Praise Chapel Christian Fellowship
social network - where our vision, values, ideas and friendships all connect
Why Michael Patton Inspires Me
In the last couple of years I have been highly inspired by a young theologian (well as best as I can tell by young I mean he is at least in his thirties) by the name of Michael Patton. He has reminded me how to conduct myself when teaching or discussing theology. He is somewhat of a reminder of how Dr. Walter Martin would approach theological subjects when there was obvious disagreement.
Michael leads a ministry call Reclaiming the Mind, and is a prolific blogger, and teacher. Much of my desire is to follow in his example of Irenic Theology. He was the first to introduce me to that term. Much of my recent thinking has been influenced by him, and for that I am grateful.
What many might find interesting is that Michael is a Calvinist. He is a graduate from Dallas Theological Seminary, but he is the most gracious Calvinist/non-pentecostal that I have ever met (well met in the sense that I interact with him at his blog and emails). I hope to be able to be his counter part as an Arminian/Pentecostal Ministerial Theologian. I say all that because I am going to quote and almost repost a section of one his blogs (again you can read the entire posting at the link below). It is this attitude that attracts me to his writings and teachings. And has highly influenced the starting up of this group.
Blog Title: What Part of Gentleness and Respect don’t We Understand? by Michael Patton
You can read the whole blog by clicking on the title, but I want to focus on a few of his points.
He starts off by saying:
"I often talk about the importance of having an irenic approach to doing theology. It would seem that this term, “irenic” is suffering because of its overuse and mis-identification with those who would choose to abuse it. To be irenic means that we are peaceful in our approach to issues. This does not involve compromise, but a willingness to engage issues fairly."
Then he defines Irenic Theology, which I have done here before, but then he quotes 1 Peter 3:15. It is here that I want to focus our attention in what he says:
"Many of us only hear the first part of the verse “give an defense,” and upon this we justify our apologetic polemic ready to destroy, slander, or misrepresent any who disagree with what we believe to be the truth. We fail to recognize that this defense, in this context, is to be given to people “who ask.” This is requested information based upon a life of integrity in the midst of our suffering. As well, this defense is to be done irenically—with gentleness and respect.
I can hear the “what abouts” coming. And in the spirit of this post let me tell you how stupid you are for questioning my . . . ahem . . . Ok, let’s deal with them.
There seems to be examples in the Scripture where the prophets, apostles, and even Christ did not engage irenically. In other words, they often seemed to engage people with a fierce resolve, respecting the truth more than the person with whom there is conflict. I admit this is true. I also admit that there are times when such polemics are important. But we need to look at the context in which this type of polemic is brought about.
1. Should we be defending the faith like Christ cleansed the temple?
We often think we should speak with the authority of Christ. In defense of our attitude we will appeal to Christ’s attitude toward the pharisees or his cleansing the temple. But to refer to the example of Christ in these instances can be problematic seeing as how Christ’s actions are not always intended to set examples for us. I know this sounds off, but think about it. He worked great miracles in order to demonstrate his unique authority, he engaged people with a divine introspection knowing their thoughts, motives, and intentions, and he was the ultimate divine judge who has every right to judge all people. As well, this was not the modus operandi of Christ. Do you ever notice that he was only polemic in such a way to the self-righteous who arrogantly believed they had all the answers and were a step above all the rest?
2. Defending the faith like Paul encountered the Galatians.
Many times we will appeal to Paul’s example. His polemics, especially to the Galatians, are used to defend our own less than gracious encounters. But this has problems as well.
First, Paul was an apostle who carried the authority of an apostle. Being such, he had both divine authority and the divine ability to speak to a situation with infallible guidance. This is something that most of us we cannot claim. Can we?
Second, Paul primarily only spoke in such a way to those who were under his authority. He was their leader and had the right and obligation as their leader to engage them in a candid way. He was their pastor. Pastor’s can and sometimes should speak in such a manner to their flock.
ROBERT: Here is where I highly agree with Michael. Way too often we loose site of Pastoral authority in our lives. We somehow think that we have a right to have this attitude and I always here Acts 17:11 quoted as the justification for our attitude and conduct. They make reference such as "We are just searching the scriptures to make sure they are right, and if they are not we have the right to correct them."
Third, like Christ, Paul did not always engage people in such a way. In fact, as noted above, he encouraged his people to be gracious, humble, and respectful in all their dealing with those with whom there is disagreement. In 1 Thess 2:7 he describes his own ministry as one of gentleness, comparing it to a mother caring for her children.
Sadly, it often seems as if there are people out there who not only think they are an apostle, but also think that they are talking to their own congregation. Some even seem to enjoy polemical engagement in an unhealthy manner. In fact, I think that a lot of ministries would not know what to do if they did not have someone to fight.
Sadly, many times this attitude is found more in my own conservative Calvinistic circles than in any other. For this I am sorry and ashamed. Sometimes Calvinists often make the worst Calvinists . But, of course, it can be found in any group. Baptists have a knack for it. Even emergers can display the most angered, discounting, and arrogant spirit that I have ever seen."
