1. The chapter opens with Dan asking himself, “What have I gotten myself into?” He likens his decision and the way he feels about it to his decision to marry Carol. How does a marriage commitment mirror Dan and Carol’s decision to stay connected to Potomac Community Church in a new way? How does commitment change the nature of relationship with another human being as well as with a community of people?
2. For the first fifteen chapters of the book, we eavesdrop on a conversation between Neo and a white, middle-aged male pastor form a modern, evangelical Protestant church. Casey is a young, female African American youth pastor from a high church tradition. Does the nature of this conversation change at all when the person is of a different gender, age, race and tradition? Why or why not? Respond to Neo’s description to Casey of Dan’s meltdown. Did you perspective change when hearing it related from a different point of view?
3. Casey wants to move on from youth ministry into ministry to adults. Neo says “. . . working with teenagers is generally more important and more strategic than working with adults.” What would lead Neo to say this? Do you agree or disagree? What is appealing about working with adults?
4. As she considers changing the focus of her ministry, Casey is compelled to continue her education. Neo is tentative about recommending seminaries, however. Neo believes that most seminaries work on a modern model and are more able to prepare students for ministry in the 1940s, not 2040. List the reasons seminaries are ill-equipped to deal with the kind of education needed to train leaders for ministry in 2040 (p. 145, 156, 150). Describe Neo’s vision for a new kind of seminary.
5. Describing the difficulty of transitioning a church from a traditional, modern framework to a postmodern, missional framework, Neo employs some pretty sobering statistics (p. 147). Have you ever been a part of an organization that has undergone significant change? What was that experience like? Did the organization survive the transition? Is it easier to start over from scratch?
6. Neo lists several options leaders have when facing change. First, he says, you can scare people or inspire them. Second you can move incrementally or innovatively. Third, you can seek to minimize or maximize discontinuity. Explain what Neo means by each of these distinctions. Are these options mutually exclusive or is there a third, higher way of operating “above the line”?
7. Reread Neo’s quote about “Nobodies” who change the world (pp. 149-150). Do you agree that those on the margins initiate the leap into terra nova? Does his thesis about “Somebodies” and “Nobodies” inspire or frighten you? As it relates to the subject of this book, are you a “Somebody” or a “Nobody”?
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Chapter 15 – Beginning the Journey into Terra Nova
1. Neo discovers, with amazing force and clarity, that he is being pulled back into the pastorate. Throughout A New Kind of Christian, Neo has been a blessing and a benefit for Dan in his struggles. How has Dan played that same role for Neo?
2. Besides Dan’s influence, what else contributes to Neo’s desire to return to pastoral ministry?
3. What is it about the work of pioneering that makes it so demanding, and as a result, so exhausting? Is pioneering necessarily a solitary task? If so, why? If not, how might communities of people pioneer into this new territory? What qualities would such a community have to possess to go on this journey together?
4. After Dan speaks to a group of young adults, one woman confesses that hearing him speak was a very emotional experience for her: “. . . whenever I get to know individual non-Christians—I mean really get to know them—I am completely convinced that I find God already there and at work in their lives.” Is she right that Christianity doesn’t own God? Compare what she says to Dan with Jesus’ description to Nicodemus of the ministry of the Holy Spirit (John 3:8). Are there any similarities? Have you ever had an experience like that of this young woman?
5. Reread Dan’s description of his two alternatives as he looks to his future and his decision to take a riskier third option (p. 142). Where are you on this journey? Do you have any sense of being called to explore terra nova? How might Dan’s three alternatives be expressed in your life?
2. Besides Dan’s influence, what else contributes to Neo’s desire to return to pastoral ministry?
3. What is it about the work of pioneering that makes it so demanding, and as a result, so exhausting? Is pioneering necessarily a solitary task? If so, why? If not, how might communities of people pioneer into this new territory? What qualities would such a community have to possess to go on this journey together?
4. After Dan speaks to a group of young adults, one woman confesses that hearing him speak was a very emotional experience for her: “. . . whenever I get to know individual non-Christians—I mean really get to know them—I am completely convinced that I find God already there and at work in their lives.” Is she right that Christianity doesn’t own God? Compare what she says to Dan with Jesus’ description to Nicodemus of the ministry of the Holy Spirit (John 3:8). Are there any similarities? Have you ever had an experience like that of this young woman?
5. Reread Dan’s description of his two alternatives as he looks to his future and his decision to take a riskier third option (p. 142). Where are you on this journey? Do you have any sense of being called to explore terra nova? How might Dan’s three alternatives be expressed in your life?
Chapter 13 – Spiritual Practices: Secret and Shared
1. Dan notes that when he and Neo are forced to communicate via e-mail it changes their relationship in a surprising way: “as soon as he was so physically distant, we seemed to get closer.” Have you ever experienced this? In Chapter Four, Neo lists how major changes in technology, specifically in communications technology, alter the nature of the world in which we live. Do you see the interconnectedness of the world changing our perceptions of reality? How are developments in communications technology changing the nature of our relationships?
2. According to Neo, for any kind of Christianity to be valuable, it must engage the financial realities of our lives: “if we can’t discipline ourselves to learn the joys of generous living, I think we’re an embarrassment to the gospel.” In a culture that is awash in individualism and consumerism, why is generosity so radical and necessary? Why does Dan continue to push aside the issue of money? Is Neo right to be concerned?
3. Neo writes about Christian institutions and media ministries being captive to money. What does he mean by this? Do you agree? If so, where have you seen examples of this captivity? Is Neo right when he asserts that this captivity keeps these Christian organizations from being able to respond to the reality of our world? Why do appeals to fear generate revenue for ministries?
4. Neo asks Dan a series of direct questions that are worth considering. Do you think that God would want a heaven filled with people who care more about being saved from hell than being saved from sin? Who care more about getting into heaven than being good? Who care more about having their sins forgiven than being good neighbors? How does Neo’ description of this active, engaged, and “worldly” faith mirror the description of faith found in James 2:14-19?
5. What does Dan mean when he states that heaven is a by-product, not the main point (p. 131)? Reread Neo’s technology metaphor that compares how a computer “saves” data with what it might mean for people to be saved (p. 19-30). How effective is this analogy?
