I'm not sure how to post this question. I'll do the best I can. My question is (and excuse my lack of history and theology in the past)
what kind of "reformed" theology exists before the Reformation? I believe I've read somewhere that Augustine wrote similar things found in Calvinism. (correct me if I'm wrong here). It might help for you to know why I'm asking this. I am trying to write up my own critique of Brian McLaren and specifically from 2 of his books "A New Kind of Christian" and "More Ready Than You Realize". Here are a couple of quotes from the first book:
...how our whole approach to Christianity is so conditioned by modernity. What do we think of when we think of theology? We think of Latinate terms like omnipotence, omnipresence, and immutability. We think of an analytical outline, where theology is divided up into many other "ologies" "soteriology, hamartiology, eschatology and so on. It's a dissection of God - a "theosection". It strikes me how rare these kinds of words, outlines and dissective ways of thinking are in the Bible, which preoccupies itself with earthy stories rather than airy abstractions, wild poetry rather than tidy sytems, personal and contextual letters rather than timeless, absolute pronouncements or propositions."
(A brief personal comment here. I didn't know whether to cry or laugh when I read the part - 'It's a dissection of God - a 'theosection'.' A 'theosection' - ha!!. This just is so ridiculous and stupid it honestly just makes me laugh!!! I won't be sharing that in my critique with the associate. I don't think he'll get it.)
"I'm beginning to see them as an artifact of worship from the modern era, no less sincere or magnificent than medieval cathedrals - in fact you could call them modern conceptual cathedrals. Rather than condemning, I am simply noticing that our sytematic theologies are themselves a modern phenomenon."
"Modern people believed that they could create a nice framework that would pigeonhole everything. "Remember that the Pharisees were the great pigeonholers and that Jesus told them that many who came out last in their framework would come out first in his."
Obviously what you see here is that McLaren doesn't like systematic theology (and what I really see is he doesn't like Christianity, but wants to bring a new gospel). But what he's trying to present in the book is the idea that the "Modern" period (approx. the years 1500-2000) and the theology from this whole era has been culturally conditioned, etc. So in trying to write against this whole thing in my critique one of my thoughts is this -
what about the good theology before the "Modern" period (as McLaren defines it)??? From my limited understanding there probably isn't volumes of "systematic" theology written before the Reformation period, but there has to have been something written between the time of the Apostles and the Reformation isn't there?? And of course the whole obvious point McLaren is missing is that the good systematic theology is based on the BIBLE!! That is one of my other arguments to this whole issue that I bring up. I already realize that. But as far as the question I've asked, I just don't have a lot of the Christian history behind my belt to put together the thoughts I have. Also McLaren likes to talk about the more "authetic" times of Christianity in the "pre-modern" times (this would mean before the years of the Reformation - the times of the early Church Fathers). He implies that this was a better time of Christianity that we should return to it. Here's a quote to try to explain it. He says we need to
"read the Bible as a pre-modern text, emerging from a people who believe that truth is best embodied in story and art and human flesh rather than abstraction or outline or moralism. We relieve the biblical writers of having to conform to modern expectations. ....According to the Bible, humans shall not live by systems and abstractions and principles alone but also by stories and poetry and proverbs and mystery."
Thanks for any help. It is going to take me forever to write up this critique, but I told our associate pastor I would do it because I think he's thinking my husband and I are nuts and he already asked my husband if we think that he's a heretic, etc. The situation is heating up. He is not happy about us bringing this up and wants it to resolve it. Well unfortunately it's not going to be resolved quickly like he wants. At least he seems to be honest with us and he doesn't understand why we think McLaren is preaching a different gospel (my husband thankfully sees this!!! Thank you for praying for this BTW). I was afraid the pastor might be two-faced and just give us an answer we want to hear. But he seems to be trying to understand where we're coming from so that's why I'm trying to write up something from myself for him (and our sr. pastor will read it too). Not sure if it'll really make a difference or not, but it seems to be the thing to do.
