Comments for Meet Jesus at uni

Comment on Student movements and slippery slopes by Arthur Davis

Arthur Davis — Sat, 18 May 2013 07:50:46 +0000

Sure thing, Mike. It’s the vibe I remember in my head as a student: SCM wasn’t just different to us, they were an object lesson to show decline, even apostasy. The slippery slope was: lose propitiation-as-centre, and SCM is your inevitable endpoint. The most memorable occasion was MYC 2003, ‘the Cross of Christ’. (I’ve heard it in Aussie student ministry circles at various points since then, too.)

I’m using McKnight not as a contrast, but to reflect on identity. I’m not warning against defining community from the centre — only against using our centre as ammo against others. I want us to be honest about *how* we go about defining ourselves, and to relax: we can have our centre, but there’s no need to be all sectarian about it!

Comment on Student movements and slippery slopes by Mike Roe (@MicrosaurusRex)

Mike Roe (@MicrosaurusRex) — Sat, 18 May 2013 00:51:56 +0000

Arthur, thanks for the clarification. :-) In what way do you think that the CICCU story was used at EU as a ‘slippery slope’ argument? Or who do you think it ‘weilded against’ at EU? [As a trainee staff worker at EU during your time there I am naturally curious to understand this better.]

Either way, how do you now wish to understand and communicate the significance of the atonement now? After all, McKnight isn’t against maintaining (and promoting) the centrality of atonement, he just seems concerned with how focusing on ‘Penal Substitution’ (to the exclusion of the other “clubs in the bag”) obscures the richness of “the atonement”; not that emphasizing the atonement (‘the atoning blood of Christ’) itself necessarily leads one to ignore other aspects of the gospel (such as the incarnation). As such I’m not sure I see that McKnight is even necessarily in conflict with Grubb and the CICCU position. What am I missing here? ;-)

Comment on Keeping missionaries accountable by petervandever

petervandever — Fri, 17 May 2013 06:04:48 +0000

I think it is more the people back in the States that make it spiritual. I don’t make things all spiritual. (In fact, I hate overly spiritual people). I just tell people I am hanging out with locals and leave it at that. We are still normal people too.

Comment on Student movements and slippery slopes by Arthur Davis

Arthur Davis — Wed, 15 May 2013 04:04:48 +0000

Cheers Mike. Yeah, my point is that the CICCU story was used as a slippery slope in my student ministry circles (not by Stott).

Comment on Student movements and slippery slopes by Mike Roe (@MicrosaurusRex)

Mike Roe (@MicrosaurusRex) — Wed, 15 May 2013 01:21:00 +0000

Thanks Arthur for a stimulating piece, and thanks Andrew for the Perelandra analogy.

I do however wonder whether you (Arthur) are being just a teeny bit mischievous? … since I don’t think Stott is using the CICCU tale as a slippery slope argument. :-)

Stott emphasizes (and you note) that the encounter was about a potential post-war re-unification of the (much larger) SCM and the (much smaller) CICCU. The point is not that CICCU were saying that if the SCM denies a central place for the atoning blood of Christ then they are on a slippery slope towards doom … they had already separated (after previously existing prior to and independently of the SCM). Isn’t the point that they wanted to maintain it as central for themselves, and to re-join the SCM would be incompatible with that? That’s not a slippery slope argument, and nor is it a reason to suggest that CICCU didn’t embrace other aspects of the gospel. So I don’t think Stott is being inconsistent with the use of the tale.

BTW: In the context of early 20th century evangelicalism the centrality of atonement was actually a pretty good shibboleth … since the very fact that groups sidelined it (or denied, or outright re-defined it) often revealed a great deal about “where someone was coming from” theologically (and whether you can work together with them to meet your own aims). And we should remember: the Ephraimites were not killed because of how they pronounced shibboleth, they were killed because they were Ephraimites. The shibboleth just revealed where they were coming from.