6. Compare and contrast what it means to be “saved for privilege” versus being “saved for service.” Dan describes his dream for his church: “. . . that it would increasingly become a community of communities, a place full of little ‘villages of Christ’ where people really connect, really care, really make their faith visible through love. A place where we help people believe and become by helping them belong.” Have you ever experienced a church community like the one Dan describes? How does such a community cut across the grain of an individual-centered faith?
2. According to Neo, for any kind of Christianity to be valuable, it must engage the financial realities of our lives: “if we can’t discipline ourselves to learn the joys of generous living, I think we’re an embarrassment to the gospel.” In a culture that is awash in individualism and consumerism, why is generosity so radical and necessary? Why does Dan continue to push aside the issue of money? Is Neo right to be concerned?
3. Neo writes about Christian institutions and media ministries being captive to money. What does he mean by this? Do you agree? If so, where have you seen examples of this captivity? Is Neo right when he asserts that this captivity keeps these Christian organizations from being able to respond to the reality of our world? Why do appeals to fear generate revenue for ministries?
4. Neo asks Dan a series of direct questions that are worth considering. Do you think that God would want a heaven filled with people who care more about being saved from hell than being saved from sin? Who care more about getting into heaven than being good? Who care more about having their sins forgiven than being good neighbors? How does Neo’ description of this active, engaged, and “worldly” faith mirror the description of faith found in James 2:14-19?
5. What does Dan mean when he states that heaven is a by-product, not the main point (p. 131)? Reread Neo’s technology metaphor that compares how a computer “saves” data with what it might mean for people to be saved (p. 19-30). How effective is this analogy?
6. Compare and contrast what it means to be “saved for privilege” versus being “saved for service.” Dan describes his dream for his church: “. . . that it would increasingly become a community of communities, a place full of little ‘villages of Christ’ where people really connect, really care, really make their faith visible through love. A place where we help people believe and become by helping them belong.” Have you ever experienced a church community like the one Dan describes? How does such a community cut across the grain of an individual-centered faith?
Chapter 12 – French Fries and the Kingdom of God
1. At the bar, in the parking lot, and at the soccer game, Dan is amazed at the ease with which Neo engages people who are not Christians. Neo admits that at an earlier time in his life, whenever he was with people from outside the church he was tense. “There was always this threat in the air—either I was going to be pulled down by their bad behavior, or else I was going to judge them and preach to them.” Have you felt this tension? How have you resolved it? Is there any irony in the contrast between Jesus’ apparent comfort among those his culture labeled “unclean” and the difficulty his followers seem to have around “sinners”?
2. Compare and contrast the way the phrase born-again is understood and used today with how Neo describes its meaning in the context of a first century conversation between Jesus and a Pharisee named Nicodemus. Do you agree that the term born-again Christian has an overwhelmingly negative connotation to people who aren’t Christians? If so, why do you think this is the case?
3. In contrast to modernity, which stresses abstract principles and universal concepts, Neo talks about the need for postmodern theology to reincarnate (that is, to rediscover) the importance of language, setting and context in conveying meaning. Describe the context and setting of the first century, according to Neo, and why the language of the “kingdom of God” and the “kingdom of heaven” was so explosive. What kinds of images and creative language might be used to describe God’s work in the world today? Would such language be as potent for Christians today as it was for first-century religious people? If not, why not?
4. When asked to summarize how he would describe the gospel to someone, Neo emphasizes the importance of introducing a person to the church so that they can experience Christian community. Have you ever thought of this as an integral part of the gospel? Do you agree that it is? Why or why not? Is integration with a local church an essential part of becoming a Christian?
5. Why does Dan react so strongly to Neo’s presentation of “the kingdom of God”?
6. What is the difference between counting conversions and counting conversation? Do you agree that people are sick of Christian sales pitches and formulas? Neo believes that “friendship evangelism” is just another version of these manipulative strategies. Do you agree? Why or why not?
2. Compare and contrast the way the phrase born-again is understood and used today with how Neo describes its meaning in the context of a first century conversation between Jesus and a Pharisee named Nicodemus. Do you agree that the term born-again Christian has an overwhelmingly negative connotation to people who aren’t Christians? If so, why do you think this is the case?
3. In contrast to modernity, which stresses abstract principles and universal concepts, Neo talks about the need for postmodern theology to reincarnate (that is, to rediscover) the importance of language, setting and context in conveying meaning. Describe the context and setting of the first century, according to Neo, and why the language of the “kingdom of God” and the “kingdom of heaven” was so explosive. What kinds of images and creative language might be used to describe God’s work in the world today? Would such language be as potent for Christians today as it was for first-century religious people? If not, why not?
4. When asked to summarize how he would describe the gospel to someone, Neo emphasizes the importance of introducing a person to the church so that they can experience Christian community. Have you ever thought of this as an integral part of the gospel? Do you agree that it is? Why or why not? Is integration with a local church an essential part of becoming a Christian?
5. Why does Dan react so strongly to Neo’s presentation of “the kingdom of God”?
6. What is the difference between counting conversions and counting conversation? Do you agree that people are sick of Christian sales pitches and formulas? Neo believes that “friendship evangelism” is just another version of these manipulative strategies. Do you agree? Why or why not?
Chapter 11 – Getting Beyond Righteousness
1. When Neo rants that the Bible is not “biblical” in the way that Dan’s critics are using it (p. 95), what does he mean? Do you agree? Do you agree that evocative language must be used to discuss spiritual realities? Why or why not? Can you think of examples of evocative language (or behavior) in the Bible that would be scandalous to Christians today? How has modernity limited the kind of language available for spiritual conversations?
2. Dan likes Neo’s sermon on death but can’t imagine preaching it himself. He makes the observation that people are comfortable reading C.S. Lewis in their homes but are less comfortable when his ideas and approach are taken into the pulpit. Why do you think this is the case? Does Lewis’s use of story make hard ideas more palatable? Why might this be so? How does this parallel Jesus’ approach?
3. “Why do you think that church people get so tense, so inflexible?” Dan asks Neo. Is this a true or fair description of “church people” in your experience? Why or why not?
