The Logic of Intersubjectivity. Darren M. Slade

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ War, esp. x, 18‒19, 34‒40, 139, 144‒45, 169 and “Perspicuity of Scripture,” 141‒58.

      68. Howe, “A Review of A Generous Orthodoxy,” 81‒102. Howe ends his article by stating, “Some may disagree with my review, but if they do, that just means they are Postmodern, unthinking, wishy-washy, McLarenites” (p. 102).

      69. Geisler and Howe, “A Postmodern View of Scripture,” 63‒79; “A Postmodern View of Scripture,” in Evangelicals Engaging Emergent, 92–108.

      70. Christy, “Neoorthopraxy and Brian D. McLaren.”

      71. See Stewart, “The Influence of Newbigin’s Missiology,” esp. 25‒27, 86‒111, 225‒26, 238, 255.

      72. Blackwell, “Return or Rereading.”

      73. Hatch, “Hearing God Amid Many Voices,” 23‒47.

      74. Burson, “Apologetics and the New Kind of Christian.”

      75. For a history and schematization of Emergent Christianity, see Clawson, “A Brief History of the Emerging Church,” 17‒44; “Emerging from What?”; and Burson, Brian McLaren in Focus, 273‒83.

      76. As Tony Jones amusingly quips, “Evangelical pastors have to read [McLaren’s] A New Kind of Christian wrapped in a Playboy cover” (Jones, The New Christians, 51).

      77. Gibbs and Bolger, Emerging Churches, 329.

      78. Bradley and Muller, Church History, 29‒31.

      79. Brian D. McLaren, email to author, January 24, 2018. As an informal consultant, McLaren was able to provide guidance and further insights into his thought processes. However, this book’s assertions and judgments (in their final form) are solely mine and, thus, any errors or misrepresentations of McLaren’s work are solely those of this author and not of anyone else.

      80. Clark, To Know and Love God, 172‒73.

      81. This assumption is not unjustified since McLaren seeks to “discuss questions like what faith is, how faith and knowledge are related, whether God exists, and how thinking people can explore and evaluate various ideas about God” (FFS §Intro, 25). As Scott Burson remarks, “In 1974, [McLaren] enrolled at the University of Maryland originally as a philosophy major, but soon shifted to English while maintaining an interest in the aesthetic dimensions of philosophy” (Burson, “Apologetics and the New Kind of Christian,” 272).

      82. Peterson et al., Reason and Religious Belief, 10; Rowe, Philosophy of Religion, 1‒2; Clark, To Know and Love God, 297.

      83. See for example, Aldwinckle, “Is There a Christian Philosophy?,” 233‒42.

      84. Fitch, The End of Evangelicalism?, 8‒9.

      85. Kee, Christian Origins in Sociological Perspective, 26.

      86. Cf. Gleason, “How St. Mary’s College,” 257‒60; Turcotte, “Sociologie et historie des religions,” 43‒73; and Marti and Ganiel, The Deconstructed Church, 197‒208.

      87. Unlike most other interactions with McLaren’s work, this study recognizes that a simple scrutiny of his theological deductions is inadequate without consideration of the cultural and practical contexts within which McLaren must live out his religious beliefs. In other words, religion is ultimately a lived experience that must work in reality apart from the theoretical musings of the intellectual mind; and since McLaren does not endorse an analytic approach to religiosity anyway, investigations into his beliefs would be incomplete without relating his philosophy to the sociocultural, historical, and practical contexts of everyday life. See Cottingham, Philosophy of Religion, 1‒24. For an elaboration on socio-historical investigations, see Slade, “What is the Socio-Historical Method,” 1‒15.

      88. As Kierkegaard once wrote, “A pseudonym is excellent for accentuating a point, a stance, a position. He is a poetic person. Therefore, it is not as if I personally said: This is what I am fighting for” (Hong and Hong, Søren Kierkegaard’s Journals and Papers, 6:6421). Cf. Clowney, “A Critical Estimate,” 32‒33; Vardy, The SPCK Introduction to Kierkegaard, 49; Roberts, Emerging Prophet, 10n21.

      89. Kierkegaard wrote something similar: “Thus in the pseudonymous books there is not a single word by me. . . .if it should occur to anyone to want to quote a particular passage from the books, it is my wish, my prayer, that he will do me the kindness of citing the respective pseudonymous author’s name, not mine” (Kierkegaard, Concluding Unscientific Postscript, 1:626‒27).

      90. Likewise, in the introduction to A New Kind of Christian, McLaren admits that his fictitious story incorporates numerous aspects from his personal life (NKOC §Intro., xvi‒xviii). Thus, these books are semi-autobiographical without McLaren explicitly claiming ownership of the viewpoints expressed therein (see “Becoming Convergent”).

      91. Cf. Bohannon, “Preaching and the Emerging Church,” 61n1.

      92. For detailed explorations of the difference between the “empirical author” and the “implied author” within narrative literature, see Foucault, Archaeology of Knowledge; “What Is an Author?,” 141‒60; Suleiman, The Reader in the Text, Booth, Critical Understanding; The Rhetoric of Fiction; The Company We Keep; and Rimmon-Kenan, Narrative Fiction.

      93. Though McLaren does not argue that his beliefs are self-evident or incorrigible, he does conclude that his philosophy is not self-referentially incoherent, either, especially because of its pragmatic worth for Christian faith (cf. AMP §18, 278; FOWA §1, 4; SMJ §9, 72‒89).

      2

      McLaren СКАЧАТЬ