[Chrysostom]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

It's curious that there's so much uncertainty about such a defining element of Christianity.

What defining element? If you're talking about ecclesiology and/or liturgiology, honestly, "uncertainty" is a description that I would only ascribe to the traditions descended from Anabaptism and Revivalism, and frankly those traditions are set up to create volatility and uncertainty.

[thesteve]

Good read John. I think if you dissect the argument regarding the priesthood of believers, you end up dismantling many of the authors' criticisms. Some of the arguments they make later in the book regarding tithing and Christian education seem to be more valid considering isolated excesses and egotists than they do of Christianity as a whole (with tithing, it is that the church could do so much more if they weren't paying mortgages, and with Christian education it was that there were generations with knowledge but no ability to use it).

The further I get from my reading of the book, the more jaded I get regarding its contents. While I still feel that the authors brought up some interesting points here and there, on the whole the book does cast the bulk of church history in a negative light and, as you pointed out, this just doesn't make a lot of sense. At the end it definitely feels like they were writing with an audience in mind, and I do feel like their message is one that many young Christians (say, <30 years old) identify with.

I do have one question that perhaps you could clarify. When you say,

They come into this scene of disillusionment and respond, Well, look, the reason you feel disillusioned is that all of Christian history has been under the spell of a vast unintentional conspiracy, and it turns out that the Bible actually shares the very unique assumptions that modern culture prizes: Individualism, egalitarianism, the privatization of religion, etc

Do you mean that these are things not prized in the Bible but are prized in modern society?

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Chrysostom

Okay, let's slow down and repeat exactly what they are saying. We have the writings of people who were around to see what the early ecclesiastical culture was actually like, and those writings all agree with the rest of Church history and disagree with Pagan Christianity.

How do Barna and Viola respond to those writings?

[Chrysostom]

Originally Posted by Sean

How do Barna and Viola respond to those writings?

I was quoting thesteve on it:

"They reject the shift to a single leader in the church as occurred through the urging of Ignatius of Antioch and spread through the church in the mid-2nd century. They also argue that Clement of Rome's distinction between the leadership and non-leadership (laity) as well as Clement and Tertullian's use of the clergy were concepts foreign to the New Testament."

In other words, they admit that their views contradict those of the Apostolic Fathers, Patristics, etc., and that their view can be found in no writers outside of the New Testament. (I'm assuming that the Didache, Polycarp, etc. get the same dismissal by them.) They then respond, well, that's because all these early writers -- who either sat directly under apostles or were prominent members of apostolic communities shortly after their founding apostles' deaths -- were introducing pagan notions into Christianity and acting like their communities already knew these pagan notions well.

I have no doubt that many bad things have been introduced into Christianity, but when they say that everybody was introducing similar bad stuff and not a single person realized it was bad or offered a good alternative, an understated assessment would be to say that it strains credulity.

Originally Posted by thesteve

The further I get from my reading of the book, the more jaded I get regarding its contents. While I still feel that the authors brought up some interesting points here and there, on the whole the book does cast the bulk of church history in a negative light and, as you pointed out, this just doesn't make a lot of sense. At the end it definitely feels like they were writing with an audience in mind, and I do feel like their message is one that many young Christians (say, <30 years old) identify with.

To give them their due, of course we must agree that they've probably made some good criticisms at various places. They just need to answer those problems by being as Christian as they can be! Dig deeply within the history of the Church and you'd be amazed what kinds of riches you can find.

Originally Posted by thesteve

Do you mean that these are things not prized in the Bible but are prized in modern society?

Sorry that was worded so badly. Yeah, you are right. I mean, individualism and egalitarianism and these things have good things about them, it's just that they take those things and run with them. These are the values of a post-Christian world. They're not the values of a non-Christian or pre-Christian world. They're what you get when Christianity has changed everything, and then you throw out Christianity. The dignity and significance of the individual as made in the image of God with a potential and destiny beyond all understanding is turned into a sappy individualism. The catholicity of the Church, the fact that it is not a subset of any nation but extends beyond them all, is turned into the coercive privatization of religion. Etc.

[AlphaSigma]

So I know I'm jumping in mid-discussion but overall for those of you who have read it, would you recommend it? This was recommended to me by several Youth leaders this week, but not sure if it's worth buying.

[thesteve]

Originally Posted by AlphaSigma

So I know I'm jumping in mid-discussion but overall for those of you who have read it, would you recommend it? This was recommended to me by several Youth leaders this week, but not sure if it's worth buying.

Eh...there are things about it that are good and things about it that are bad. I felt like it's a book perhaps worth borrowing (from a library or friend) but not necessarily buying. I am borrowing it from a friend of mine that got it for a book club he is involved with, and when I give it back to him I won't feel like there's an empty place in my library. If your youth leaders have it, you might consider borrowing it from them.

[AlphaSigma]

Originally Posted by thesteve

Eh...there are things about it that are good and things about it that are bad. I felt like it's a book perhaps worth borrowing (from a library or friend) but not necessarily buying. I am borrowing it from a friend of mine that got it for a book club he is involved with, and when I give it back to him I won't feel like there's an empty place in my library. If your youth leaders have it, you might consider borrowing it from them.

Yeah,
Good call. As much as I like adding to my library being a poor seminary student prohibits me from just buying books all willy nilly. :\