I finished reading “The Secret Message of Jesus” by Brian McLaren. It was thought provoking, introducing some new ideas and concepts that were fairly intriguing. Although I don’t always agree with Brian I always find myself in a virtual conversation with him as I read his books – there is something compelling about that. With all the hype leading to the release of this book about it being controversial, I found it almost a let down as it was not as controversial as I was expecting. Maybe I am not as conservative as some and find his writing less problematic.

If you are interested in reading a great article/review of the book my friend James (I now call him Prof. James) has written a fabulous one here. For me I found several things compelling. First, you have to begin with title and the overall theme of the book. I have asked similar questions as to why Jesus made his message so seemingly unclear and almost hidden in metaphors and parables. If you have read the gospels you have probably asked this exact same question. I think McLaren does a great job at unpacking the historical context which I think helps to free the often entrapped message of Jesus from our North American individualism that often seems to imprison Jesus’ message. Second, McLaren has wonderful explanation about the Kingdom of God being the Dream of God and how Jesus’ radical message of how to live can produce a change – a transformation – that is revolutionary.

Third, I also think that the reason the message of Jesus isn’t clear is because it, in itself, is part of the message. Jesus asked questions and invited interaction, which is fundamental to any relationship – real relationship based on love. Think about that…Jesus answered a small fraction of questions in the New Testament and asked them in disproportionate abundance. That promotes relationship; Jesus listened and taught in ways that made people think, reflect, contemplate, mull over, question, argue, debate, seek clarification. It is not only compelling but highly effective.

McLaren also takes the book of Revelation and sees it through the lens of the Kingdom of God. I think he is on to something here… I too would argue that when we take the culture, the genre and the message of Jesus in the New Testament and interpret the message of Revelation, we end up with a very different view then your typical pop-culture interpretation. A fantastic book on this topic is a book written by a brilliant former professor of mine, Paul Spilsbury, entitled: “The Throne, The Lamb and The Dragon.” Spilsbury, along with many Biblical Scholars, interpret the book of Revelation in a way that is more connected with its original intent – that is a post for a different time.

I think the danger of McLaren’s interpretation is that you soon begin to find the Kingdom of God in everything – even to the point of finding it in places it was never intended to be. Much like the allegory of old, we begin to read into the next rather than have the text read into us. That being said, there is something also very dangerous about limited the message of Jesus as well. In North American, we have largely limited it to personal salvation and ignored the rest. Think about it, if the Message of Jesus was just about personal salvation…one parable or sermon would have been enough but it is so much more. That doesn’t dismiss the individually responsibility of each person to make a commitment to Christ, but it is also so much more. The problem is we have focused on the former and in the process buried the later.

While in Bolivia I finished the book Your God Is Too Small by J.B. Phillips. I started reading it on the plane on the way down and it is clearly thought provoking. This is one of those books that expanded on things I have been asking and contemplating over for the last several years.

Phillips deconstructs our often marred, confused and distorted picture of God (resident policeman, parental hangover, God-in-a-box, second-hand God, projected image, etc.) and proposes, or rather constructs, an alternative view. I think the view he begins to construct moves closer to the life, message and ministry of Jesus – and if nothing else, it is the beginning of such a journey. Like many authors today, Phillips proposes that we have misunderstood and, even possibly, distorted the message of Jesus. For example, here is a quote I found rather interesting on evangelism: “Christ very rarely called men “sinners” and as far as we know never attempted deliberately to make them feel sinners, except in the case of the entrenched self-righteous, where He used the assault and battery of scathing denunciation. (This, we may surmise, is an instance of what He saw to be desperate ill requiring a desperate remedy.) Some evangelists, whose chief weapon is the production of a sense of sin, would find themselves extraordinarily short of ammunition if they were obliged to use nothing but the recorded words of Christ.” (Pages 103-104) For me, this exemplifies some of our twisted understandings of Jesus and His message. This practical outworking can be traced back to our often confused and wrongly perceived cultural understanding or misunderstanding of God and who He is as well as whom He is not. It is precisely this dichotomy that Phillips addresses.

