Month: May 2004

There’s an interesting discussion going on a

Reasons Why has an interesting post on pragmatism and movements such as the Purpose Driven Church / Life. I think the analysis falls short, however. Read on….

Reasons Why is surely correct that mere pragmatism can’t be an ultimate justification for a belief or practice. Let’s unpack this a bit, though.

In the first example given, embryonic stem cell research, reducing the justification for such research to mere pragmatism sets up a straw man. No one really claims that ESTR is acceptable simply because it leads to treatments that work. The heart of the argument is that a fetus isn’t morally equivalent to the person suffering from, say, Alzheimer’s. The fetus may have some moral status, but this lack of moral equivalence makes the research justifiable, particularly if the research is promising. Note that this has a pragmatic component, but it isn’t mere pragmatism. (I disagree with this line of reasoning, but I also don’t think it’s helpful to reduce the opposing arguments to a straw man.)

Now let’s extend this to church movements, such as the Purpose Driven Life (PDL). It’s true that, at some popular level, people might be inclined not to examine such a movement critically because “it works.” I’m not convinced, however, that most church leaders accept the material so uncritically.

We are doing the “40 Days of Purpose” at our church, for example. I’ve read through the PDL book and I think, for the most part, that it’s pretty well Biblically grounded. The overarching point of PDL, as I see it, is that we are designed to be in a relationship with God in which we serve and glorify Him rather than ourselves. It’s really nothing more than classic, orthodox Christianity.

Does this mean I think PDL is flawless? Of course not. Warren frequently takes scriptures out of context, and the section on “mission” lacks any discussion about social justice, poverty relief and the like. But here is where I’m a realist, if not a pragmatist: there is no perfect resource. If running a “40 Days of Purpose” campaign is accessible and gets people thinking about God’s broader purpose for their lives, great! We can take what’s good from those materials and then fix what isn’t and build on what’s missing.

Sozo over at Reasons Why continues the discussion on pragmatism and the Purpose Driven Life. He notes that there haven’t been many Biblical defenes of PDL. I guess I would ask first, what is seen as unbiblical in PDL? When I read the book, I felt it was a nice, contemporary discussion of priorities and spiritual disciplines. In short: your first priority should be to glorify God, your highest purpose is to bring others into His kingdom, and you begin to cultivate Christlikeness through personal purity, prayer and Bible study. I didn’t have the impression the book was presenting some kind of gimicky formula, ala “The Prayer of Jabez.”

This isn’t to say I think the book is a revolutionary or even a top-notch discussion of these topics — merely that I think it’s generally sound.

On the question of Warren’s use of scripture — he does, frequently, employ faulty exegesis, if you could call it exegesis at all. But it’s “harmless error” in a sense, because the principles are still correct. In another sense, it’s not harmless, because it sets a bad model for others to follow. Perhaps more on that in another post.

What is it about the sound of a Hammond B3 organ that is so compelling? I was listening to Mary Chapin Carpenter’s Between Here and Gone CD on the way in to work today. The organ work on that disc is just fantastic. The playing is very subtle, with those sweet sustained notes slowly spinning out from the Leslie speaker and swiring into a tight vibrato at the end of each phrase. Just like a long, slow kiss. Wonderful!