For awhile, I’ve been moving about the Christianity Blogosphere. Sometimes I comment, sometimes I read and think about what the author has said, sometimes I read and delete the site address from my history. I enjoy reading the different blogs because I believe strongly in outside perspective. I am part of a fellowship of churches whose top leaders seem to be terrified of outside perspectives, mainly due to doctrinal concerns. I don’t say this as a bystander, I’ve spoken to many of them. I also look at the example of their lives, sometimes they encouraged me to do for years.

In any case, I have learned one thing from reading all these blogs: Solomon was right in that there is no end to the making of books.

Seriously, I have learned other things as well. The list is in no particular order.

1. Some bloggers want to debate for the sake of debating
2. Some bloggers will not discuss anything with those that strongly disagree with them.
3. Some bloggers ask for discussion, but don’t want it.
4. Some bloggers ask for discussion, but don’t receive it.
5. Some bloggers are very proud of their denomination while others are ashamed of it.
6. Some bloggers are good exegetes while others are not.
7. Finally, some bloggers are fascinated only with new ideas while others will not budge from their preconceived notions at all.

It’s an amazing variety, and I believe that it is important that this variety continues to exist. Where would we be without others that see things from a different perspective? Better yet, where would we be if some of our friends weren’t reluctant to try new ideas? It’s true that we need those that we jump at any new idea as much as we need those that will not abandon old ones.

What good are those that refuse to change? Much. Primarily, they are each still an individual creation of God. Even if they get on our nerves, He still delights in them. Outside of that, they can be the influence to prevent us from jumping on the latest religious bandwagon. They can help us to take time to think through various issues, methods, and the like. In a society that ridicules people with strong opinions as narrow-minded, it is refreshing to find those that believe in SOMETHING passionately, even if it is wrong. They are sometimes right and that is something that each person has to wrestle with on their own.

Not to be mean, but they can also serve as examples of ‘what not to do’. I read the writings of some ministers that refuse to change their doctrine and methods and just cringe. I don’t cringe because they are unyielding, but because reading their defense of their beliefs and methods is so painful. The urge to shake them and shout “WAKE UP” is very powerful sometimes. However, without them, we have no persistent example to avoid. Imagine Christianity if the lessons of previous generations had to be learned anew in every generation. To a degree, this may seem to be true anyway, but I submit that if this were true, American Evangelicalism wouldn’t have gone through the various movements this past century. Instead, the stages would cycle much more quickly.

We had the Jesus People of the 60s and 70s, then various movements involved in shepherding, then various movements concerned with church growth, now the new thing is the emergent church. I’m sure that the next big thing after this will be some kind of return to institutionalized churches. I would think that if we learned nothing from previous generations, we would stop reacting to them, but would recycle the same ideas over and over.

Personally, I tend to have a hard time with folks on either extreme. Fortunately, the number of people on either one is pretty small. Stubborn people can change and flighty folks can dig in their heels – I’ve seen both happen. Although we need the few on the fringes, they shouldn’t be immune from correction or even a rebuke. Make no mistake, I believe we need these folks, but needing them doesn’t make them right. I talk about one such person frequently here because despite more than a few talking and pleading with him to change, he refuses. He seems to have a real inability to see another perspective or be anything less than the man on top of the pyramid. Pretty soon, I will be writing about someone else that flits around like a butterfly without settling on anything. The teachings and ministry of this person is just as destructive.

Speaking of Thomas, we learn today that his way is still biblical and all others are not. We also learn that Nationalism is now considered a sin. Apprarently, it is similar to autonomy (which he also calls a sin). Lastly, two years is roughly the limit for healing from past hurts. Anything beyond this is apparently tolerating sin.

Lovely.

As far as flighty goes, this post describes some of the things I’ve encountered with the emergent church crowd. It’s funny, in my own fellowship of churches, I’m seen as a way out there radical. To the emergent folks I’ve encountered so far, I’m seen as way out there conservative. Go figure. I enjoy a good challenge to my thinking even if some of those that provide the challenge have little ability to receive one in return.

I would love to go to the Emergent Convention. Reading through the topics, I would love to be in on almost all of them just to hear some new ideas, especially those about leadership. Oh well. I certainly hope that those who go will post about it.

Speaking of a good challenge, my old friend and I are discussing one of the branches of TULIP, Perseverence of the saints. I know that he wrestled with it for qutie a long time and does not believe in it lightly. I enjoy discussing it with him, especially as we do not regard each other as ‘unsaved’ because of our different perspectives. Definitely some good things to think about. Keep it up, who knows where the conversation will go.

Anywho, that’s it for today.