sábado, fevereiro 19, 2011

TOM RACHMAN: The Imperfectionists

Libido: it has been the tyrant of his times, hurling him from comfortable America all those years ago to sinful Europe for adventure and conquest, marrying him four times, tripping him up a hundred more, distracting and

ARTHUR’S CUBICLE USED TO BE NEAR THE WATERCOOLER, BUT the bosses tired of having to chat with him each time they got thirsty. So the watercooler stayed and he was moved. Now his desk is in a distant corner, as far from the locus of power as possible but nearer the cupboard of pens, which is a consolation.

You can’t dread what you can’t experience. The only death we experience is that of other people. That’s as bad as it gets.

You can’t dread what you can’t experience. The only death we experience is that of other people. That’s as bad as it gets.

We enjoy this illusion of continuity, and we call it memory. Which explains, perhaps, why our worst fear isn’t the end of life but the end of memories.”

You know, there’s that silly saying ‘We’re born alone and we die alone’—it’s nonsense. We’re surrounded at birth and surrounded at death. It is in between that we’re alone.”

saying ‘We’re born alone and we die alone’—it’s nonsense. We’re surrounded at birth and surrounded at death. It is in

The paper, however, had an idiosyncratic response: it did nothing. The corrections editor, Herman Cohen, nixed all talk of a website. “The Internet is to news,” he said, “what car horns are to music.”


People see what they want to see and what people want to see never has anything to do with the truth. People are cowards to the last breath. I'm telling you between you and me: the human being, broadly speaking, is the closest thing there is to a rat. 

they want to watch the great masters spar, but they have no interest in real combat, when the great masters struggle against that something, that something that terrifies us all, that something that cows us and spurs us on, amid blood and mortal wounds and stench.

All criticism is ultimately a nightmare, he thought as he washed his face in the apartment where his mother's body no longer was.


Generous Justice: How God's Grace Makes Us Just (Timothy Keller)

O novo livro de Tim Keller seria uma retomada de um dos seus primeiros livros,  MINISTRIES OF MERCY, há uma retomada do assunto de justica social, para o autor, está ligado ao entendimento do evangelho.

O livro tem como subtítulo COMO A GRAÇA DE DEUS NOS FAZ JUSTOS, o texto apresenta uma forte defesa para o envolvimento do cristão no serviço de justiça social, que de forma alguma minaria a propagação do evangelho no mundo.

Como o próprio autor coloca exisitiria outro comando na Bíblia mais forte em termos e mais peremptoriamente urgente que ajudar aos pobres? Uma preocupação com a justiça em todos os aspectos da vida não é nem uma adição artificial e nem uma contradição com a mensagem da bíblia.

O que acontece e existe é o simples fato que as classes mais baixas não estão apenas desproporcionalmente mais vulneráveis para a injustiça, mas que são costumeiramente as vítimas atuais de injustiça. Mesmo a injustiça, ela não é não dividida proporcionalmente. Nós temos que ter uma forte preocupação para com os pobres, mas a idéia de justiça da bíblia não para ai.


Na bíblia, a palavra tzadeqah se refere ao vida diária da pessoa que conduz todos seus relacionamentos na família e na sociedade de maneira justa, generosa e igualitária. 

Justo como Israel foi uma comunidade de justiça, então a igreja está para refletir as mesmas preocupações para com os pobres. A preocupação de Deus com os pobres é tão forte que ele deu a Israel um monte de leis que, se praticadas, haveriam virtualmente eliminado qualquer classe inferior permanente.

Paulo ensina que o dinheiro que nós temos é tanto um presente de Deus como o maná que foi dado como presente aos israelitas no deserto.  

Paul teaches that the money we have is as much a gift of God as the manna was a gift to the Israelites in the desert. Though some are more able “gatherers”—that is, some are better at making money than others—the money you earn is a gift of God. Therefore, the money you make must be shared to build up community. So wealthier believers must share with poorer ones, not only within a congregation but also across congregations and borders. (See 2 Corinthians 8:15 and its context.)

The three causes of poverty, according to the Bible, are oppression, calamity, and personal moral failure.

He does not call everyone to bring sacrifices of the same kind and value, for that would have automatically make it easier for the rich to please God. Instead, God directs that each person should bring what they can, and if their heart is right, that will give them access to his grace.

The patronage system was characterized by neither compassion nor justice. It did not unite a society divided by class and race—it sustained the status quo. Jesus’s ethic of love attacked the world system at its root.

“The disposition of one’s possessions signifies the disposition of one’s heart.”55 The purification of the heart through grace and love for the poor are of a piece; they go together in the theology of Jesus.

