An Evening With Rob Bell
On April 15 Vineyard Community Church hosted An Evening With Rob Bell for Off The Map.
About 250 people (mostly local) gathered for an evening of food and music and to hear some short talks, interviews and dialog.
The podcasts are here:
- Rob Bell “Jesus Wants To Save Christians”
- Rose Swetman Interview With Rob Bell
- Andy Himes - Missionary to Evangelicals
- Off the Map interview with Rob Bell, Todd Hunter, Doug Pagitt, & Sunil Sardar
These bloggers have written about it (I’ll add to this list if I find more):
- Steve Lewis
- Randy Siever
- Rose Swetman
- Eugene Cho
- Ryan Beattie
- Helen Mildenhall
- “Linds”
- Ben Katt
- Soma…a church of the Christ
If/when photos go online I’ll link to those too.
Jim Henderson said
am April 17 2008 @ 8:47 pm
Thanks to the generosity of Rich and Rose Swetman, Rob Bell, Todd Hunter , Doug Pagitt, Sunil Sardar, Andy Himes , Kelly Carpenter and his band you are able to eaves drop on a series of conversations recorded live at Off The Map Live @ The Vineyard on April 15th.
You will also want to read the fascinating responses, comments and observations of our blogging friends. Let’s just say that not all Christians come to the same conclusions.
Off The Map seeks to promote Otherlyness - the spirituality of serving. We participated in and promoted the Dalai Lama in Seattle because we believe he and his friends are seeking the grow in the spirituality of serving as well. We think we have much to learn from them.
Our Christian friends who were invited to represent us, Rob Bell and Doug Pagitt,were gracious and generous.
The evening gathering gave some of us a chance to reflect on the day and talk about important issues facing those who call themselves followers of the way of Jesus.
We were honored to have several of todays most important thinkers and innovators in the room at the same time.
Pam Hogeweide said
am April 19 2008 @ 2:13 pm
i’ll blog about this specific night before the weekend is over. For now, I have a post up about the Dalai Lama event and my thoughts on participating in an interspirituality event.
it was a great evening at the vineyard. highlights of the night for me were Andy Himes talking about the wound of racism on his little boy soul. I grew up in the south and I could totally relate. When I saw him leaving I ran down the stairs from the balcony and caught him outside. It was a quick, but meaningful interaction for me as two former white southerners intersected in the space of prejudice. His comment about helping the dying black woman still echoes in my thoughts, “I carried God in the night.”
I also had a kick hanging out with Nancy Murphy and Al Doyle in the balcony listening to Rose interview Rob. I love how Rob communicates, he is clearly a gifted orator. And it was utterly fascinating, as well as frustrating for me, to see how he completely missed the direct question that Rose asked him. It was a perfect example being lived out in front of all of us of what the disconnect is with our brothers who have the power of the platform and do not include our sisters in that space of leadership and influence.
Thanks again, OTM and Vineyard, for organizing the evening. The music was great, the refreshments and wine were lovely, it was a provocative evening that did not drain me as many gatherings tend to do. Great format!
Heather Stidham said
am April 20 2008 @ 12:09 am
I loved listening to all of the speakers and really connected with all of them. Andy Himes touched a place in my spirit that left me reeling!
As for Rob Bell, what a wonderful speaker! He is such a gifted individual. I could listen to him tell bible stories for hours. I want to comment in regards to Pam Hogeweide’s comment, I do not believe Rob Bell missed the point of Rose Swetman’s direct question. What I understood him to say was, don’t make an agenda out of women leading in the church, JUST DO IT! Women have so much potential in all aspects of leadership, especially in the Vineyard. We just need to grab a hold of it and walk forward. There is a time and a place for everything, we may not be at that time and place yet but we are paving the way for all who follow.
Anyway, thank you Off The Map for organizing such a wonderful event.
Helen said
am April 20 2008 @ 3:52 pm
Thanks for your comment, Heather.
I agree with you that women need to take every opportunity they get in order to change the status quo. However, I think they also need men to help create those opportunities in order to change the status quo.
I don’t think women simply taking opportunities will be enough and that’s why Rose would like men who have influence nationally to help create more opportunities for women.
If you’re a woman called to lead and the status quo is making that hard, how do you not make an agenda out of it? The only way I can think of is to give up and turn aside from that call.