4. What is lost when certainty and safety become the chief concerns for Christians and churches? What happens when faith is sanitized? Do you agree with Dan that fear of “heresy and sin creeping into the camp” is a legitimate concern? Why or why not?
5. How would you answer Dan’s question: “How do we remain open and accepting of people without compromising and condoning sin?” How does the messiness of people playing by different sets of rules (p. 97) mirror, in Neo’s opinion, the first century church?
6. Neo says the contemporary understanding of sin is truncated (p. 99). What does he mean by this? According to Neo, what is dangerous about a modern understanding of sin (pp. 99-101)? Do you agree? How do you respond to Neo’s desire to include the social, or systemic, nature of sin in the discussion?
7. Neo distinguishes righteousness from goodness. What do you make of this distinction? How does the righteousness Neo describes as modern differ form the righteousness described by Jesus in the story of the Good Samaritan?
2. Dan likes Neo’s sermon on death but can’t imagine preaching it himself. He makes the observation that people are comfortable reading C.S. Lewis in their homes but are less comfortable when his ideas and approach are taken into the pulpit. Why do you think this is the case? Does Lewis’s use of story make hard ideas more palatable? Why might this be so? How does this parallel Jesus’ approach?
3. “Why do you think that church people get so tense, so inflexible?” Dan asks Neo. Is this a true or fair description of “church people” in your experience? Why or why not?
4. What is lost when certainty and safety become the chief concerns for Christians and churches? What happens when faith is sanitized? Do you agree with Dan that fear of “heresy and sin creeping into the camp” is a legitimate concern? Why or why not?
5. How would you answer Dan’s question: “How do we remain open and accepting of people without compromising and condoning sin?” How does the messiness of people playing by different sets of rules (p. 97) mirror, in Neo’s opinion, the first century church?
6. Neo says the contemporary understanding of sin is truncated (p. 99). What does he mean by this? According to Neo, what is dangerous about a modern understanding of sin (pp. 99-101)? Do you agree? How do you respond to Neo’s desire to include the social, or systemic, nature of sin in the discussion?
7. Neo distinguishes righteousness from goodness. What do you make of this distinction? How does the righteousness Neo describes as modern differ form the righteousness described by Jesus in the story of the Good Samaritan?
Chapter 10 – C.S. Lewis in the Pulpit, or, What is Heaven About Anyway?
1. Discussing the nature of the Bible in Chapter 7, Neo distinguishes between the Bible as a book of answers and the Bible as the story of God and his people. In this chapter he clarifies further, stating that he was raised to believe that the central story of the Bible is the saving of individual souls. What does he mean by that? Is your experience similar to Neo’s? Is there an alternative story in the Bible, or even a different understanding of what salvation is? If so, what might it be?
2. Neo identifies several issues that are problematic for the view of salvation he was raised under: it is too selfish, it is too preoccupied with the individual, and its scope is all too otherworldy. What is missing, according to Neo, in this view of salvation? Do you agree or disagree? How might the modern culture of the West, with all that it emphasizes, produce such a view of salvation?
3. Neo articulates a more holistic and encompassing view of salvation: while affirming the spiritual and eternal aspects of salvation, he proposes that it has physical and temporal dimensions as well. Is there a danger associated with a view of salvation that emphasizes only the spiritual and eternal? What about the opposite extreme? Can you think of examples of these views in different theological traditions? Do you agree that the Biblical view of salvation is comprehensive of both?
4. If we are to have a different, more holistic, and comprehensive view of salvation, Neo asserts that we must have a better understanding of the kingdom of God and how the church relates to the kingdom. What is the kingdom of God? Is it different than the church? What are some of the metaphors Jesus used to describe the kingdom?
5. Some Christians believe the church equals the kingdom. Others disassociate the two completely. Neo again proposes a third option, an alternative to what he sees as two unacceptable choices. What is Neo’s third version? How is it consonant or dissonant with some of the metaphors Jesus uses to describe the kingdom?
6. Dan has to know: “Do you believe that people of other religions will go to heaven?” Neo responds by giving Dan a tape of a sermon he preached, called “Death.” Do you think Neo is proposing that heaven and hell are the same place? Why or why not? What would be the effect of believing that God is like Aslan as pictured in the C.S. Lewis story at the end of Neo’s sermon?
2. Neo identifies several issues that are problematic for the view of salvation he was raised under: it is too selfish, it is too preoccupied with the individual, and its scope is all too otherworldy. What is missing, according to Neo, in this view of salvation? Do you agree or disagree? How might the modern culture of the West, with all that it emphasizes, produce such a view of salvation?
3. Neo articulates a more holistic and encompassing view of salvation: while affirming the spiritual and eternal aspects of salvation, he proposes that it has physical and temporal dimensions as well. Is there a danger associated with a view of salvation that emphasizes only the spiritual and eternal? What about the opposite extreme? Can you think of examples of these views in different theological traditions? Do you agree that the Biblical view of salvation is comprehensive of both?
4. If we are to have a different, more holistic, and comprehensive view of salvation, Neo asserts that we must have a better understanding of the kingdom of God and how the church relates to the kingdom. What is the kingdom of God? Is it different than the church? What are some of the metaphors Jesus used to describe the kingdom?
5. Some Christians believe the church equals the kingdom. Others disassociate the two completely. Neo again proposes a third option, an alternative to what he sees as two unacceptable choices. What is Neo’s third version? How is it consonant or dissonant with some of the metaphors Jesus uses to describe the kingdom?
6. Dan has to know: “Do you believe that people of other religions will go to heaven?” Neo responds by giving Dan a tape of a sermon he preached, called “Death.” Do you think Neo is proposing that heaven and hell are the same place? Why or why not? What would be the effect of believing that God is like Aslan as pictured in the C.S. Lewis story at the end of Neo’s sermon?
Chapter 9 – Redeeming Our Culture Over Dinner
1. Carol confesses to Dan that she has been praying for him, telling God that Dan’s questing for truth is a function of his love for God. She says to God, “If he didn’t love you, if he didn’t love the truth so much, he would just play the game, just fulfill the role . . . he is suffering because he really wants the truth.” Carol suggests that Dan could actually be “falling into God,” not falling away. Do you think Carol’s assessment of the source of Dan’s struggles is accurate? How might a time of doubt and intense questioning result in a person’s “falling into God”?