“When you ignored the poor, you ignored me.” This meant that one’s heart attitude toward the poor reveals one’s heart attitude toward Christ.

“There should be no poor among you” (Deuteronomy 15:4). This was the pinnacle of the “social righteousness” legislation of the Old Testament, which expressed God’s love for the vulnerable and his zeal to see poverty and want eliminated.

It is only if we truly see the love God requires in his law that we will be willing and able to receive the love God offers in his gospel of free salvation through Jesus. Jesus was encouraging the man to seek the grace of God.

he was asking each listener to imagine himself to be a victim of violence, dying, with no hope if this Samaritan did not stop and help.

Before you can give this neighbor-love, you need to receive it. Only if you see that you have been saved graciously by someone who owes you the opposite will you go out into the world looking to help absolutely anyone in need. Once we receive this ultimate, radical neighbor-love through Jesus, we can start to be the neighbors that the Bible calls us to be.

The load, or weight, or burden of my neighbor’s glory should be laid daily on my back, a load so heavy that only humility can carry it, and the backs of the proud will be broken. . . . This does not mean that we are to be perpetually solemn. We must play. But our merriment must be of that kind (and it is, in fact, the merriest kind) which exists between people who have, from the outset, taken each other seriously—no flippancy, no superiority, no presumption. And our charity must be a real and costly love, with deep feeling for the sins in spite of which we love the sinner—no mere tolerance or indulgence which parodies love as flippancy parodies merriment. . . .81

God sees economically comfortable people abstaining from food, “going without” for a day or two, but not being willing to abstain from exploiting their workers. Though they demonstrate the external sign of belief in grace—fasting—their lives reveal that their hearts have not been changed.

There is a righteousness which Paul calls “the righteousness of faith.” God imputes it to us apart from our works. . . . [Now] though I am a sinner in myself, with regard to the moral law, . . . yet in that righteousness I have no sin, no sting of conscience, no fear of death. I have another righteousness and life above this life, which is Christ the Son of God.86

“We are saved by faith alone, but not by a faith that remains alone. True faith will always produce a changed life.”

Imagine that you have no job, no money, you live cut off from the rest of society in a world ruled by poverty and violence, your skin is the “wrong” color—and you have no hope that any of this will change. Around you is a society governed by the iron law of achievement. Its gilded goods are flaunted before your eyes on TV screens, and in a thousand ways society tells you every day that you are worthless because you have no achievement. You are a failure, and you know that you will continue to be a failure because there is no way to achieve tomorrow what you have not managed to achieve today. Your dignity is shattered and your soul is enveloped in the darkness of despair. But the gospel tells you that you are not defined by outside forces. It tells you that you count; even more, that you are loved unconditionally and infinitely, irrespective of anything you have achieved or failed to achieve. Imagine now this gospel not simply proclaimed but embodied in a community. Justified by sheer grace, it seeks to “justify” by grace those declared “unjust” by a society’s implacable law of achievement. Imagine, furthermore, this community determined to infuse the

The next level is development. This means giving an individual, family, or entire community what they need to move beyond dependency on relief into a condition of economic self-sufficiency. In

“Development,” of course, is far more time consuming, complex, and expensive than relief.

“The division into different people groups with different languages was a consequence of human disobedience.”

Racial prejudice is wrong because it is a denial of the very principle that all human beings are equally sinful and saved by only the grace of God. A deep grasp of the gospel of grace, Paul says, should erode our racial biases.

Churches and Christian organizations must not be wooden and mechanical, yet they will have to come up with some agreed-upon guidelines, or find themselves endlessly arguing.

deed ministry can consist of three levels—relief, development, and reform. Will your church be sticking to relief type efforts only, or will it try ministries within the more ambitious and complex levels? Will your church work almost exclusively with needy individuals and their families, or will it seek to reach out to particular needy classes of people, such as the homebound elderly, or youth who need tutoring, or prisoners and ex-offenders?  

I propose a different way to understand evangelism and social justice. They should exist in an asymmetrical, inseparable relationship.
But, as we have seen, doing justice is inseparably connected to preaching grace.

One way is that the gospel produces a concern for the poor. The other is that deeds of justice gain credibility for the preaching of the gospel. In other words, justification by faith leads to doing justice, and doing justice can make many seek to be justified by faith.

The experience of salvation led to generosity to the poor, which led to more people becoming open to the message of salvation.

many Christians who care intensely about evangelism see the work of doing justice as a distraction for Christians that detracts from the mission of evangelism. That is also a grave error.

