<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;The Gospel Coalition&#8221; and Post-Christendom: Will it be a Coalition or an Expedition? Some Reflections and Concerns</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/the-gospel-coalition-and-post-christendom-will-it-be-a-coalition-or-expedition-some-reflections-and-concerns/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/the-gospel-coalition-and-post-christendom-will-it-be-a-coalition-or-expedition-some-reflections-and-concerns/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 16:28:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Elephant Room and The Gospel Coalition :: A Perspective from an Interested semi-Outsider &#171; The Blog of Andrew Arndt</title>
		<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/the-gospel-coalition-and-post-christendom-will-it-be-a-coalition-or-expedition-some-reflections-and-concerns/comment-page-2/#comment-381220</link>
		<dc:creator>The Elephant Room and The Gospel Coalition :: A Perspective from an Interested semi-Outsider &#171; The Blog of Andrew Arndt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 18:13:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/?p=500#comment-381220</guid>
		<description>[...] fear &#8211; and sadness &#8211; is that TGC represents the new fundamentalism.  David Fitch, in this post back in 2009, astutely asked the question of TGC whether it would be a &#8220;coalition&#8221; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] fear &#8211; and sadness &#8211; is that TGC represents the new fundamentalism.  David Fitch, in this post back in 2009, astutely asked the question of TGC whether it would be a &#8220;coalition&#8221; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Challenges Facing The Gospel Coalition</title>
		<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/the-gospel-coalition-and-post-christendom-will-it-be-a-coalition-or-expedition-some-reflections-and-concerns/comment-page-2/#comment-95745</link>
		<dc:creator>Challenges Facing The Gospel Coalition</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 10:02:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/?p=500#comment-95745</guid>
		<description>[...] are many other challenges. I enjoy reading people like David Fitch who keep me attuned to some of them. Because we believe in depravity, we shouldn&#8217;t be [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] are many other challenges. I enjoy reading people like David Fitch who keep me attuned to some of them. Because we believe in depravity, we shouldn&#8217;t be [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reclaiming the Mission &#187; The Rob Bell Fiasco: Why We Can&#8217;t Have This Conversation</title>
		<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/the-gospel-coalition-and-post-christendom-will-it-be-a-coalition-or-expedition-some-reflections-and-concerns/comment-page-2/#comment-93848</link>
		<dc:creator>Reclaiming the Mission &#187; The Rob Bell Fiasco: Why We Can&#8217;t Have This Conversation</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 17:10:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/?p=500#comment-93848</guid>
		<description>[...] left to either wander or head for the newer coalitions of the Neo-Reformed. Yet as I&#8217;ve said here, this isn&#8217;t going to take us into Mission. Based in the impulses in both of these movements, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] left to either wander or head for the newer coalitions of the Neo-Reformed. Yet as I&#8217;ve said here, this isn&#8217;t going to take us into Mission. Based in the impulses in both of these movements, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reclaiming the Mission &#187; My 5 years of Blogging: 10 Highlights</title>
		<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/the-gospel-coalition-and-post-christendom-will-it-be-a-coalition-or-expedition-some-reflections-and-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-68794</link>
		<dc:creator>Reclaiming the Mission &#187; My 5 years of Blogging: 10 Highlights</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Dec 2010 15:11:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/?p=500#comment-68794</guid>
		<description>[...] 8. The &#8220;Gospel Coalition&#8221; and Post Christendom. A major concern that has emerged for me on this blog over the last few years  has been the migration of the &#8220;young and restless&#8221; to the New Calvinism in our day. In the aftermath of Emergent, it seems that the disenchanted have found something solid in the Neo-Reformed movement spawned by John Piper, Marc Driscoll and Don Carson.  I see this version of Reformed theology as prone towards retrenchment and defensive Christianity. Instead I see great possibilities in a neo-Anabaptist missional position for the situating of the church for mission in N. America. I have only begun to express my reservations with the New-Reformed theological position and I hope to expand on it this year on the blog. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 8. The &#8220;Gospel Coalition&#8221; and Post Christendom. A major concern that has emerged for me on this blog over the last few years  has been the migration of the &#8220;young and restless&#8221; to the New Calvinism in our day. In the aftermath of Emergent, it seems that the disenchanted have found something solid in the Neo-Reformed movement spawned by John Piper, Marc Driscoll and Don Carson.  I see this version of Reformed theology as prone towards retrenchment and defensive Christianity. Instead I see great possibilities in a neo-Anabaptist missional position for the situating of the church for mission in N. America. I have only begun to express my reservations with the New-Reformed theological position and I hope to expand on it this year on the blog. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reed</title>
		<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/the-gospel-coalition-and-post-christendom-will-it-be-a-coalition-or-expedition-some-reflections-and-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-9502</link>
		<dc:creator>Reed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Aug 2009 02:51:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/?p=500#comment-9502</guid>
		<description>David, I know this post is super-old, but I wanted to chime in. I love TGC, but you raise good points.

