Did you listen? Did you hear the conversation between the two “liberal,” “left wing,” goatee wearing, tattoo sporting, beer drinking, emerging, pomo, Christian artists who are trying to lead our little ones astray (Sorry. I cribbed that from Russ Moore’s blog)? These labels are slapped on Derek Webb and Don Miller by a few critics and I have found such descriptions to be generally unfair, or inconsequential. *For Clarity* While I am not on the same page with these two brothers on everything (who am I on the same page with on every issue?), I tire of the superficial criticisms leveled against them. I think they have a lot to say that we should listen to.
Don and Derek answered questions in a moderated web-chat last night. It starts slow, they talk over each other a bit, and the moderator seems busy microwaving a plate of spaghetti or something, but it is worth a listen for those who have been following the dialogue about these popular artists. It’s an hour long, you can’t download it, there aren’t tracks. So, for those who don’t have the time, here are some highlights that are relevant to all the drama.
They admit our faith can be broken up into “systematic theology” but it is essentially more relational than that.
They distinguish themselves from the “social Gospel” movement by holding to orthodoxy and evangelical theology. In fact they continually return to the doctrines of substitution and imputation. These doctrines inform their worldview and motivate them to pursue righteousness.
The doctrine of unchanging love of God for his people is touched on.
When theodicy is raised they appeal to a good and sovereign God in whom we alone find ultimate satisfaction.
When asked “What must I do to be saved?” Neither seem to want to give a pat answer. Obviously one must “believe,” but they don’t like formulas. Don talked about everyone having a “mysterious relational encounter with Jesus” that varies from person to person. Like many things Don says, you can interpret him charitably in light of everything else he has affirmed (hell, the exclusivity of salvation in Jesus Christ, etc.), or you can nit pick his answer. I would have answered it differently, but they make some good points about putting the full doctrinal cart before the horse of conversion (my words).
They believe we should work to see others converted by putting Christ in front of them. This is done by sharing Scripture, personal testimony and working to demonstrate the Kingdom has come.
When war/pacifism comes up Webb is quick to make a distinction between an ethic of non-violence and doing nothing. We must be active, “willing to fight,” he says, but violence is not one of the resources for the citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven. He admits this is complicated, that the answers are not easy. The guys don’t pretend to have it all worked out. They go so far as to say that a country, our country, may have to go to war to protect the innocent.
Don’s concern is that the issue of war is so lopsided in America, that to come at it from a different perspective is perceived as unpatriotic.
Webb points out that when discussing non-violence he is often asked, “What if someone has a gun to your wife’s head?!” He admits this is a hard/extreme situation, but asks, since when do we allow situations to dictate our ethics? We should let Scripture alone command us. Here is where Don admits to being weary of being perceived as a liberal when he believes he is looking at Scripture more like a fundamentalist than those against him.
They went on to say that we sometimes have to choose faithfulness over success. To suffer and die may look like failure to the world, but it may prove us faithful to Christ.
Their real point seems to be peace making. They want to talk about peace, how to make it, promote it, teach it. They take the beatitude seriously, “blessed are the peacemakers,” and believe the church should be doing more. They want to see our Christian universities offering “peace studies” and programs. They dream of a day when the world can do no better than to come to the church when wanting to know, “How can we find peace?” They believe the church should be experts at this. This was similar to Richard Baxter’s appeal, that if the world needed fit leadership they could do no better than appeal to the leders of the church.
They like the idea of pre-emptive peace.
The argue that political involvement is good. We should vote, call our Congressmen, etc., but more can be done by getting our hands dirty. By doing the work ourselves. They encouraged people to check out and start organizations like BloodWater.Org.
In the end the moderator asked a dumb question. “When you stand before God, and he says ‘Well done good and faithful servant,’ what would you like to hear him say to you next?” I thought that was a lame, selfish, me-centered kinda thing to think about, and Don’s initial answer points this out. He says he’d use Will Ferrell’s answer to the same basic question when asked by James Lipton on The Actor’s Studio.
When Ferrell was asked what he would like to hear God say to him in the end he replied, “You’re number one!”
Funny, and shows the folly of it all.
The men did not come off as whiny liberals who are only trying to fight against authority. They came off as men who are trying to think their way through Scripture as they follow Jesus into the world. Their basic theology is evangelical with some Reformed hat-tipping. Even if you disagree with them, they just aren’t what they are painted to be by some of the critics.
For the curious, doubtful, or bored check out the web-chat here, and visit DonMillerFans.Net where Don answers more questions.
I am the Lead Pastor of Redeemer Fellowship; husband to Jen; Dad to Katherine, Elias, Madeline, and Kilian. If you're in town you can probably find me in the local coffee house or running through the neighborhoods.
{ 11 comments… read them below or add one }
Nice Summary Joe. Thanks.
Joe,
Thanks for your run down. I though it was interesting that, while speaking on war, Don began a minor tirade on our involvement in Iraq. The moderator quickly chimed in, “I wasn’t talking about Iraq.” Not saying he was right or wrong on that, but Don got busted.
I had to listen to Don’s answer about the gospel several times. I started to nit-pick, but after taking his answer as a whole, their was some coherence to it, but I don’t think he actually answered the question asked. Derek basically gave a thumbs up to what Don said, but I would rather have heard Derek’s unfiltered comments. I agree with Don’s assertion that we can’t front load the gospel with highly technical theologic-speak and expect the unsaved to understand and follow along. But he leaned too heavily on the “mystical encounter”. Isn’t that a little too subjective?
My “encounter”, if I can even call it that, was not mystical. I can explain it now that I understand it better. But, at the time, I didn’t understand justification by faith alone.