2. Part of Dan’s suffering comes from the real-life implications attached to his role as a pastor, where changes in theology have serious ramifications. What are some of the ramifications pastors and other leaders face when they begin to engage in dialogues about changes in theology? Should these concerns overshadow (in this instance) Dan’s search for truth? How difficult might it be to live in this tension?
3. As Dan, Carol, and Neo discuss “organized religion” the topic naturally shifts to culture. On each end of the religious spectrum are ways of engaging with culture. One way is to accommodate or serve the culture on its own terms; the other way is to completely disengage from the dominant culture and set up a subculture. Neo says that religion, Christianity specifically, is not a matter of “. . . private comfort or political power. It’s a matter of revolutionary mission” (p. 73). What does Neo mean by that? Can you think of examples of Christianity as private comfort and political power? Have you ever experienced Christianity as revolutionary mission?
4. How do you respond to the story of the Ugandan dancers and the Native American pastors? Has exposure to another culture ever caused you to question some of your underlying assumptions about what is essential and what is cultural?
5. Reread the story (pp. 76-77) that leads up to Dan’s statement: “Wouldn’t it be ironic if, in the name of Christ, we try to conserve and preserve the very same native cultures in the 21st century that we tried to wipe out in the 19th and 20th centuries? How do you respond to this idea?
6. Neo says that Buddhism is more than a culte; Buddhism is also a culture. He goes on to suggest that Jesus can invade a culture (Buddhist, for example) and spark a new and authentic expression of Christianity. How might an expression of Christianity from a Buddhist or Islamic culture challenge a Western European version of Christianity? Is this already happening?
7. Carol and Dan worry about syncretism, that is, blending pure Christianity with pagan elements. Neo replies that “. . . syncretism is usually what Christians who are thoroughly immersed in one culture talk about when Christianity is being influenced by other cultures.” Is there such a thing as “pure Christianity”? How does Neo suggest that the church can engage culture and avoid losing its identity through syncretism? Do you think he is being overly optimistic? Do you see other ways the church can both maintain its identity and engage in mission in the midst of conforming cultural forces?
2. Part of Dan’s suffering comes from the real-life implications attached to his role as a pastor, where changes in theology have serious ramifications. What are some of the ramifications pastors and other leaders face when they begin to engage in dialogues about changes in theology? Should these concerns overshadow (in this instance) Dan’s search for truth? How difficult might it be to live in this tension?
3. As Dan, Carol, and Neo discuss “organized religion” the topic naturally shifts to culture. On each end of the religious spectrum are ways of engaging with culture. One way is to accommodate or serve the culture on its own terms; the other way is to completely disengage from the dominant culture and set up a subculture. Neo says that religion, Christianity specifically, is not a matter of “. . . private comfort or political power. It’s a matter of revolutionary mission” (p. 73). What does Neo mean by that? Can you think of examples of Christianity as private comfort and political power? Have you ever experienced Christianity as revolutionary mission?
4. How do you respond to the story of the Ugandan dancers and the Native American pastors? Has exposure to another culture ever caused you to question some of your underlying assumptions about what is essential and what is cultural?
5. Reread the story (pp. 76-77) that leads up to Dan’s statement: “Wouldn’t it be ironic if, in the name of Christ, we try to conserve and preserve the very same native cultures in the 21st century that we tried to wipe out in the 19th and 20th centuries? How do you respond to this idea?
6. Neo says that Buddhism is more than a culte; Buddhism is also a culture. He goes on to suggest that Jesus can invade a culture (Buddhist, for example) and spark a new and authentic expression of Christianity. How might an expression of Christianity from a Buddhist or Islamic culture challenge a Western European version of Christianity? Is this already happening?
7. Carol and Dan worry about syncretism, that is, blending pure Christianity with pagan elements. Neo replies that “. . . syncretism is usually what Christians who are thoroughly immersed in one culture talk about when Christianity is being influenced by other cultures.” Is there such a thing as “pure Christianity”? How does Neo suggest that the church can engage culture and avoid losing its identity through syncretism? Do you think he is being overly optimistic? Do you see other ways the church can both maintain its identity and engage in mission in the midst of conforming cultural forces?
Chapter 8 – Yeah, But What About the Other Guys?
1. Several times in the course of this discussion about other religions Dan gets aggressive, hostile and ultimately violent. Why does this topic provoke such strong reactions from Dan? Neo tells Dan he feels like “. . . we just switched gears from two friends talking sincerely and openly to a kind of inquisition.” Have you ever experienced this? What were you discussing? What was the result?
2. “Dan, when it comes to other religions, the challenge in modernity was to prove that we’re right and they’re wrong. But I think we have a different challenge in postmodernity. The question isn’t so much whether we’re right but whether we’re good.” What does Neo mean by this? Do you agree that this is an important challenge for Christians? Why or why not?
3. Does this distinction between right and good set up a false dichotomy, or have Christians been so far to the “right” side of the continuum that there must be a corrective swing? Do people who are not Christians view Christianity as a force for good in the world? Why or why not? Is this fair? What has your experience been?
4. Neo defines truth as more than mere factual accuracy; rather, he suggests, truth is ultimately being in sync with God. This presents an issue for Dan, who sees evangelism as trying to convince people of the truth (that is, the factual accuracy of our information about God.). Do you agree that in the modern era, Christian evangelism has largely been about convincing people of the truth?
5. Neo suggests that evangelism is more dance than conquest or argument. How does the dance image work for you? How do you respond to Neo’s description of some evangelism as “assault”?
6. How do you respond to Neo’s view of other religions?
7. Neo relates the story of a conversation with a Jewish man who was very hostile to the Christian faith due to his experiences of persecution. Dan asks if Neo felt obligated to defend the faith to this man. What do you make of this whole encounter? How do you react if you are the Jewish man in the story? How do you react to Dan’s impulse to “defend the faith”? What about Neo’s decision to model a different kind of Christianity for the Jewish man? Neo says, “Christianity isn’t salvation . . . the good news is.” He later elaborates: “I believe Jesus is the Savior, not Christianity.” How do you respond to these statements?