I think (&amp; hope) you&#039;re off on #1&amp;2. TGC has a strong &#039;theological vision of ministry&#039; on their website (http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/about/foundation-documents/vision/) that grows out of the awareness that doctrinal statements are not the end-all-be-all (in addition, their doctrinal statement is not Reformed; Arminian individuals and organizations may also affiliated with TGC). Do you think it’s a false dichotomy to pit ‘strict’ theology against missional orientation?

The problem that I see in TGC is that, while they do not exclude non-Reformed people from becoming members, very little (none?) of this is represented in the leadership. I am concerned about the effects of this.

#3 (women pastors) I also think is an issue. TGC’s stance is complementarian, and yet they also claim to represent a ‘broad’ spectrum of evangelicalism. Again, I see mixed signals being sent here, and I don’t say that because I’m egalitarian (I’m not). 

#4 (NPP): Just because Piper and Carson have written against NPP doesn’t mean that that is what they’re primarily (or even secondarily) concerned about in TGC. The concerns of TGC are much more than NPP (although certainly include it). 

#5: Not sure why you think megachurches are so bad, although I have grown to really love small churches. But have you laid out anywhere more fully your reasoning behind this? I&#039;m not sure if I&#039;m quite buying it yet. It seems to me that the Church needs both big and small churches...

What I appreciate about TGC is the theological vision for ministry, mentioned above, and that they are trying very hard to be multi-ethnic and international. In fact, 23% of the people who have registered on the TGC website are from outside North America. It’s a start, anyway. 

The dialogue between Neo-Anabaptists and Neo-Reformed needs to continue; I agree with you. Thanks for your perspective.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David, I know this post is super-old, but I wanted to chime in. I love TGC, but you raise good points.</p>
<p>I think (&amp; hope) you&#8217;re off on #1&amp;2. TGC has a strong &#8216;theological vision of ministry&#8217; on their website (<a href="http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/about/foundation-documents/vision/" rel="nofollow">http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/about/foundation-documents/vision/</a>) that grows out of the awareness that doctrinal statements are not the end-all-be-all (in addition, their doctrinal statement is not Reformed; Arminian individuals and organizations may also affiliated with TGC). Do you think it’s a false dichotomy to pit ‘strict’ theology against missional orientation?</p>
<p>The problem that I see in TGC is that, while they do not exclude non-Reformed people from becoming members, very little (none?) of this is represented in the leadership. I am concerned about the effects of this.</p>
<p>#3 (women pastors) I also think is an issue. TGC’s stance is complementarian, and yet they also claim to represent a ‘broad’ spectrum of evangelicalism. Again, I see mixed signals being sent here, and I don’t say that because I’m egalitarian (I’m not). </p>
<p>#4 (NPP): Just because Piper and Carson have written against NPP doesn’t mean that that is what they’re primarily (or even secondarily) concerned about in TGC. The concerns of TGC are much more than NPP (although certainly include it). </p>
<p>#5: Not sure why you think megachurches are so bad, although I have grown to really love small churches. But have you laid out anywhere more fully your reasoning behind this? I&#8217;m not sure if I&#8217;m quite buying it yet. It seems to me that the Church needs both big and small churches&#8230;</p>
<p>What I appreciate about TGC is the theological vision for ministry, mentioned above, and that they are trying very hard to be multi-ethnic and international. In fact, 23% of the people who have registered on the TGC website are from outside North America. It’s a start, anyway. </p>
<p>The dialogue between Neo-Anabaptists and Neo-Reformed needs to continue; I agree with you. Thanks for your perspective.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee Wyatt</title>
		<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/the-gospel-coalition-and-post-christendom-will-it-be-a-coalition-or-expedition-some-reflections-and-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-9257</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee Wyatt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2009 22:48:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/?p=500#comment-9257</guid>
		<description>I am becoming more and more convinced that church planting ought to be done, on the model of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, by a two-person team - the scribe (Ezra) and the builder (Nehemiah).  I think such shared leadership and differing gifts not only better enables the ministry (in my experience these different skill sets are rarely found in one person though both are necessary), but models at the heart of the plant the community and accountability that needs to be the DNA of the church.