When a city perceives a church as existing strictly and only for itself and its own members, the preaching of that church will not resonate with outsiders. But if neighbors see church members loving their city through astonishing, sacrificial deeds of compassion, they will be much more open to the church’s message. Deeds of mercy and justice should be done out of love, not simply as a means to the end of evangelism. And yet there is no better way for Christians to lay a foundation for evangelism than by doing justice.

Kuyper distinguished between the institutional church—the congregation meeting under its leaders—and the “organic” church, which consists of all Christians, functioning in the world as individuals and through various agencies and voluntary organizations.

“Freedom, much like equality, is an empty concept. . . . Whether freedom is good or bad depends entirely on the particular substantive cause on behalf of which freedom is invoked.”130

According to one framework, the most just action is that which brings the greatest good to the greatest number of people. According to the second, the most just action is that which respects the freedom and rights of each individual to live as he or she chooses. According to the last view, justice is served when people are acting as they ought to, in accord with morality and virtue.

In a fascinating book, The Humiliation of the Word,2 Jacques Ellul relates seeing and hearing to believing. He finds that the proclamation of the Word has been replaced by liturgy in the high churches and by campaign spectacle in evangelical movements. He appeals to language, not merely binocular vision, as that which sets human beings apart. Language is more than the tactile signals of ants or the visual dance of bees. It is not only more complex, but different, for it is symbolic and conceptual. Ellul describes sight as immediate, locating us in spatial reality, but lacking in significance.

sexta-feira, fevereiro 18, 2011


De volta ao resumo de Deep Church: A Third Way Beyond Emerging and Traditional  de Jim Belcher

O livro se inicia a partir de um dialogo entre John piper e Doug paggit, representantes dos extremos irreconciliáveis que o livro tenta reconciliar,  

When Pagitt, who is Jones's pastor, asked Piper, "Maybe we can find  ways to work together," Piper said it would be impossible without agreement   on essential doctrines like the atonement. Because Pagitt and Jones  don't hold to Piper's view of atonement, they are "rejecting the gospel in  toto, and so, by logical extension, [they] are not . . . Christian."

 A alternativa proposta por BELCHER é a igreja profunda, frase cunhada por C.S.LEWIS a partir da oposição britânica entre HIGH CHURCH E LOW CHURCH. 

"Perhaps the trouble is  that as supernaturalists, whether `Low' or `High' Church, thus taken together, they lack a name. May I suggest `Deep Church'; or, if that fails  in humility, Baxter's `mere Christians'?"

O modernismo ligado ao setor evangelical e mais tradicional da igreja foi cunhado como um grande prédio construído sob a ciência e o racionalismo. O pos modernismo rejeita a narrativa de uma verdade universal baseada na razão, propondo, ao invés disso, uma verdade que é local, encontrada nas comunidades de sentido.

No topo da nossa lista de ministérios generalizam seus alvos, ou por vezes, são chamados de ministérios estágios-de-vida. O movimento de crescimento de igreja chama isto de homogêneos unidos com princípios. Ambos, mesmo as igrejas sensíveis quanto as da geração x tem adotado este princípio, num ministério de estagio de vida, cada geração tem seu próprio pastor e seus alvos ministeriais, se tornando uma igreja dentro da igreja.
Hoje, se acredita que a segregação pela idade acaba empobrecendo tanto os indivíduos como as comunidades.

 E, também, outro mal entendido é a falta de centralidade do evangelho que se presencia nos encontros da geração x, lá há muita conversa sobre alcançar a cultura, mas muita pouca discussão sobre a centralidade da cruz para o perdão e o poder capacitador da graça para viver para Jesus.

O movimento emergente precisa ser visto, em sua teologia, a partir daquelas coisas que eles estão protestando e as razaos pelas quais eles estão chamando por mudança. A tarefa das igrejas emergentes, seus conteúdo, é primeiro um desmantelamento e então..uma reconstrução. Eles entendem que isto faz das igrejas tradicionais algo não muito fácil.

