This entry was posted on Sunday, January 29th, 2006 at 6:02 pm and is filed under The Church, Theology. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Pages:
Feeds
Categories:
- Administration (6)
- Apologetics (22)
- Church Growth (13)
- Culture (139)
- Devotional (21)
- Media (10)
- Misc. (31)
- Philosophy (19)
- Podcasts (22)
- Question (10)
- Scripture (21)
- Testimony (6)
- The Church (74)
- The Outlaw Church (3)
- Theology (82)
- Uncategorized (149)
Archives:
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
Meta:
Emergent Fanboys
01.29.2006 by Tim Reed
The term fanboy is a slightly derisive term that is used when someone has become such a huge proponent (or fan) of someone or something that they are blind to the faults and shortcomings of that someone or something. Usually its used in reference to an element of pop-culture. For example, someone who describes Star Wars: The Phantom Menace as anything other than a “large pile of crap” would be a Star Wars fanboy. Well it seems that Brian McLaren has gotten his own fanboys with this latest dust up. Jim Nicholson of the BHT writes:
What I’m saying - and what I think Mclaren is saying, perhaps behind some posturing - is that we need to shut the hell up about “homosexuality” and start showing the same Christ-like compassion for homosexuals that we do with most other forms of sin. We need to drop the conspiracy model and start viewing those who are gay or lesbian as our neighbors.
That position sounds fairly reasonable. The problem is, that isn’t what McLaren wrote. What McLaren wrote was:
Frankly, many of us don’t know what we should think about homosexuality. We’ve heard all sides but no position has yet won our confidence so that we can say “it seems good to the Holy Spirit and us.”
and
If we think that there may actually be a legitimate context for some homosexual relationships, we know that the biblical arguments are nuanced and multilayered, and the pastoral ramifications are staggeringly complex. We aren’t sure if or where lines are to be drawn, nor do we know how to enforce with fairness whatever lines are drawn.
McLaren is being fairly straightforward here. He believes that on the issue of homosexuality scripture is unclear to the point where an agnostic position on the issue is a reasonable one. Which is a very different position from the one Nicholson outlines.