8. Why do you think Dan responds so intensely at the end of this chapter?
2. “Dan, when it comes to other religions, the challenge in modernity was to prove that we’re right and they’re wrong. But I think we have a different challenge in postmodernity. The question isn’t so much whether we’re right but whether we’re good.” What does Neo mean by this? Do you agree that this is an important challenge for Christians? Why or why not?
3. Does this distinction between right and good set up a false dichotomy, or have Christians been so far to the “right” side of the continuum that there must be a corrective swing? Do people who are not Christians view Christianity as a force for good in the world? Why or why not? Is this fair? What has your experience been?
4. Neo defines truth as more than mere factual accuracy; rather, he suggests, truth is ultimately being in sync with God. This presents an issue for Dan, who sees evangelism as trying to convince people of the truth (that is, the factual accuracy of our information about God.). Do you agree that in the modern era, Christian evangelism has largely been about convincing people of the truth?
5. Neo suggests that evangelism is more dance than conquest or argument. How does the dance image work for you? How do you respond to Neo’s description of some evangelism as “assault”?
6. How do you respond to Neo’s view of other religions?
7. Neo relates the story of a conversation with a Jewish man who was very hostile to the Christian faith due to his experiences of persecution. Dan asks if Neo felt obligated to defend the faith to this man. What do you make of this whole encounter? How do you react if you are the Jewish man in the story? How do you react to Dan’s impulse to “defend the faith”? What about Neo’s decision to model a different kind of Christianity for the Jewish man? Neo says, “Christianity isn’t salvation . . . the good news is.” He later elaborates: “I believe Jesus is the Savior, not Christianity.” How do you respond to these statements?
8. Why do you think Dan responds so intensely at the end of this chapter?
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Chapter 7 – Letting the Bible Read Us
1. For Dan, and for the majority of evangelical Protestants, the Bible is foundational to the faith of Christianity. While affirming the centrality of the Scriptures, Neo questions the value of using a word or metaphor like foundation to adequately express the role of the Bible and what is contained therein. Summarize the difference between the building or foundation image and the web image for describing the role of the Bible in Christian thought and practice.
2. In questioning the adequacy of the foundational metaphor, Neo seems to undermine Dan’s faith. Is there a danger in having a faith that rests merely on one foundation (such as the Bible, authority, or an interpretive scheme)? How might a faith that is built on one foundation crumble when that foundation is challenged? Have you seen or experienced such a crumbling of faith?
3. In talking about the factors that contribute to a stable faith, Neo points to the historical figure of John Wesley who emphasized Scripture, tradition, reason and spiritual experience (now known as Wesley’s quadrangle). What has been the foundation of your faith? How has that expressed itself in your life?
4. What does Neo mean when he asks, “What if, instead of reading the Bible, you let the Bible read you?”
5. Neo engages Dan in a little thought experiment by asking him to describe the postures of a scientist and a detective toward a subject in their given fields. Are these similar to postures we have taken toward the Bible? What do you think of Neo’s suggestion that we approach Scripture in a way analogous to how a teenage boy approaches a teenage girl? What other analogies might we use?
6. Dan asks Neo a rapid-fire set of questions about seeing the Bible as story (p. 58). How would you reply to Dan’s questions? What is the story? What is the difference between getting the story and getting answers? Is there really a difference between a story and an answer?
7. Neo says he “. . . found the pastorate a pretty hard place to be a growing, thinking, honest Christian.” Reread his reason for leaving professional ministry (p. 59). What does this say about our expectations for leaders? Are there any correlations between how we treat the Bible as a modern text and the expectations we place on leaders? If so, what are they?
2. In questioning the adequacy of the foundational metaphor, Neo seems to undermine Dan’s faith. Is there a danger in having a faith that rests merely on one foundation (such as the Bible, authority, or an interpretive scheme)? How might a faith that is built on one foundation crumble when that foundation is challenged? Have you seen or experienced such a crumbling of faith?
3. In talking about the factors that contribute to a stable faith, Neo points to the historical figure of John Wesley who emphasized Scripture, tradition, reason and spiritual experience (now known as Wesley’s quadrangle). What has been the foundation of your faith? How has that expressed itself in your life?
4. What does Neo mean when he asks, “What if, instead of reading the Bible, you let the Bible read you?”
5. Neo engages Dan in a little thought experiment by asking him to describe the postures of a scientist and a detective toward a subject in their given fields. Are these similar to postures we have taken toward the Bible? What do you think of Neo’s suggestion that we approach Scripture in a way analogous to how a teenage boy approaches a teenage girl? What other analogies might we use?
6. Dan asks Neo a rapid-fire set of questions about seeing the Bible as story (p. 58). How would you reply to Dan’s questions? What is the story? What is the difference between getting the story and getting answers? Is there really a difference between a story and an answer?
7. Neo says he “. . . found the pastorate a pretty hard place to be a growing, thinking, honest Christian.” Reread his reason for leaving professional ministry (p. 59). What does this say about our expectations for leaders? Are there any correlations between how we treat the Bible as a modern text and the expectations we place on leaders? If so, what are they?
Chapter 6 – Hot Words about Biblical Interpretation
1. In Chapter One, Dan seems intent on pigeonholing Neo as a “liberal Episcopalian” until Neo reminds him that “liberals can be fundamentalists, too.” In this chapter, Dan asks Neo to distinguish between how “postmodern Christians” respond to various issues, as compared to “traditional Christians.” Neo bristles at the labels, challenging Dan about his use of language. Why are labels so appealing? What is the function of a label? In what ways are labels part of modernity? Why is Neo so wary of them? What are the alternatives to labels?
2. Neo contends that all the debate in the church takes place on a line. In this mode of debate, the issue becomes finding the right point on that line and defending it. What does he mean that all debate takes place on a line? Is Neo right to assert that point-defending is pointless? Why or why not? What points have you defended or do you feel compelled to defend? What has the result been? This mode of debate can also lead to a view that those to the right of us are fundamentalists and everyone to our left, liberals. Do you agree or disagree?
3. According to Dan, one of the biggest “points” of debate is the Bible, especially between “conservatives” and “liberals” (p. 48). Characterize the caricatures of conservative and liberal debates about and approaches to the Bible (pp. 78-79). How does Neo put context around these approaches?