Secondly, I believe that topping or enveloping or over shadowing (pick your own word or come up with your own) the list of leadership virtues (which I think are great) is &quot;laddership&quot; (from John 1:51).  Jesus tells Nathanael tha he will &quot;see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.&quot;  To the degree that we too share in the gift of this vision and experience of Jesus as the intersection of heaven and earth, to that degree we will be effective leaders.  In other words, unless we are first and foremost followers, we cannot be good leaders; and unless we can enable our people to see and experience this vision of Jesus, we will not properly equip our people for their ministries.  Our world is asking the same question the Greeks in John 12 said to Philip, &quot;Sir, we wish to see Jesus.&quot;  Can we show him to them?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am becoming more and more convinced that church planting ought to be done, on the model of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, by a two-person team &#8211; the scribe (Ezra) and the builder (Nehemiah).  I think such shared leadership and differing gifts not only better enables the ministry (in my experience these different skill sets are rarely found in one person though both are necessary), but models at the heart of the plant the community and accountability that needs to be the DNA of the church.</p>
<p>Secondly, I believe that topping or enveloping or over shadowing (pick your own word or come up with your own) the list of leadership virtues (which I think are great) is &#8220;laddership&#8221; (from John 1:51).  Jesus tells Nathanael tha he will &#8220;see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.&#8221;  To the degree that we too share in the gift of this vision and experience of Jesus as the intersection of heaven and earth, to that degree we will be effective leaders.  In other words, unless we are first and foremost followers, we cannot be good leaders; and unless we can enable our people to see and experience this vision of Jesus, we will not properly equip our people for their ministries.  Our world is asking the same question the Greeks in John 12 said to Philip, &#8220;Sir, we wish to see Jesus.&#8221;  Can we show him to them?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/the-gospel-coalition-and-post-christendom-will-it-be-a-coalition-or-expedition-some-reflections-and-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-8741</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:33:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/?p=500#comment-8741</guid>
		<description>Dude,

LOVE the conversation on this post (minus the short &#039;heresy interlude&#039;).  I appreciated the humble tone you took, Dave, in the post, as well as the comments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dude,</p>
<p>LOVE the conversation on this post (minus the short &#8216;heresy interlude&#8217;).  I appreciated the humble tone you took, Dave, in the post, as well as the comments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jr</title>
		<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/the-gospel-coalition-and-post-christendom-will-it-be-a-coalition-or-expedition-some-reflections-and-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-7379</link>
		<dc:creator>Jr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:21:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/?p=500#comment-7379</guid>
		<description>Grace to you, David:

I think some of what you see out of TG4 (in regards to doctrine) is in response to the false teachings that have crept into this post-Christendom context (McLaren, Bell, Pagitt, etc.). Certainly, against such attacks the Gospel must be defended I don&#039;t care if you are neo-reformed or not. The soon-to-be-defunct Emergent Village (while currently and noticeably going through a split and publishers refusing to print anything starting with &quot;E&quot; anymore) and their most prolific leaders made some noise and it needed to be combated. (Let me be clear, I can distinguish between emerg-ing and emerg-ent; and I admit I am defining EV by its noisiest spokesmen). 