Os pontos a serem desconstruídos:
1. o cativeiro ao racionalismo iluminista.
2. a visão estreita da salvação
“o protesto emergente argumenta que a igreja tradicional tem focado muita atenção em como um indivíduo se torna salvo e não o suficiente em como ele ou ela vive como um cristão (…) A igreja está muito dependente na forma da salvação que está nas epístolas e não tem prestado muito atenção no ensino de Jesus sobre o Reino de Deus nos Evangelhos. Os criticos dizem que as boas novas são mais do que perdão dos pecados e um bilhete para o céu, é a aparição do reino de Deus” (loc. 397)
“De acordo com Dan Kimball, o termo a igreja emergente simplesmente significa igreja que estão focadas na missão de Jesus e pensando sobre o Reino dentro de nossa cultura emergente” (loc. 404)
3. crer antes de pertencer.
“a igreja emergente é critica a visão tradicional da igreja que a pessoa deve acreditar na teologia correta antes de ser bem vinda na igreja” (loc. 407)
4. adoração descontextualizada.
“outro protesto comum dos escritores emergentes é que a adoração na igreja tradicional não comunica mais com a cultura ao redor dela” (loc. 410)
5. pregação ineficaz

6. eclesiologia fraca.
7. tribalismo


If they are theologically liberal, that is,  they reject the rebirth of orthodoxy, then ecclesial unity may be neither   possible nor desirable. I hope this is obvious. If someone denies the  deity of Christ or the incarnation, for example, unity would not be  possible. Nevertheless, on a personal level, love, civility and kindness  would still guide us. Dialogue is always a good thing even with those  outside the bounds of orthodoxy.

Nós temos que alcançar o que John stott chamou de a unidade do evangelho, toda unidade tem um aspecto doutrinário. Nenhuma unidade é possível sem os limites do pensamento e da crença em torno de alguma coisa. Há sempre um limite sobre o que um grupo pode tolerar sem ser colocado de lado.

Por vezes, colocamos a pureza doutrinária sobre a unidade, ou estressamos uma unidade de relacionamento sob o som de doutrina. a realidade é que Jesus quer que nós sejamos igualmente comprometidos tanto com a paz como também com a pureza da igreja.   Este novo ecumenismo é sobretudo todo comprometido de modo não apologético ao antigo ensino ecumênico. É comprometido com a palavra de deus, numa visão a longo termo do consenso histórico e acumulativo e uma visão clássica ecumênica de DEUS PAI, DEUS FILHO E DEUS ESPÍRITO SANTO. Também permanece, um conceito clássico consensual das doutrinas da encarnação, expiação e ressurreição, e o retorno de Cristo. 

This view allows Christians to agree on the  essentials but cling to their differences, with humility and charity. We  can put our foot down on mere Christianity, the classic, consensual tradition   of the gospel,'
Our sermons and our weekly  school of discipleship are rooted in a commitment to teach the full counsel  of God in a way that is culturally relevant, timely and informed by the  Reformed tradition. We teach the Bible. But our understanding of the  Bible has been wonderfully shaped by the tradition we are part of.
Primeiro, nós enraizamos nossa congregação a cada semana numa liturgia histórica que traz o melhor da história cristã. Nossos sermóes e a nossa escola semanal de discipulado está comprometida em ensina o total conselho de Deus numa forma que seja culturalmente relevante, em tempo e informado pela tradição reformada. nós ensinamos a Bíblia. mas, nosso entendimento da bíblia tem sido maravilhosamente moldado pela tradição que fazemos parte.

No modernismo, que nasceu no sec. XVII, tem como visão de mundo a rejeição de uma verdade transcendente, ao invés disso, buscamos o sentido na razão e na solidão individual, não entendemos nosso mundo a partir da revelação,mas da razão. Segundo BELCHER,  a melhor metáfora para uma pessoa do sec. XX, é uma pessoa sozinha assistindo televisão.

A verdade é qualquer coisa que traga conforto ou ajuda a pessoa em algo em sua vida. Assim, toda verdade é relativa para cada pessoa. O relativismo reina, as comunidades se quebram e a ética é atirada pela janela. O pós modernismo é um pouco pior, porque leva o modernismo a sua conclusão lógica, a partir da perspectiva de que não importa como você molde isto, o pós modernismo não é uma coisa boa.Como uma solução para o pós modernismo é a cura que irá matar o paciente ainda mais rápido.

entre livros, de volta ao sec. XX

Apos alguns seculos, sem conexão própria, situação ainda vivida e vívida.

Neste mês ouvi alguns audiolivros, voltei a ouvi-los

NEMESIS e THE HUMBLING ambos de Philip Roth, THE REASON FOR GOD  de Timothy Keller e THE WORLD AS STAGE de Bill Bryson.

no papel, termine SE EU FECHAR OS OLHOS AGORA, de Edney Silvestre, e estou caminhando com VALSA NEGRA de Patricia Melo.

no kindle, terminei, at last, THE IMPERFECTIONISTS de Tom Ramcham, GENEROUS JUSTICE de Tim Keller e VINTAGE CHURCH  de Mark Driscoll, caminhei em KITCHEN CONFIDENTIAL de Antony Bourdain.