world will live as one.
Or something like that.
LikeLike
Curt, I believe that would be the bruised banana.
Word to the OP wise: don’t bring up Marx and fruit of the Spirit within 500 words of each other.
LikeLike
D.G. Hart,
Why? There are things to learn from Marx and there are things to criticize. But how we criticize shows whether we are bearing the fruit of the Spirit or exhibiting the works of the flesh.
BTW, in case you are interested, I just reviewed this post in my blog.
LikeLike
Curt, do what you want with Marx. Don’t complain about tribalism if you belong to a church that many consider sectarian. Just think what Jonathan Merritt would think of the OPC.
LikeLike
D.G. Hart,
I want with Marx what I want from anyone I read. I want what I can learn. The moment where we feel we can’t learn from others who are different is the moment we need to come to grips with pride and how much it is controlling us.
LikeLike
Karl Marx is about as relevant today as Richard Marx. Not even the Communist Chinese find him compelling.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9rT2hZwk2k
I hear he’s still the bomb in North Korea, though. That’s working well for them.
LikeLike
Curt Day, does learning from others apply to Harry Emerson Fosdick? If I think he’s nuts (and a liberal) I’m proud? Not smart? Not orthodox?
BTW, if you are so interested in learning from others, why call your blog flaming fundamentalist? Why not “caring Christian”?
LikeLike
D.G. Hart,
Yes, learning from everybody. If we go back to Marx, we could get an example of how one can learn from someone one strongly disagrees with by reading Martin Luther King’s critique of him (see pg 92 from http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/ows/seminars/aahistory/Pilgrimage.pdf)
BTW, one reason why I call my blog flaming fundamentalist because I want people to realize what original Christian Fundamentalism was so they realize that they can learn from Christian Fundamentalism. Calling one’s self a Christian is quite ambiguous in today’s world.
And I added the word flaming because of the alliteration causes some to laugh and I am passionate about Christian Fundamentalism with regard to its 5 tenets, not its psychological persona.
LikeLike
Erick,
Substitute parasitic investor class, which is what most who invest belong to, for bourgeoisie and you will see how Marx’s analysis is quite relevant for today.
LikeLike