An emphasis that I see in TG4 is what Isaiah 55:11 says, &quot;so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.&quot; 

Too many in the &quot;missional movement&quot; (for lack of a better term) abandon the teaching of the Word; or want to reframe it to an absurd extent (even dismissing key doctrine) in the name of post-Christendom acceptance (which is nothing more than knee-jerk pragmatics). I know this because I know church plants and church planting networks that teach such methodologies for success in the name of mission. I appreciated your comment that you realize this tendency.

So the issue you address in number 1 (purify doctrine they will come), I believe, is in response at least somewhat to that way. Our country is pathetically biblically-illiterate and with that comes the acceptance false doctrine. So, maybe the thought is, (in buying your first statement of issue), let&#039;s firm up the doctrine and preach the Word; the people will come (Isa 55:11).

Another tendency of the &quot;emerging&quot; angle that you did not mention, however, is that it seems a lot of times they are motivated more by politics than anything else; and they simply cloak it in spiritual terms. It leaves a bad taste in a lot of people&#039;s mouths (like mine) who truly want to converse as we move forward. The idol worship of all-things-Obama or the neo-liberal theological nostalgia of the 30s (though they call it “new”) blows the cover real quick. I just can’t take these people seriously; and their blind commitment to men worry me.

Recommendation: I think a wonderful common ground is found in &quot;Total Church: A Radical Reshaping Around Gospel and Community&quot; by Tim Chester and Steve Timmis. The book bleeds mission and community while upholding the authority and paramount position of the Word in everything.

What I see in the neo-Reformed crowd is the hunger for the Word and firm theology that has been eroded by the tentacles of false teachers; and I appreciate that. And I also appreciate your recognition that we cannot dismiss the success of TG4 and the men who lead it; for the simple fact of 18-30+ year-olds are eating it up and loving it. Young men are falling in love with the Jesus of the Bible. Praise God! God is glorified through men like Keller, Piper, Chandler, etc.

I appreciate the language of coming together for this missional purpose and I fully support it; even though I know we fall on opposite sides of the Reformed perspective.

His Word will not return void.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Grace to you, David:</p>
<p>I think some of what you see out of TG4 (in regards to doctrine) is in response to the false teachings that have crept into this post-Christendom context (McLaren, Bell, Pagitt, etc.). Certainly, against such attacks the Gospel must be defended I don&#8217;t care if you are neo-reformed or not. The soon-to-be-defunct Emergent Village (while currently and noticeably going through a split and publishers refusing to print anything starting with &#8220;E&#8221; anymore) and their most prolific leaders made some noise and it needed to be combated. (Let me be clear, I can distinguish between emerg-ing and emerg-ent; and I admit I am defining EV by its noisiest spokesmen). </p>
<p>An emphasis that I see in TG4 is what Isaiah 55:11 says, &#8220;so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.&#8221; </p>
<p>Too many in the &#8220;missional movement&#8221; (for lack of a better term) abandon the teaching of the Word; or want to reframe it to an absurd extent (even dismissing key doctrine) in the name of post-Christendom acceptance (which is nothing more than knee-jerk pragmatics). I know this because I know church plants and church planting networks that teach such methodologies for success in the name of mission. I appreciated your comment that you realize this tendency.</p>
<p>So the issue you address in number 1 (purify doctrine they will come), I believe, is in response at least somewhat to that way. Our country is pathetically biblically-illiterate and with that comes the acceptance false doctrine. So, maybe the thought is, (in buying your first statement of issue), let&#8217;s firm up the doctrine and preach the Word; the people will come (Isa 55:11).</p>
<p>Another tendency of the &#8220;emerging&#8221; angle that you did not mention, however, is that it seems a lot of times they are motivated more by politics than anything else; and they simply cloak it in spiritual terms. It leaves a bad taste in a lot of people&#8217;s mouths (like mine) who truly want to converse as we move forward. The idol worship of all-things-Obama or the neo-liberal theological nostalgia of the 30s (though they call it “new”) blows the cover real quick. I just can’t take these people seriously; and their blind commitment to men worry me.</p>
<p>Recommendation: I think a wonderful common ground is found in &#8220;Total Church: A Radical Reshaping Around Gospel and Community&#8221; by Tim Chester and Steve Timmis. The book bleeds mission and community while upholding the authority and paramount position of the Word in everything.</p>
<p>What I see in the neo-Reformed crowd is the hunger for the Word and firm theology that has been eroded by the tentacles of false teachers; and I appreciate that. And I also appreciate your recognition that we cannot dismiss the success of TG4 and the men who lead it; for the simple fact of 18-30+ year-olds are eating it up and loving it. Young men are falling in love with the Jesus of the Bible. Praise God! God is glorified through men like Keller, Piper, Chandler, etc.</p>
<p>I appreciate the language of coming together for this missional purpose and I fully support it; even though I know we fall on opposite sides of the Reformed perspective.</p>
<p>His Word will not return void.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Winton</title>
		<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/the-gospel-coalition-and-post-christendom-will-it-be-a-coalition-or-expedition-some-reflections-and-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-7330</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Winton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 03:25:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/?p=500#comment-7330</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s eery just how similar the messages are in South America (Lima, Peru) and this mega-church in Singapore. Singapore is geographically far away from Lima and yet the so-called &quot;prosperity gospel&quot; seems to get manufactured there in practically identical kinds of ways. In my conversations with folks from the global south with regards to this issue, I&#039;ve gotten mixed responses (some affirm it and others don&#039;t). But I&#039;d bet most folks I know here in the States would decry at least parts of this as misleading. And yet, we all (everyone I know personally, that is) brew a big cup of global free market ideology throughout our workdays and as we &quot;consecrate&quot; our homes (with commercials and market images). You could even say we communicate it through our sitting down (or standing up or jumping or whatever) on a Sunday morning to enjoy the worship (though the idolatry isn&#039;t so readily apparent). 