I wish that instead of focusing on what’s different in conversion experiences, that they could have touched on the objectiveness or sameness of conversion to Jesus Christ. There is something that is common about salvation, no matter how we may take it through the lens of culture, gender, language, personality, etc.
Joe, based on your reasons and recommendation, I did finally read Blue Like Jazz and posted my thoughts on my blog. I can appreciate alot (not all) of where Don’s coming from and I intend to read his other books. I saw Derek in January and have been impacted by his Mockingbird album enough that I’m holding “talks” with our pastor to try to hopefully re-align our evangelism team to have more of an outreach emphasis and be more missional. We have a large foreign missions team and very little focus on our own back yard.
I think both of these guys understand that we impose barriers on others when we wrap ourselves in the political agendas broadcast as “what Christians believe”. The world needs to see more of what Christians do. I’ve been saddened in past years by the types of books that are sold in Christian book stores. But lately I’ve noticed another subset of books that are political in nature. This is not what I want people to think of when they think of Jesus.
God bless and thanks for your site.
Van,
Yeah, I wanted to hear Webb’s thoughts on that as well. I think he said that he was basically going to say, “believe” but it was hard to hear.
Everyone who dismisses guys like Webb and Miller as liberal, immature, or heretical only create more distance between themselves and the younger generation they want to protect. Guys in their twenties/thirties are reading Miller and are sharp enough to see he is not a heretic.
As always I think we should engage the actual ideas in the books/songs, and not trip all over the superficial stuff.
I too see the war/peace issue as more complicated than most will admit. Yet, I think more needs to be said than Webb is saying. I am not satisfied with his answer. But his pendulum swing away from the predominant view can help facilitate dialogue and steer us toward a more biblical perspective.
Joe, Thanks. I really don’t have the time to listen to the chat but I did have the time to read this. I really appreciate your summary!
Good summary Joe. I caught parts of it live and then there was a “live blogging” kind of thing going on at the Webboard.
I’m pretty sure Don Miller and Dizzy Gillespie were seperated at birth.
I was glad to hear Derek affirm that “maybe” it is right for a country to go to war to protect the innocent. I was afraid he was going to say no. I agree with the maybe and I thought they were correct in saying that if we are going to invade a country to liberate its people from a dictator, there were other countries in the world that needed it before Iraq.
The moderator ruined it for me. He was late and then he never seemed to arrive. He asked pretty much the same question each time.
Now I’m going to have to read Don Miller this summer.
I enjoyed the audio and this review.
Would someone please comment on the statements made regarding fighting vs. killing. It provoked me to think about the difference but then I wondered if there was a difference, biblically speaking.
Derek made the distinction without elabroation, saying that we should “fight” but not kill. He also said “violence is not one of our resources.” So the “fight” isn’t a physical combat. It is the active, aggressive work to protect, defend, rescue or relieve. I think Derek would say the Bible calls us to fight/war, but not as the world does. Not by killing , but in working against evil via peace and righteousness.
Thanks, Joe.
Very nice review, I missed the interview/webchat so it was nice to read a summarized version of it.
You think there’s any chance Webb might add, “Don’t teach me how to read with discernment, just hand me an authorized book list,” to his song “New Law?”
Moore has forgotten that Judge Paul Pressler didn’t look at the first hill he saw and said, “I want to die on that one!” The fight to reform the SBC was a noble fight. Even though I’m not a Southern Baptist, I personally benefited from the hard work and sacrifices made by Pressler, Mohler, Paterson, and others because I went to SBTS. Yet, I was warned before I went that some warriors are always looking for the next fight behind every clump of dirt. Sadly Moore appears to be going this route by looking for battles with everyone who doesn’t look and sound just like him (unless that person is the late Johnny Cash?).
I’m grateful for the varied work of Miller, Moore, and Webb (I mean c’mon Derek, paedobaptism?) but I certainly don’t agree with them 100% of the time. Perhaps it’s time for Moore to slowly put his claymore back in its scabbard and openly acknowledge that a guy like Miller may have something to say to worth hearing.
I downloaded the podcast of the Webb/Miller interview a few days ago via itunes and listened while I was working late one night. I have been a fan of Derek’s for a long time and recently read both Blue Like Jazz and Searching for God Knows What. I am in my late thirties and have been a believer since early childhood – raised by parents who put a high value on both good theology and service for God’s kingdom. I also believe that I have a good understanding of Biblical truth and error. What I appreciate about both Webb and Miller is their approach to taking God’s word seriously, their struggle to work out their faith, and their willingness to do some of this in a public forum. I wish that all Christian leaders were as vulnerable and ready to learn from God rather than finding contentment in formulas and traditions of men. I have found myself challenged by Webb and Miller to reconsider my approach to living out my faith in different ways. I think much of what Webb has to say is an attempt to convince fallen people that “yes, indeed they are lost and fallen” but that their fallen state is a beginning and not an end – that only Jesus can redeem them and should be their source of hope. This is always something that I need reminding about. Miller on the other hand is great at giving you a “day in the life” insight to his struggles and the miracle that God continues to work with him (and the rest of us) to redeem Miller’s life and draw him to a greater dependence on him. I find Miller’s candidness and irreverence mostly refreshing but at times disappointing because it often leaves me feeling unresolved. Maybe that’s not a bad thing but I wonder sometimes if Miller enjoys rocking the boat for the sake of his own amusement and without the best of intentions. As for the interview, I thought both men presented themselves as very thoughtful Christians who are trying hard to interpret scripture without the influence of culture and man-made institutions. Because of the way both men challenge traditional thinking in their work they are easy targets for religious traditionalists who want to discredit them by picking and choosing quotes. I think it’s fair to give both Miller and Webb a measure of grace in their means of expression and appreciate the broader picture that they both paint of our desperate need for renewal, repentance and revival in our thinking and our hearts.
{ 3 trackbacks }