Listen Up
A couple links:
Shane Hipps, whose "Third Way Faith" podcast is subscription only (though I highly recommend it) on Wired Parish, you can now read his blog and hear clips of the podcast here. He's got a few interviews with me there...
And you can now listen to the archived audio of my time on the Albert Mohler Radio Show here. (So, Ken Silva, how did I do?)
Shane Hipps, whose "Third Way Faith" podcast is subscription only (though I highly recommend it) on Wired Parish, you can now read his blog and hear clips of the podcast here. He's got a few interviews with me there...
And you can now listen to the archived audio of my time on the Albert Mohler Radio Show here. (So, Ken Silva, how did I do?)
posted by tony at 4:37 AM
19 Comments:
if nothing else; the way in which they used music involving your last name was quite impressive, and oh so witty.
nice job tony. other than that . . . i'm speechless. it is beyond me how you can intelligently discuss your framework, use on of their own examples of interracial marriage, and then get followed up with "well i don't think that's truth" let's go to a commercial break.
no surprise, but it's like their mind is already made up and they're just looking to catch you in a loop hole or something and expecting you to recant.
it's one thing to be blind. it's another thing to choose to be blind.
I have to agree with Josh. We don't get Christian religious broadcasting hereabouts (unless its on shortwave) so I'm not sure how the modus operandi generally works but I get the feeling that it was a monologue pretending to be a conversation.
Having said that, I find some points by Dr Moore valid but I find the way he pushed it quite irritating and manipulative.
Tony,
Blessings to you Tony.
Your patience while being constantly attacked was exemplary; Dr. Moore kept putting labels on you to throw out FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt; it’s a sales tactic that is very effective in getting people to agree they need what you’re selling, but ethically bad form).
Several times he said you said something you didn’t say. He didn’t like your facts so he’d muffle over them. I wonder why Dr. Moore’s understanding of God requires the Bible to be inerrant. My understanding is that God is bigger than me, and my puny mind’s attempt to prove him is wasted energy. God doesn’t need me to prove He is—He just is.
This is what I heard.
Moore: I’m right, these “Lots of FUD adjectives” emergent’s are saying this “my interpretation heresy”, So Tony tell us “using our language” why your right and were wrong.
Tony: Well part of the problem is “your language” isn’t applicable to the people I deal with, so let me try to paint a picture we can maybe both agree with….
Moore: The problem is with who your talking with then, they should just accept the language I’m using. It’s worked all this time in my world so it should work for everyone, my job isn’t to converse with you but prove to my loyal listeners how wrong you are.
Tony, you came off as the Loving example of Christ, and Dr. Moore came off sounding like a Pharisee!
Ben.
My personal favorite was the "Schleiermacher with a soul-patch" comment. Maybe others have heard that one, but it was new to me.
Inerrancy debate been going on since the garden of eden? Nice. You did a remarkable job. Congratulations. He was pretty inflammatory in his closing comments and dismissive. I commend you for your patience.
The inerrancy debate "going on since the Garden of Eden" was a choice quote... but the one that really got me at the very beginning was Russell's reference to "2,000 years of American Christianity."
I had to go back and make sure that was actually what he said.
Wow.
"Schleiermacher with a soul-patch" I like that one too. I was impressed by your generosity, Moore's rudeness, and the Counting Crows song.
Could you talk Dr. Moore into being interviewed for the emergent podcast. Then you could demonstrate how to have a conversation. Plus it would be cool to hear how a fundamentalist could believe there were Christians in America before the roman road got to North America
Tony, you gave a reply on my blog on this radio interview. I'm in Nashville and would really love to take you up on your offer to sit down and meet you if you ever come through town. You are a guy I would love to spend some time with.
hey tony. sorry to bug you like this. but couldn't find your email address anywhere. email me when you get a chance at josh_at_redcowboydesigns.com
nick and i were curious if you wanted to come back on the podcast sometime soon. we could talk about the wheaton deal. or if you're tired of talking about it, we can just explore your paper a little bit with provisional theology and locality.
if not, no worries. thanks dude.