I&#039;ve been reading the blog here for a while, so I know this isn&#039;t anything new to most of David&#039;s commenters. But...just thought I&#039;d say it again for posterity&#039;s sake.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s eery just how similar the messages are in South America (Lima, Peru) and this mega-church in Singapore. Singapore is geographically far away from Lima and yet the so-called &#8220;prosperity gospel&#8221; seems to get manufactured there in practically identical kinds of ways. In my conversations with folks from the global south with regards to this issue, I&#8217;ve gotten mixed responses (some affirm it and others don&#8217;t). But I&#8217;d bet most folks I know here in the States would decry at least parts of this as misleading. And yet, we all (everyone I know personally, that is) brew a big cup of global free market ideology throughout our workdays and as we &#8220;consecrate&#8221; our homes (with commercials and market images). You could even say we communicate it through our sitting down (or standing up or jumping or whatever) on a Sunday morning to enjoy the worship (though the idolatry isn&#8217;t so readily apparent). </p>
<p>I&#8217;ve been reading the blog here for a while, so I know this isn&#8217;t anything new to most of David&#8217;s commenters. But&#8230;just thought I&#8217;d say it again for posterity&#8217;s sake.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Neo-Reformed or Neo-Anabaptist Blog? &#171; Withered Grass</title>
		<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/the-gospel-coalition-and-post-christendom-will-it-be-a-coalition-or-expedition-some-reflections-and-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-7267</link>
		<dc:creator>A Neo-Reformed or Neo-Anabaptist Blog? &#171; Withered Grass</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2009 01:34:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/?p=500#comment-7267</guid>
		<description>[...] post-battle damage assessment by Internet Monk; (d) David Fitch&#8217;s late May contrasting of Neo-Reformed vs. Neo-Anabaptist approaches towards post-Christendom (in anticipation of an upcoming church planting course at Fuller Theological Seminary); and, most [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] post-battle damage assessment by Internet Monk; (d) David Fitch&#8217;s late May contrasting of Neo-Reformed vs. Neo-Anabaptist approaches towards post-Christendom (in anticipation of an upcoming church planting course at Fuller Theological Seminary); and, most [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

