I have probably entered the "obsessing" phase of writing a book. While in-between drafts I have begun to obsess over the title. Is "Beginning Conversations" saying what this book will really be all about??? Hmmm. My latest candidate is "Conversations in Context."

Back when I thought of this project, the idea was provide a tool that would act as a catalyst for theological conversation and consequent action. Hence "Beginning" conversations.  But now it seems that these conversations are happening. The issue remains though, that we need some kind of reference point and guide when constructing theology in context.

I can’t leave behind the concept of informal conversations, because that is where I believe theology needs to move and is moving. Whether through blogs, gatherings of friends, or gatherings in churches, the postmodern context demands that we all play our part.

So for now, it’s "Conversations in Context." I’m thinking about changing the header here, but not yet. I don’t want to have musical titles. Of course whoever publishes the book will change it anyway, so why all of the fuss?

I find that the value of debate for the church is debatable.

The church has two primary creeds to follow: love God and love one another. I wonder if debate by its very nature has a tendency to hinder the latter.  (Read up on the denotations of debate and you’ll see how we get some of our connotations as well: wikipedia, dictionary.com)

Debate surely does have its place and its benefits. The formal nature can be very helpful when discussing important topics, especially within institutions such as governments. The freshest images in my own mind of debates are from presidential campaigns, and I see debates in this context as a good thing.

While debate may also be used to good effect in formal Christian gatherings, especially among theologians at conferences, it certainly does have a dark side to consider. Of particular consideration here, debate often focuses on the topic over the people, becomes argumentative, and produces a winner and loser. There certainly are more, but these three features are of particular importance to the Christian who would aspire to "love one another".

Topics Over People
If your primary goal in winning a debate is prove your position is correct. While it may be possible to simply debate opposing points, too often it becomes personal. We become so focused on being right and on advancing our own logic that we often forget there’s a fellow brother/sister talking with us (or "at us" as is the case often). When topics supersede people, the following is likely to happen.

Arguments
Christians engaged in debate are more likely to cut the other off, insult one another, and become argumentative. I’ve seen it too many times and done it myself. Some debaters will try to fluster their opponents, throw curve balls, and question the credibility of their supposed "opponent." This is not healthy for the body of Christ.

Winners and Losers
Instead of ending the day with a body that is built up in love and encouragement, we have one side that is exalted (and sometimes prideful) and another side that is dejected and low. There typically is a rift between parts of the body who claim to not need to the other. While this does not always happen in debates, the price paid by the collective body of Christ to have a winner is far too high.

Alternatives
My alternative for debates is conversation. While conversations can get out of hand, the following aspects of conversations may make them a safer context for discussing potentially divisive issues.

1. Conversations typically revolve around people and not topics. We debate with anyone who will hammer it out with us, but we engage in conversations when we feel comfortable relating with another.  If we feel comfortable in a conversation with another Christian, then that may be a good setting to discuss a topic that could be categorized as "debatable".
2. If the person is more important than the topic, then we are less likely to be disrespectful and argumentative. While the topic is still in the car, it’s in the back seat.
3. Whatever the topic, the point should be on encouragement and sharing information, bringing one another closer to the truth in a collaborative venture. Both sides should come out with more information and a clear perspective of one another’s views.

These are perhaps some fine lines to draw and even friendly conversations can blow up when infused with an inflamatory topic. Nevertheless, we would do well to keep in mind that relationships come before topics. To be the church means that love must overcome all disagreements and differences.

Love does not mean lining up behind the same exact doctrine (a la the SBC fiasco that has produced an inordinate amount of blog posts), but leaving room for differences and learning from them. Even if we’re convinced that a supposed Christian is not a part of the body of Christ, what do we have to lose be treating them as one?

We gasp at the thought of being charitable to "Christians with bad doctrine" because we value the topics over the people. Too often the price for winning the debate is dropping love by the wayside.

One of the most exciting components of this project has finally come together. I have developed a diagram that details the various components of Christian Reflection. I feel that it helpfully fleshes out each piece of the pie while keeping the focus right on God. Here is my summary:

Christian reflection is the God-centered contemplation of God and His relationship to scripture, tradition, the church, mission, and culture that leads to an imitation of Him in a particular time and place.

Until typepad cooperates in allowing me to upload the image I’ll have to describe it to the best of my abilities.

First of all, God is at the center of the wheel. All Christian reflection concerns God. It’s about him and should cause us to eventually act like him. Christian reflection contemplates how God works through scripture, how he works through tradition, etc.