4. Dan states that the Bible is the foundation for everything and that liberals sift and sort through the Bible, picking and choosing that which suits them. Neo’s response is not to disagree, but to point out that evangelicals do the same thing. Thus the argument, according to Neo, is less about the Bible and more about the superiority of one grid over another. How do you respond to that?
5. Neo refers to the use of the Bible to defend slavery in the nineteenth century. How would you respond to the question, “How are you sure that some of your ironclad interpretations today aren’t similarly fueling injustice?” What could posterity judge Christians today with justifying or “overlooking”?
6. Issues of authority are enormous in Neo and Dan’s conversation. Neo says that conservatives look at the Bible the way medieval Catholics looked at the church and the Pope: infallible, inerrant, and absolutely authoritative. He claims that liberals approach the Scriptures as a dated collection of artifacts that, while inspiring, are not authoritative. Why is the issue of authority so problematic? Respond to Neo’s question: “What if the issue isn’t a book that we interpret with amazing creativity but rather the will of God, the intent of God, the desire of God, the wisdom of God—maybe we could say the kingdom of God?”
7. Neo says that approaching the Bible as the story of God and his people is better than the “answer book” approach. Do you agree? What do we risk losing when we relinquish the answer-book approach?
2. Neo contends that all the debate in the church takes place on a line. In this mode of debate, the issue becomes finding the right point on that line and defending it. What does he mean that all debate takes place on a line? Is Neo right to assert that point-defending is pointless? Why or why not? What points have you defended or do you feel compelled to defend? What has the result been? This mode of debate can also lead to a view that those to the right of us are fundamentalists and everyone to our left, liberals. Do you agree or disagree?
3. According to Dan, one of the biggest “points” of debate is the Bible, especially between “conservatives” and “liberals” (p. 48). Characterize the caricatures of conservative and liberal debates about and approaches to the Bible (pp. 78-79). How does Neo put context around these approaches?
4. Dan states that the Bible is the foundation for everything and that liberals sift and sort through the Bible, picking and choosing that which suits them. Neo’s response is not to disagree, but to point out that evangelicals do the same thing. Thus the argument, according to Neo, is less about the Bible and more about the superiority of one grid over another. How do you respond to that?
5. Neo refers to the use of the Bible to defend slavery in the nineteenth century. How would you respond to the question, “How are you sure that some of your ironclad interpretations today aren’t similarly fueling injustice?” What could posterity judge Christians today with justifying or “overlooking”?
6. Issues of authority are enormous in Neo and Dan’s conversation. Neo says that conservatives look at the Bible the way medieval Catholics looked at the church and the Pope: infallible, inerrant, and absolutely authoritative. He claims that liberals approach the Scriptures as a dated collection of artifacts that, while inspiring, are not authoritative. Why is the issue of authority so problematic? Respond to Neo’s question: “What if the issue isn’t a book that we interpret with amazing creativity but rather the will of God, the intent of God, the desire of God, the wisdom of God—maybe we could say the kingdom of God?”
7. Neo says that approaching the Bible as the story of God and his people is better than the “answer book” approach. Do you agree? What do we risk losing when we relinquish the answer-book approach?
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Chapter 5 - Neo Worries About Keeping Up With Jesus
1. One student expresses doubt about the significance of the changes Neo describes. Is Neo guilty of what this student sees as every generation's tendancy to perceive itself as living in a pivotal age of historic change and exaggerated importance? Is this an example of Lewis's notion of "chronological snobbery"? (See Chpter Four questions for an explanation of "chronological snobbery".) Discuss Neo's distinction between change and transition. Can you think of specific examples of each?
2. A young woman asks Neo if he is scared by all the talk of change. While affirming the dangers inherent in times of transition, Neo wonders aloud about the danger of simultaneously upholding the status quo. What are the risks of moving forward? What are the risks of maintaining the status quo? Are there other options? What might those be?
3. Even though she couches her question in humor, the same young woman seems more concerned with what she calls "major heresy". Heresy is a loaded and powerful word that can change the entire tone of a conversation by instilling fear. The word heresy is derived from the Greek word hairesis and means "to choose for oneself." It has come to mean departure from accepted or orthodox dogma, or teaching. What has Neo said that makes the young woman fear heresy? Is the word heresy bandied around to freely in Christian circles today? Why or why not?
4. In the modern era, "faith" has often come to mean an accepted set of doctrinal affirmations about Jesus, as opposed to a way of being or behaving in response to Jesus. Do you agree with this assessment?
5. Neo confesses that he believes the Holy Spirit is with us, as Jesus promised, and is leading us into a time of change (pg. 42). How do you respond to Neo's fear of lagging behind the movement of Jesus and the Holy Spirit? Do you see examples of this in the gospels or the Acts of the Apostles? When did Jesus' opponents and even his disciples have a difficult time keeping up with him? What were the issues and activities that distressed them?
2. A young woman asks Neo if he is scared by all the talk of change. While affirming the dangers inherent in times of transition, Neo wonders aloud about the danger of simultaneously upholding the status quo. What are the risks of moving forward? What are the risks of maintaining the status quo? Are there other options? What might those be?
3. Even though she couches her question in humor, the same young woman seems more concerned with what she calls "major heresy". Heresy is a loaded and powerful word that can change the entire tone of a conversation by instilling fear. The word heresy is derived from the Greek word hairesis and means "to choose for oneself." It has come to mean departure from accepted or orthodox dogma, or teaching. What has Neo said that makes the young woman fear heresy? Is the word heresy bandied around to freely in Christian circles today? Why or why not?
4. In the modern era, "faith" has often come to mean an accepted set of doctrinal affirmations about Jesus, as opposed to a way of being or behaving in response to Jesus. Do you agree with this assessment?
5. Neo confesses that he believes the Holy Spirit is with us, as Jesus promised, and is leading us into a time of change (pg. 42). How do you respond to Neo's fear of lagging behind the movement of Jesus and the Holy Spirit? Do you see examples of this in the gospels or the Acts of the Apostles? When did Jesus' opponents and even his disciples have a difficult time keeping up with him? What were the issues and activities that distressed them?