Rose said
am April 20 2008 @ 6:07 pm
I agree women need to step into the places made for them. I think my husband, Rich had a good analogy. If we were alive during slavery would we say, well I don’t have slaves on my plantation, it’s too bad they still slaves on “their” plantation…I think my point was more to the people that hold the power, i.e. white males have to be willing to make space for women when there is not a place to take hold. There is a difference between slow, organic change that comes from just “doing it” which I am in favor of…and knowing when it’s time to agitate the system to put things to rights…think MLK, Alice Paul…
I loved that Rob said he used to think that there were two sides to this issue and now he is convinced if you land on the side of oppressing (I don’t think he used that word) women you are just wrong.
Elaine said
am April 21 2008 @ 8:23 am
Rose - thank you for raising the women’s issue in church.
Thank you Jim for inviting women to the table.
adey wassink said
am April 22 2008 @ 5:33 pm
I appreciate this discussion. I wasn’t a part of this grand event but have been moved and stirred by it. May i say that I am heartened by Rose Swetman’s willingness to choose “doing it” and “agitating the system.” She does it with style and finesse. May we see more men and women sharing their privilege with those to whom power has been historically denied.
adey
Michele said
am May 5 2008 @ 12:42 pm
I don’t see any Bible verses in your blogs to support who and what you are advocating here. Rob Bell and the Dalai Llama? What fellowship hath light with darkness? The entire Emerging Emergent “conversation” is filled with wandering souls who have no solid Bible backgrounds and just have itching ears, heaping up teachers who will say thinks they want to hear. I urge you all to repent of this heresy. You are preaching Marxism, atheism, Eastern Mysticism, and all sound like Oprah Winfrey and her sidekick Eckhart Tolle. Repent and turn back to the God of the Bible before it is too late. You are doing untold damage to people.
Jim Henderson said
am May 5 2008 @ 7:41 pm
” I urge you all to repent of this heresy.”
We will take that under advisement
Jim Henderson said
am May 5 2008 @ 8:33 pm
Michele
One more thing that would help me consider your request per repenting from heresy etc.
Could you also consider repenting from being mean. I suppose you think of it as being bold and all that but it really is straight up meaness - and even you wont listen if someone sounds like they’re yelling at you.
But alas- if you are what I used to be none of this will phase you since you are so certain of your understanding of the bible and all things Christian.
I dont expect that you are any more ready to repent from your heresy of being unloving than I am of being unbiblical
Helen said
am May 6 2008 @ 9:12 am
If being mean is unbiblical then maybe Michele is being unbiblical too.
And if being kind is heretical then I’m going to continue being an unapologetic heretic.
Elaine H. said
am May 6 2008 @ 12:34 pm
Michele,
I really don’t remember ever reading that Jesus said we must “quote from the bible” to support every statement we make. That could make for very long blogs, very long conversations (or very short)
Also, frequently people selectively mis-use scripture to support their points…but if it is taken out of context - what is the value? is that not misleading others? I have come to distrust people who “quote” scripture inappropriately.
I have seen other people express your same concern, both at OTM blogs and at other Christian gatherings, about the lack of scripture to support whatever is being said.
It always puzzles me.
Can you talk more about why this matters to you?
Can you give us scripture to support your view?
Thanks for your dissent…even if we don’t agree.
(FYI - I have been a follower of Jesus since I was a wee little girl more than 60 years ago.)
benjamin ady said
am May 6 2008 @ 12:36 pm
I for one am a wandering soul (…like Abraham?) whose ears occasionally itch for some good speaking (listening to typical sermons tends to exacerbate this itch, while listening to a Barack Obama sermon tends to scratch it).
But what exactly is a “Solid Biblical Background”? Sounds like a piece of military hardware or software or something =)
benjamin ady said
am May 6 2008 @ 12:38 pm
All my heroes were (are) considered heretics by someone =)
too late in what sense?
benjamin ady said
am May 6 2008 @ 1:05 pm
(sorry–can’t resist)
I noticed when I was in the shower that you can squeeze the entire following lyric into the melody for Don’t let me be misunderstood:
“I’m just a wandering soul with itchy ears and a Solid Biblical Background. Oh Lord please don’t let me be misunderstood.”