ROBERT: Again it takes great courage for Michael's honesty in his assessments on how this attitude is more prolific in Calvinistic camps. Yes that has been my experience, but yet I agree with him they can be found in many other groups as well. If we are not careful we are endanger of falling into this trap.
Michael leads a ministry call Reclaiming the Mind, and is a prolific blogger, and teacher. Much of my desire is to follow in his example of Irenic Theology. He was the first to introduce me to that term. Much of my recent thinking has been influenced by him, and for that I am grateful.
What many might find interesting is that Michael is a Calvinist. He is a graduate from Dallas Theological Seminary, but he is the most gracious Calvinist/non-pentecostal that I have ever met (well met in the sense that I interact with him at his blog and emails). I hope to be able to be his counter part as an Arminian/Pentecostal Ministerial Theologian. I say all that because I am going to quote and almost repost a section of one his blogs (again you can read the entire posting at the link below). It is this attitude that attracts me to his writings and teachings. And has highly influenced the starting up of this group.
Blog Title: What Part of Gentleness and Respect don’t We Understand? by Michael Patton
You can read the whole blog by clicking on the title, but I want to focus on a few of his points.
He starts off by saying:
"I often talk about the importance of having an irenic approach to doing theology. It would seem that this term, “irenic” is suffering because of its overuse and mis-identification with those who would choose to abuse it. To be irenic means that we are peaceful in our approach to issues. This does not involve compromise, but a willingness to engage issues fairly."
Then he defines Irenic Theology, which I have done here before, but then he quotes 1 Peter 3:15. It is here that I want to focus our attention in what he says:
"Many of us only hear the first part of the verse “give an defense,” and upon this we justify our apologetic polemic ready to destroy, slander, or misrepresent any who disagree with what we believe to be the truth. We fail to recognize that this defense, in this context, is to be given to people “who ask.” This is requested information based upon a life of integrity in the midst of our suffering. As well, this defense is to be done irenically—with gentleness and respect.
I can hear the “what abouts” coming. And in the spirit of this post let me tell you how stupid you are for questioning my . . . ahem . . . Ok, let’s deal with them.
There seems to be examples in the Scripture where the prophets, apostles, and even Christ did not engage irenically. In other words, they often seemed to engage people with a fierce resolve, respecting the truth more than the person with whom there is conflict. I admit this is true. I also admit that there are times when such polemics are important. But we need to look at the context in which this type of polemic is brought about.
1. Should we be defending the faith like Christ cleansed the temple?
We often think we should speak with the authority of Christ. In defense of our attitude we will appeal to Christ’s attitude toward the pharisees or his cleansing the temple. But to refer to the example of Christ in these instances can be problematic seeing as how Christ’s actions are not always intended to set examples for us. I know this sounds off, but think about it. He worked great miracles in order to demonstrate his unique authority, he engaged people with a divine introspection knowing their thoughts, motives, and intentions, and he was the ultimate divine judge who has every right to judge all people. As well, this was not the modus operandi of Christ. Do you ever notice that he was only polemic in such a way to the self-righteous who arrogantly believed they had all the answers and were a step above all the rest?
2. Defending the faith like Paul encountered the Galatians.
Many times we will appeal to Paul’s example. His polemics, especially to the Galatians, are used to defend our own less than gracious encounters. But this has problems as well.
First, Paul was an apostle who carried the authority of an apostle. Being such, he had both divine authority and the divine ability to speak to a situation with infallible guidance. This is something that most of us we cannot claim. Can we?
Second, Paul primarily only spoke in such a way to those who were under his authority. He was their leader and had the right and obligation as their leader to engage them in a candid way. He was their pastor. Pastor’s can and sometimes should speak in such a manner to their flock.
ROBERT: Here is where I highly agree with Michael. Way too often we loose site of Pastoral authority in our lives. We somehow think that we have a right to have this attitude and I always here Acts 17:11 quoted as the justification for our attitude and conduct. They make reference such as "We are just searching the scriptures to make sure they are right, and if they are not we have the right to correct them."
Third, like Christ, Paul did not always engage people in such a way. In fact, as noted above, he encouraged his people to be gracious, humble, and respectful in all their dealing with those with whom there is disagreement. In 1 Thess 2:7 he describes his own ministry as one of gentleness, comparing it to a mother caring for her children.
Sadly, it often seems as if there are people out there who not only think they are an apostle, but also think that they are talking to their own congregation. Some even seem to enjoy polemical engagement in an unhealthy manner. In fact, I think that a lot of ministries would not know what to do if they did not have someone to fight.
Sadly, many times this attitude is found more in my own conservative Calvinistic circles than in any other. For this I am sorry and ashamed. Sometimes Calvinists often make the worst Calvinists . But, of course, it can be found in any group. Baptists have a knack for it. Even emergers can display the most angered, discounting, and arrogant spirit that I have ever seen."
ROBERT: Again it takes great courage for Michael's honesty in his assessments on how this attitude is more prolific in Calvinistic camps. Yes that has been my experience, but yet I agree with him they can be found in many other groups as well. If we are not careful we are endanger of falling into this trap.