Chapter 4 - What A Difference A Worldview Makes
1. At the philosphical heart of this book is the issue of worldviews, or how cultures create mental maps that function as working models of reality. Neo describes the transition from modernity to postmodernity by likening it to the last major worldview transition: from the medieval world to the modern one. Why is is helpful to compare our situation to another as we try to understand our present context?
2. Neo lists seven major factors that contribute to the shift from a medieval world to a modern world (pp. 29-30). Review the broader general categories and the specific event within each category that were transformational for the medieval world. Consider how each of these events are significant individually, and taken together, how they altered people's understanding of reality"?
3. Neo also identified recent events that fit the seven transitional categories (pp. 30-31). Can you think of other specific events of recent years that fit these categories? Why are each of these events significant individually, and taken together, how are they altering our understanding of our own "reality"?
4. Dan is distracted by something Neo says during his talk. He is reminded of a time when one of his theological heroes was criticized, specifically the work of Francis Schaeffer as he sought to articulate "the Christian worldviews". Why is Neo suspicious of such grand aims as Schaeffers?
5. Neo enlists the ideas of C.S. Lewis to illustrated "...how one's subjective posture affects what one sees and 'knows objectively'". What does that mean? Neo's words work to warn us of what Lewis later termed "chronological snobbery", that is, the temptation to think that because something is chronologically more recent, its claims to truth and goodness are automatically of greater value. Is this a significant point? How is modernity guilty of chronological snobbery? How can Lewis's words challenge us in this discussion?
6. Neo concludes by challenging his young audience to get buys building a new ship rather than trying to keep the old one afloat. Do you agree with this? Why or why not?
2. Neo lists seven major factors that contribute to the shift from a medieval world to a modern world (pp. 29-30). Review the broader general categories and the specific event within each category that were transformational for the medieval world. Consider how each of these events are significant individually, and taken together, how they altered people's understanding of reality"?
3. Neo also identified recent events that fit the seven transitional categories (pp. 30-31). Can you think of other specific events of recent years that fit these categories? Why are each of these events significant individually, and taken together, how are they altering our understanding of our own "reality"?
4. Dan is distracted by something Neo says during his talk. He is reminded of a time when one of his theological heroes was criticized, specifically the work of Francis Schaeffer as he sought to articulate "the Christian worldviews". Why is Neo suspicious of such grand aims as Schaeffers?
5. Neo enlists the ideas of C.S. Lewis to illustrated "...how one's subjective posture affects what one sees and 'knows objectively'". What does that mean? Neo's words work to warn us of what Lewis later termed "chronological snobbery", that is, the temptation to think that because something is chronologically more recent, its claims to truth and goodness are automatically of greater value. Is this a significant point? How is modernity guilty of chronological snobbery? How can Lewis's words challenge us in this discussion?
6. Neo concludes by challenging his young audience to get buys building a new ship rather than trying to keep the old one afloat. Do you agree with this? Why or why not?
Chapter 3 - Dan Discovers Where the Cross Meets The Dream Catcher
1. As Dan journals about his response to his conversation with Neo, he imagines the potential responses and objections many of his Protestant friends might have: "We're not modern - we're biblical! We believe in 'sola Scriptura'! We follow the New Testament!" Did you have any of the same reactions, or others? If so, which ones? What do you think of Dan's analysis that the way we approach the Bible is severly conditioned by modernity?
2. Dan wonders if he can trust God beyond his own theological understanding. What does that mean? Is it possible?
3. Dan says, "I remember hearing a saying somewhere that he who marrie the spirit of the age is sure to be a widow in the next." What does that mean? Is this a good metaphor? Why or why not? Inherent in this quote is an assumption that there is a context-free position from which to assess the age in which one lives. Is there such a place? This quote also seems to imply, albeit subtly, that the preferable position from which to engage the world we inhabit is a place free of commitment and risk. Again, is there such a place, and if so, is it even desirable?
4. Reread the journal entry from September 7 (pp. 24-25). Dan highlights the differences between how we live and use language within the church (within a largely modern framework) and how we live and use language outside the church (the postmodern world). Do you agree there is a "disconnect" between how we talk about reality and how we live in reality? If so, where do you see the discrepancies?
5. The chapter ends with Dan sitting ona panel next to a prominent Christian thinker and leader for whom he has a great deal of respect. When asked whether they are optimistic or pessimistic about what they see coming in the new millenium, they have very different responses. How do you reconcile the two different worlds these people describe? Which story is more resonant for you? What story do you hear told more frequently in Christian circles? Why do you think this is so?
6. Reflect on and respond to the Native American dream catcher hanging by the cross.
7. Compare Dan's posture from Chapter One to Chapter Three. What has changed? Has your posture changed? If so, how?
2. Dan wonders if he can trust God beyond his own theological understanding. What does that mean? Is it possible?
3. Dan says, "I remember hearing a saying somewhere that he who marrie the spirit of the age is sure to be a widow in the next." What does that mean? Is this a good metaphor? Why or why not? Inherent in this quote is an assumption that there is a context-free position from which to assess the age in which one lives. Is there such a place? This quote also seems to imply, albeit subtly, that the preferable position from which to engage the world we inhabit is a place free of commitment and risk. Again, is there such a place, and if so, is it even desirable?
4. Reread the journal entry from September 7 (pp. 24-25). Dan highlights the differences between how we live and use language within the church (within a largely modern framework) and how we live and use language outside the church (the postmodern world). Do you agree there is a "disconnect" between how we talk about reality and how we live in reality? If so, where do you see the discrepancies?
5. The chapter ends with Dan sitting ona panel next to a prominent Christian thinker and leader for whom he has a great deal of respect. When asked whether they are optimistic or pessimistic about what they see coming in the new millenium, they have very different responses. How do you reconcile the two different worlds these people describe? Which story is more resonant for you? What story do you hear told more frequently in Christian circles? Why do you think this is so?
6. Reflect on and respond to the Native American dream catcher hanging by the cross.
7. Compare Dan's posture from Chapter One to Chapter Three. What has changed? Has your posture changed? If so, how?
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Chapter 2 - Entering That Awkward Age, or Does Jonah Eat Bagels?