I forgot to leave you an email address...if you come through Nashville, lets get together.
danetilly@hotmail.com
Thanks for challenging me.
hey dude it's cathryn thomas.... chick you met in Greensboro ..... ummmmmm prophetic thingy....
anyway... got back from London... and Andrew brought the Orkney broil..... big feast... yeah yeah... he blogged it ...and my blog almost CRASHED!!! but saying Hi... and just reminding that there are a few that move ..... in strange places.. but seeing HIS kingdom SHOW UP.... My buddies Derek and Amy are with Andrew at the mo....... LOL big circus of grace!!!! But wanted to touch in..... and open the dialogue...... of Spirit...... Just to see ... what can happen when Logos... meets Rehma!- and ps... that is much beyond emotionalism BS!!!! hey got some old stuff on my blog.... Larry Norman leads Randy Stonehill to Jesus.... it made me laugh and Larry wasn't charsimanic!!! Just classic!
www.lovefiercely.blogspot.com
Been prayin for your ass!!! so MOVE! and Love well dude!!! you rock!
lovingly, cathryn thomas
Tony, I join with the others in congratulating you on your kindness. I think it was pretty obvious that Dr. Moore already had his mind made up, and was simply listening for likely (or not so likely) spots to insert his disagreements.
One thing that's frustrating to me is that no one seems to really speak to this idea of truth being local. This is the point that scares the pants off of folk like Dr. Moore, and I don't think you really did yourself justice with your response. Maybe I don't get it, but local truth to me seems to center around our limited perception of God's truth. Dr. Moore kept referring to "God's word is settled in the heavens." I don't have a problem with that notion, and I don't think you do either, but when some individual starts presenting their perception of that truth, then there are inevitably problems, because none of us are perfect.
Am I missing something?
Tony,
As someone who publicly criticized your talk in another public forum, I feel compelled to say clearly how inspired I was by your words in this forum with Dr Moore. You set a standard of integrity in your dialogue with Dr Moore that the rest of us should aspire to. Your identification of points of agreement, your avoidance of any unnecessary conflict, and your caring tone are a model for us of someone more concerned with discovering the truth in dialogue with others than with winning an argument.
I was particularly impressed with your clear distinction between the truth of scripture, and the truth of modern, empirical science. I think it's good that you didn't go beyond that and offer more a more detailed notion of truth as Rick above discusses, because that would be unnecessarily divisive and unhelpful in the forum you were in; your distinction, on the other hand, helpfully guides listeners in the first step towards a more satisfying notion of truth.
Hi Mr. Jones and others who have commented here. I just listened to your interview with Dr. Moore. I just wanted to suggest that Dr. Moore's statement that the inerrancy debate has been going on since the Garden of Eden might indeed be something worth thinking about. Do you not think that in Gen. 3:1-5 when the serpent (Satan)questions Eve, He is also questioning God's authority and truthfulness, and therefore the truthfulness of Scripture as God's Word? Just a thought. I believe Mr. Moore has a point here and it has caught my attention and gained my respect.
Thanks. God bless and continue to open our minds to more of His holiness, grace, and truth.
Because of the cross and Christ's obedience to and love for His Father and for my sinful, undeserving soul -
Sarah
You seemed so gracious and patient with all the silly modernist baggage that he threw at you. Well done, you are an example to many of us. However the interview did make me realise what a bizare and tiny bubble this whole conversation is! You will never make people like that satisfied because they have a monopoly on their version of the truth. And if you do satisfy them then you will have been converted to their ways! Stay with your neighbours and love them!
nice job tony. it seemed to me that he wouldnt interact with you. he would throw out quick jabs just before or after a commercial break and then ask a question. weird. very gracious. thanks.
I'm late in commenting on this, but WOW. After one of your breakout sessions at the National Cathedral in May I got attacked in a similar way by a progressive Christian who had his definition of the absolute truth of the Gospel. It breaks my heart, as one who has a foot on both the conservative evangelical world and the liberal mainline world that our loudest voices have lost the ability to hold a conversation in a generous Spirit.
Just heard his Youth Ministry Peddler comment, that was amazing. Anyway, thanks for taking the risk, Tony, we all learn generosity of Spirit in a conversation like this one.
Why is it necessary to add the qualifier 'local' to a word like truth? Isn't this just as bad as adding the modern qualifier 'absolute' to the word truth? Why is it even necessary?
Post a Comment
<< Home