And so we have this list of pieces:

Sources
   

• God
     
• Scripture

Architects

• Tradition
• Church

Context
   

• Culture
     
• Mission

To miss out on God is to obviously not do theo-logy. But each of the other parts have important roles.

If we miss out on tradition, our theology will repeat past mistakes and assume a misplaced superiority and originality.

Without the worldwide and local church we will fall prey to our own bias. God reveals himself through the wisdom of others and we would be fools to neglect this.

Without an awareness of and interaction with culture we will miss the limits of our own context and the benefits of seeing the world through a different set of lenses. Our view of God and his ways will only grow as we include other perspectives with our own.

Without performing theology in the context of mission it will become mere philosophical musings of no benefit to anyone. Christian reflection should bring us closer to God and to his heart for relationship with the world. Theology without practice is useless and will create doctrines that do not connect with reality or the heart of God.

That’s the current draft of this diagram and its pieces. I hope to make this diagram the central organizer of the entire project, but I’m sure it needs some refining and word-smithing first.

Moving to Vermont, fixing up our home, finding a job, visiting with family and friends, traveling from Vermont to Illinois to New Jersey to Philly and then back to Vermont . . . these are some of the things that I’ve been up to lately. This combined with my lack of routine and discipline have kept me away from the book project for two months. But thankfully things are falling into place again. I have some time in the evenings, don’t have to work on Mondays (Is that not the perfect job!), and will institute a new regime to get this book wrapped up. Thankfully the collaborations are rolling in and I hope to keep adding more while waiting to hear back from agents, contributors, etc. At this point things are looking pretty up, with some interest being expressed. Though nothing is certain.

Some areas that will need some beefing up according to my own notes and the comments of collaborators include the following:

• A better discussion of the pitfalls of postmodernism that we need to watch out for.
• Better examples of how Christianity interacts with culture. In particular those outlined by Stephen B. Bevans in his hum-dinger of a book, Models of Contextual Theology (a must read for anyone interested in the Christianity and culture topic).
• Expansion of the stories and examples already listed. I basically put the bare bones of the stories in, knowing that I need to go back and flesh it out.
• Adding more to my section the centrality of God himself when doing theology in a postmodern context (hint: if you’re looking for something absolute, he may be the ticket).
• Integrating comments from collaborators in text boxes throughout the text.

The list could probably go on, but that should be enough to keep me hopping. Of course there is the allure of my home-made golf course on our six acres of land right outside the window here. It is a beauty of a day here in South West Vermont. . .

I had a great talk with my wife Julie’s friend Heather about BTC. First of all, I think I may have to do a title change at some point, moving from Beginning THE Conversation to "Beginning Conversations".  I don’t want to assume that I am the only person out there starting conversations about Christian reflection in light of postmodern cultural shifts.

Yet the bigger issue that came up was my target audience. It seemed to Heather that I was apologizing a lot for my views, but nothing really struck her as heretical or even vaguely disturbing! Everything I said made sense to her. Of course another pastor I talked with had some things that he was concerned about. And so the challenge is: am I writing primarily for people on the same page as myself or for people who aren’t quite following where I’m heading?

It is really tough to cover a controversial topic that has so many who feel strongly for both positions. In trying to write a book that can serve as common ground for conversations about God and culture, I may miss both grounds completely. This is a tough challenge to consider over the next couple days.

So far BTC has been completely read and commented on by 3 people. There are bunches more copies being read right now and hopefully bunches more collaborations to come.

Though some comments have been more constructive than others, I have found them to be very helpful. The biggest thing pointed out thus far is the caution that I must take when presenting points of view other than my own. Even if I have experienced much of the modern/institutional church, my experiences are not universal and my characterization is not always spot on.

For example, when I look at  Sunday School programs, sermons, and topic/teacher driven small groups, I see a rationalistic, education focus on spiritual growth and Christian living. In other words: right info = right living and the Holy Spirit is thus ruled out  in many cases.  I’ll at least say that I don’t see how the Spirit can work very well in such settings. Through the lens of many other Christians there certainly is room for the Spirit to work, but the kind of work they’re looking for is different than what I’m looking for. And there we have the disconnect.

It certainly is a challenge to present a Christian way of reflecting on God in the postmodern culture that does justice to the wide variety of perspectives out there. And therein lies my reliance on the help of other Christians who can think critically about the topic.

If you would like to collaborate (i.e. read BTC and send comments to me), shoot me an e-mail with your mailing address and a copy will be shipped out.