Tags: irenic theology, michael patton
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Christopher Chapman on -
i like this guy!!!
he brings up a point i am trying to figure out about this group and irenic theology in general.
"To be irenic means that we are peaceful in our approach to issues. This does not involve compromise, but a willingness to engage issues fairly"
sometimes i share my views that i am pretty sure about, some that i am utterly convinced, and some that i just hold cause i havent found anything better yet. i have different motives in each of those to some degree, and in another way i always have the same attitude.
if i am "utterly convinced" of something i want to share it cause it has helped me, and i hope that others will grab it and run with it. the things that i am "pretty sure" about i present as filler, half expecting correction and half expecting encouragment and confirmation. the third, the things i am just "accepting out of lack of options" i hope will give rise to discussions that will give me more and better options than i have faced up till this point. this third and sometimes the second category i usually throw in a ---(statement of doubt in the parenthesis)----
the attitude i hope i have and am always seeking to maintain, is a willingness to be wrong even in the "utterly convinced" segments of my theology.
on another note, i am new to this kind of discussion. i am used to face to face discussions. becasue of this i have found i am quite insecure. sometimes i am afraid if i share things i hold to i will be labeled "heretic" though i am "utterly convinced" (haha!) that i dont hold any heretical views. other times if i present my thoughts i am afraid i will be preceived as someone who thinks they know it all. my only defense is that on the things i am "utterly convinced" about, i do believe them and think i know them. but, by god's grace i do try to stay honest and listen to the other side of the issues. i am afraid to do anything different actually!!!
he said we dont have to "compromise". by that i interpret him to say , not compromise the truth, but also what we perceive as the truth. i mean if we didnt think it was true we probably wouldnt say it in the first place. but this "conviction" is balanced by the willingness to listen and be wrong. hard to do, but possible with god's grace!
i just recently had a discussion with someone for 2 days about open theism. for two days i kept putting out logical philisophical points and strong biblical arguments (i wont tell you what side i was arguing! haha!!) and he was being very infulenced. sometimes almost conceding to the side i was defending. but then he would come back and say, "but i dont know, there is still this..." i would patiently start over with my "great arguments". but then when we were about out of time together ( i am travelling around for a few weeks and visiting churches) something clicked as to what he was trying to say. at that point i said, "wait a minute, are you trying to say ....?" he said "that is exactly what i mean to say". at that point i was converted and i now am unmistakenly in his "camp" (though i am still testing the model of understanding as i read and meditate on the scriptures). the funny thing about this was that i was "utterly convinced", and was sure he would soon come to see the strength of my position. but though he couldnt say it the way i needed to hear it, he was eventually able to get through (in one flashing connection) my "utterly convinced" mind.
so if i say things and sound "utterly convinced" in our discussions (my brothers), it is because i am "utterly convinced", but if you hold the truth, perservere with me and by gods grace i will get it!!!
-
Permalink Reply by Robert Jimenez on -
Hey Chris,
one of the key qualities in having a great discussion is the ability to realize that we could be wrong in our position, even if we are utterly convinced. Again this is a theology forum, and I am confident that certain doctrines such as Christ is God/Man, the Trinity, Salvation by grace through faith, are correct and I doubt I will ever change my position on this matter.
But all others including the details of the "hows" is where we should be able to have peaceful dialog, and help each other understand.
In regards to Open Theisms, I have spent countless hours reading various books and blogging at various other sites on this matter. I am still not convinced of their positions. I still think that it is a mystery as to how God knows the future (which he can limit as to what he does know and does not know), and how man maintains free will. We don't worry or stress about how God created something out of nothing (which is impossible), but yet we stress over if God knows the future or not.
Anyhow, don't want to derail this post either into Open Theism, for those that want to chat more about that I have at least 3 parts that I have already posted, feel free to make your remarks there.
-
Permalink Reply by Christopher Chapman on
-
you did understand that i was saying that being "utterly convinced" shouldnt hold us back from being willing to admit we are wrong, when we are, right?
gbu
-
Permalink Reply by Robert Jimenez on
-
What we have here is a failure to communicate. I agree with what you said, and I was trying to reaffirm it, but it seems that I failed at that. ugh, writing is so much harder than talking.
Yes I agree with what you said and all I was trying to do is reaffirm it. ;-)
-
Permalink Reply by Christopher Chapman on
-
do you mean you dont agree?!?!?!
haha!!!
thanks for your patience with my insecurity complex!!!
-
Permalink Reply by Robert Jimenez on
-
No problem, but I am more concern about your dual personality with Randy, really he is not real and you must come to terms with that.
-
Permalink Reply by Christopher Chapman on
-
really lol!!! you win!!!
About
Sponsors
Custom Search
Verse: John 3:16; Jn 3:16; John 3
Keyword: Salvation, Jesus, Gospel
With Operators: AND, OR, NOT, “ â€
Badge
© 2009 Created by Robert Jimenez on Ning. Create Your Own Social Network