Liz said
am May 6 2008 @ 1:43 pm
Michelle: listen to these people. They make a joke out of it. And you know, I think Jesus had his “mean” moments. And these people are PLENTY “mean”. The vitriol they have posted about more traditional Christians who don’t agree with them is mean to the core. You go girl!!! We need more Christians who will stand for the truth instead of thinking they are being spiritual because they drop the f-bomb more than those mean ole evangelicals. I am thoroughly sickened by what I have seen in the “emergent” movement. They act as if they have invented something new. I seem to remember hearing about genuine relationship and not treating people like a “project” well before these people came on the scene. I seem to remember being involved in soup kitchens, habitat for humanity, etc etc…well before these people came up with the idea that they were the first humanitarian Christians (and I use the term VERY loosely) in recent history. They are OOZING with pride. Which IS a sin. Meanness, last time I checked wasn’t. Deliberate cruelty: yes. But these people construe anything that stands for the truth and “excludes” anyone as “mean”. I bet they would hate Jesus if they met Him face to face because they would find him WAAAAY too “mean” for their own tastes.
Helen said
am May 6 2008 @ 3:01 pm
Liz, we like humor - that’s true. I’m not sure where the rest of what you said comes from. Are you sure it’s about us and not some other people you’ve encountered on the Internet? If you have actual quotes which show us being proud, vitriolic, claiming to be the first humanitarian Christians etc. I’d be interested to see those.
benjamin ady said
am May 6 2008 @ 3:14 pm
with regards to the F bomb: The C bomb
Liz said
am May 6 2008 @ 3:57 pm
Humor is fine. But whenever someone raises a valid point it gets turned to a joke. I believe that is an evasive tactic. I have been a parent long enough to know this when I see it. You don’t want to talk about something because it raises an uncomfortable topic for you so lets make it into a funny. Not anti humor. Just anti deflection. And if you don’t know the difference….you are doing what my husband calls “playing iggy” (figure it out)or you are truly at a very very immature level of intellectual development.
Liz said
am May 6 2008 @ 3:59 pm
there is something seriously wrong if you think “church” or “christian” are worse words than f***.
benjamin ady said
am May 6 2008 @ 5:26 pm
Exactly.
Liz said
am May 7 2008 @ 12:18 pm
so, um, you are agreeing with me then Benjamin? Amazing. I happen to have that “unChristian” book but you know what: it makes some good points but there is a place you have to draw the line when it comes to making yourself into what you think the world wants. If the entire church does the marketing strategy thing, they will attract a lot of people who want their ears tickled and a lot of people who want something real and strong and right that they can believe in will be totally turned off at the bunch of pussies that the Christian church has become in an effort to supposedly “win” the lost. You seem to think that being firm and sure about your beliefs is the same as being nasty. This reminds me extremely much of the dynamics in my extremely messed up but looking very good on the outside family of origin. There was nothing BAD you could say because they were all so freakin NICE. But it was crazymaking. You never knew if you were coming or going because of the gymnastics that went on preventing anyone from saying anything not percieved as “nice”. I don’t know that I EVER have seen “nice” listed as a virtue in the bible. Jesus got downright angry sometimes. He sure didn’t have a “conversation” with the pharisees to see why they felt the way they did and if there was anything he had said to offend them because of course no one would ever ever EVER reject the gospel because it was a hard truth that they didn’t want. We just KNOW that if they rejected it it had to be because those Christians must just have been jerks in some way.
Helen said
am May 7 2008 @ 2:22 pm
Liz, I’m sorry you had a messed-up crazymaking family.
benjamin ady said
am May 7 2008 @ 2:55 pm
Your experience with your family sounds a lot like my experience inside evangelical Christianity. My experience has been that emergent types are much more willing to talk about and acknowledge the real darkness than the people inside the churches I experienced were. Maybe I mean to say that my experience/paradigm about darkness meshes better with that of the emergent conversation than with that of the evangelical conversation.
To pull it back around to the original post, my experience/understanding of darkness and of hope meshes better with, for instance, the things I hear Rich and Rose Swetman and Doug Pagitt and Andy Himes saying that it ever did with the things I heard said by the pastors and leaders I interacted with inside American evangelical Christianity for 20 years.
