I’m reading through the book “Adventures in Missing the Point”, which is NOT about proper evasive techniques for sword fighting. Actually, that would probably be a more useful book. This book, written by Tony Campolo and Brian McLaren, has an absolutely wonderful subtitle: “How the culture-controlled church neutered the gospel.”
I picked this book up at the local library and that subtitle caught my eye as I find myself agreeing with the premise of that statement. Therefore I dove in hoping to put aside my differences and see some good theological/practical looks at how to counteract this age-old dilemma. As I began reading I found myself nodding in agreement as they asked questions like these:
“Are our churches and broadcasts and books and organizations merely creating religious consumers of religious products and programs? Are we creating a self-isolating, self-serving, self-perpetuating, self-centered subculture instead of a world-penetrating, world-serving, world-transforming, God-centered counterculture?”
And so the authors begin to note that perhaps many in modern Christianity have “missed the point” and introduce the book as a conversation to bring us back to a right understanding of Christianity. Unfortunately I didn’t get out of the introduction before red flags started appearing.
Red flag #1 is what I will call and attempt to pre-empt criticism. Unfortunately throughout my life I have become a master of the guilt-trip (something I continually work at not using) and can recognize one a mile away. A phrase like “shame on you if you use this book to critique others” smacks of a guilt trip…and becomes ironic when within three chapters the authors are using their book to critique others (I have no problem with critiquing). They also state that if you think that the authors might have missed a point that you are actually being a person who is missing an opportunity to learn, reflect and grow. Therefore within the first chapters I find myself excluded from the “conversation” because I would like to critique faulty premises and theology. I must be someone who doesn’t want to learn, reflect or grow (three of my personal reasons for blogging btw).
Red flag #2 I will call the “join me on the bandwagon of my own ignorance/insecurities” red flag (apologies to Taylor Mali). When an author states that “this adventure is about finding our own blindnesses” or “We don’t claim to see all that much” I begin to wonder why they’re writing the book. The red flag was waving, but as I learned in my years in the corporate world (yeah McDonald’s management classes) assume innocence. Therefore I chalked that up to the authors showing humility and not wanting us to think they had all the answers. Personally however, I have a respect for a person who seeks to answer questions not simply ask them. Hence the red flag.
But these were simply red flags that I hoped might be the product of my pre-made assumptions and/or suspicions. But it didn’t take long before the authors let me down…again and again and again. In the first three chapters the authors present a very man-centered salvation, a relative view of theology and an incredible minute view of who God is, and while the reader is not supposed to critique others, the authors feel free to critique others (under the guise of asking questions of course).
As I continue to read the book I shall continue to include you in some of my thinking processes. As is becoming my policy, I wont state which of the authors made which quote as my desire is to look at the quote itself and not potentially demonize the author.