1. The topic of Dan's fear resurfaces in Chapter Two. As a pastor, Dan always feels the pressure to be the one who has the "answers". Neo seems to think this is a particularly modern sensibility, an age characterized by "debate, dialectic, argument, and discussion". What is the role of a leader in the church? Do we pay pastors to be the answer-men and -women? What is the cost of such an approach? How might the way we train such leaders dictate the kind of leaders we produce?
2. Sometimes a well-formulated question can be more productive than a matter-of-fact answer, even when it is "correct". Do you agree or disagree? Why?
3. Neo locates the greatest source of Dan's struggle as an issue of "immigration" from a faith shaped by the cultural forces of modernity into the reality of the postmodern world. After reading Neo's ten characteristics of modernity (pp. 16-18), do you agree with his assessment that Dan is facing an immigration problem? Have you ever struggled in the same way? If so, how have you described your struggle to others, if at all?
4. Neo divides the timeline of history into five eras: prehistory, the ancient world, the medieval world, the modern world, and the postmodern world. Have you ever considered history in these ways? What is helpful about these classificiations? Is there any danger in simplifying history in this way?
5. Consider the ten phrases introduced by Neo to describe modernity. Do you see examples of these themes in contemporary life, and in the church in particular? If so, where?
2. Sometimes a well-formulated question can be more productive than a matter-of-fact answer, even when it is "correct". Do you agree or disagree? Why?
3. Neo locates the greatest source of Dan's struggle as an issue of "immigration" from a faith shaped by the cultural forces of modernity into the reality of the postmodern world. After reading Neo's ten characteristics of modernity (pp. 16-18), do you agree with his assessment that Dan is facing an immigration problem? Have you ever struggled in the same way? If so, how have you described your struggle to others, if at all?
4. Neo divides the timeline of history into five eras: prehistory, the ancient world, the medieval world, the modern world, and the postmodern world. Have you ever considered history in these ways? What is helpful about these classificiations? Is there any danger in simplifying history in this way?
5. Consider the ten phrases introduced by Neo to describe modernity. Do you see examples of these themes in contemporary life, and in the church in particular? If so, where?
Chapter 1 - Sometime The Peacock Wish To Be The Seagull
1. An important theme throughout the book is the importance of dialogue around matters of faith. Everyone seems hungry to talk but afraid of the risks involved. Have you had relationships that felt safe enough to talk about your struggles and doubts regarding your faith? What made them so?
2. As the book opens, Dan is isolated; his wife is the only person with whom he discusses his difficulties. As a pastor he does not feel safe in having such dialogues with other people and as a result, he seems to fight loneliness and anger. Would you agree that pastors are not, to quote Neo, "regular people"? Why or why not? Does this tension contribute to the difficulty Dan has with self-disclosure? What risks are involved when a person cannot be honest?
3. Neo says to Dan, "Well, Reverend, it sounds like you could use a friend." In response to this simple invitation Dan is overwhelmed emotionally. How does the invitation to friendship change the nature of conversation? What kind of "posture" do friends take toward one another? What postures do we normally assume when we talk about matters of faith? What do you think it means to use a term like "posture" when talking about how people engage each other relationally.
4. One of the hallmarks of Christianity in the modern era is a focusing on the idea of truth. At the same time there seems to be a corresponding absence of honesty, especially when facing what we don't know or understand. Do you agree with this assessment? Why or why not?
5. Neo defies easy stereotyping: he's a scientist who believes firmly in evolution, and at the same time he is a committed Christian who firmly believes in God's direct involvement in creation. This position causes him to get flack from all sides. Without engaging in all the technical arguments of the debate over creation vs. evolution, do you believe it is possible for a person to hold these beliefs and still be considered a Christian? What other issues have become litmus tests or dividing lines for Christians?
2. As the book opens, Dan is isolated; his wife is the only person with whom he discusses his difficulties. As a pastor he does not feel safe in having such dialogues with other people and as a result, he seems to fight loneliness and anger. Would you agree that pastors are not, to quote Neo, "regular people"? Why or why not? Does this tension contribute to the difficulty Dan has with self-disclosure? What risks are involved when a person cannot be honest?
3. Neo says to Dan, "Well, Reverend, it sounds like you could use a friend." In response to this simple invitation Dan is overwhelmed emotionally. How does the invitation to friendship change the nature of conversation? What kind of "posture" do friends take toward one another? What postures do we normally assume when we talk about matters of faith? What do you think it means to use a term like "posture" when talking about how people engage each other relationally.
4. One of the hallmarks of Christianity in the modern era is a focusing on the idea of truth. At the same time there seems to be a corresponding absence of honesty, especially when facing what we don't know or understand. Do you agree with this assessment? Why or why not?
5. Neo defies easy stereotyping: he's a scientist who believes firmly in evolution, and at the same time he is a committed Christian who firmly believes in God's direct involvement in creation. This position causes him to get flack from all sides. Without engaging in all the technical arguments of the debate over creation vs. evolution, do you believe it is possible for a person to hold these beliefs and still be considered a Christian? What other issues have become litmus tests or dividing lines for Christians?
Introduction
"If I could seriously ponder ending my life, than I can do anything. I can change anything in my life. So instead of ending my life altogether, I'll end my life as I've been living it and start a new kind of life. I can now see a third alternative to the status quo and suicide." -Brian McLaren, Introduction (pg. xiv)
1. Why am I not the same kind of Christian I used to be?
2. What might a new kind of Christian be likew?
3. How might one become a new kind of Christian if one is so inclined?
1. Why am I not the same kind of Christian I used to be?
2. What might a new kind of Christian be likew?
3. How might one become a new kind of Christian if one is so inclined?
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
A New Kind of Christian
"A New Kind of Christian's conversation between a pastor and his daughter's high school science teacher reveals the wisdom for life's most pressing spiritual questions can come from the most unlikely sources. This stirring fable captures a new spirit of Christianity - where personal, daily interaction with God is more important than institutional church structures, where faith is more about a way of life than a system of believe, where being authentically good is more important than being doctrinally "right", and where one's direction is more important than one's present location. Brian McLaren's delightful account offers a wise and wondrous approach for revitalizing Christian spiritual life and Christian congregations."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