This book touches on a number of different concepts and constructs and although I don’t agree with every conclusion and construct that Phillips presents, the conversation is intriguing. This book is not new to bookstores and Phillips has passed on over twenty years ago now, but the questions and discussions raised are equally valuable today. In fact it demonstrates that the questions others and I are asking and conversing about are not new but have been asked for decades now… In fact, I think that what started out as a few whispers from the back row is now moving into a louder voice in Christianity today that cannot be ignored.

I read The War Between Peru and Chile by Clements R. Markham (written in 1883) on my journey down to Bolivia. I was given this book by friends who thought it might interest me as I prepared for my experience. Because the book is well over 100 years old I had to first get accustomed to the old English it was written in (it is never easy to get use to phrases like “social intercourse”) but after about the first fifty pages I got into the “groove.”

What intrigued me most about the book was the complicated and vast history of Bolivia and South America in general. Being educated in North America it is hard to comprehend the effects of colonialism and the wars that erupted as a result.

I found it interesting that although Bolivia has been in several wars, they have never won. For a Canadian this is a hard concept to grasp but one that would undoubtedly have a profound effect on a country’s psyche. You can see these effects on both the culture and the unstable political system in Bolivia.

This book was fascinating to read as it gave me a glimpse into the history of a country I visited, a history I previously knew very little to nothing about.

I read Liquid Church by Pete Ward and it is an interesting and thought provoking book on the future of the Church. His distinctions between Liquid Church and Solid Church are fascinating. Although I think the book was somewhat lacking in historical context and at times I found the theological arguments wanting (he could have flushed these out further), it was well worth my time.

There is so much I liked about the book and the concept of the fluid church. Unlike the solid church of modernity (indicating a concept that the church of modernity was often defined by a building, organizational structure or institution), Ward suggests that the emerging church will be based more on a network of relationship that is harder to identify and impossible to solidify.

Although I agreed with Ward through most of the book, I found myself questioning a couple of his proposals and concepts. First, he repeatedly talks about the fact that the emerging church will be less build around the common regular assembly (church worship service). Although I don’t believe that a church has to be a set number of people who meet every Sunday at 11:00am, there have throughout history beginning with the early church, been some kind of regular meeting/gathering for the local church. I am not saying that this has to be as “solid” as the modern church but it can’t be so “liquid” as not to exist. I also found the idea that the liquid/emerging church needs to embrace consumerism troubling. He is not referring to materialism (he makes that distinction clear), which we would all say is problematic, but the idea that humanity at its core are consumers and it is that driving desire we need to get to as the church. He has some great ideas and theories in this area but I struggle with any concept that says we need to give people what they are looking for just because they are looking for it and embrace that part of our culture. What happens when what someone is looking for is wrong or mistaken?

Once again, I found this book to be intriguing and stimulating. What I really appreciated is what I see in many emergent writings, the commitment to historic Christianity and orthodoxy (something often missed by its critics). To quote Ward: “A commitment to orthodoxy provides assurance in the midst of the flow.” (page 71)

Well off to Bolivia and hours of travel which hopefully will allow me amble time to catch up on my delinquent reading schedule.

I just finished The Search to Belong by Joseph Myers. It isn’t so much a book specifically on small groups (although its implications for small groups is fascinating) as much as it is a book on community and belonging. Myers uses the work of Edward T. Hall (four spaces: public, social, personal, and intimate) to discuss the concept of community and belonging with specific attention to its impact on the church.

I found his critique of the modern small group movement thought provoking and insightful with potentially radical implications for the church. I also found Myers’ use of Emergence theory (his slime mold analogy) within small group structures to be intriguing. It isn’t that I agree with everything that Myers proposes or that I will fundamentally change the ministry to which I give oversight and direction but it has impacted the way I look at community and belonging. It may not lead to radical change but I won’t look at my role in the same way again or have the same concept of what community and belonging is and isn’t.

This is one of those books that needs to percolate in my thoughts and it will no doubt ultimately lead to some interesting conversations in the future.

My next book: Liquid Church by Pete Ward.