Liz said
am May 7 2008 @ 3:51 pm
don’t be sorry Helen. I was only using it as an example. It made me stronger and wiser than I would have been otherwise (Romans 8:28)
So why is it that I seem to know quite a few Christians who still hold orthodox doctrine and are also willing to look at the difficulties? They don’t have to be mutually exclusive you know.
benjamin ady said
am May 7 2008 @ 4:30 pm
Indeed. Still, it always surprises me. In the same way, I suppose, that people who grew up in Baghdad were surprised by snow earlier this year in a way that someone who grew up in Yukon never could be
Liz said
am May 7 2008 @ 9:16 pm
well, Benjamin, what you are representing as “typical” of the evangelical church doesn’t mesh with what I have seen> And I have been around a lot, lived on both coasts and been to a lot of churches. Yeah, what you are talking about is out there, but I haven’t found it to be typical. I have known some KJV only fundies and frankly the don’t seem a lot like what you have linked to. The people I knew thought they were more spiritual if they never went to a dentist, the women were all fat, ugly and dressed in polyester. The list goes on. But I know plenty of people in regular evangelical churches who came from that who found their way to a less “weird” take on Christianity yet still remained true to the Bible. Yeah, I have known some that pretty much threw the baby out with the bathwater. There is no talking to them because any type of attempts at reasoning gets you lumped in as in cahoots with “the abusers”.
benjamin ady said
am May 8 2008 @ 1:16 am
And yet some people find they are able to talk to us. Like, for instance, Stefan Ulstein, whose book of interviews with folks who grew up fundamentalist is … profoundly beautiful and insightful.
I’m trying to remember if Jesus ever had this problem–of being “lumped in with the abusers” when he tried to talk to the victims of spiritual abuse. My memory is that the victims didn’t generally respond to him that way.
Just as I haven’t responded that way to the likes of Rob Bell, Rose Swetman, Jim H., or Doug Pagitt.
tammy said
am May 8 2008 @ 3:14 am
Michele said:
“…who have no solid Bible backgrounds and just have itching ears, heaping up teachers who will say thinks they want to hear.”
Jim Commented:
“Could you also consider repenting from being mean.”
Ohhh…. Jim and Michele ,
I don’t think Michele was being mean as I also read her context.( I could be wrong) But Michele you are wrong in saying Emergents have no solid Bible backgrounds.That’s just an untruth.While you may believe they are wrong in interpretation, and therefore scriptual truths, it does not necessitate that they have no solid bible backgrounds.Jim while you may assume the heart of Michele to be “mean” to say you have “itching ears” she may then assume of your heart, that you are being mean in suggesting she was mean.(Was your response meant to be mean since you accuse her of being unloving or were you acting in love, persuasively trying to show her here error in thinking and how her writing actions appeared to you so that if still remaining in disagreement you could agree to disagree if need be?
The woman thing girls as encouragement,
As I mentioned on the other post my church is Willow Creek in the Chicago area. Besides many position in layman leadership I specifically at one point held a position the was viewed as unpaid staff as a “Niche Director”( position under the staff paid director of the ministry.)I was overseer to and ran the ministry that reported to staff. I was the coach and leader to 7 men in the apologetics ministry,who then themselves coached leaders who ran small groups. Because of the nature of apologetics ministries,( teaching ministries by nature) they are highly male dominated presently because historically churches have held, and many still do, that women should not teach in the church or “over” men. This curve of course is moving as churches have changed their stance and women now go into all areas of ministry without having to assume they may be rejected because they are women.(Of course with the acception of Men’s ministry specifically to men:-)
There was only need for 1 one on one conversation with one of the coaches that arose because i was female. It ended up turning out very well as his assumption were relieved by my responses and community was restored.
As to me , in hindsight I admit I felt uncomfortable and was to limited at engaging as their leader in conversation to our “purity walks” so as to stay accountable as leaders who lives need to examplify Christ as we serve.In all other areas our edification and accountibility was good and open. It so happens that one of the leaders confessed to me, out of conscious after i had stepped down because it started while we served together, that he had had an affair.
To say the least I did not let him of the hook, but I had felt that i failed him and apologized and questioned whether for me I would enter into close leadership without at least one more woman on my leadership team.( for those here who may be sensitive to this issue I never met in any closed quarters or at a home where a wife or my husband wasn’t present.)
My leaders never batted an eye in putting me in the position and chose me over the men. All their measures where about leadership, balance, love , giftedness and passion and mission vision. Basically the totality of my walk with Christ.
Now though, it has been responses outside the church in male dominated careers that has actually been less “friendly” to me and other capable women i have worked with.
love tammy
Helen said
am May 8 2008 @ 7:59 am
Tammy, I’m glad you attend a church which affirms and implements women in leadership. I can see how it would be helpful to not be the only woman in a particular team.
benjamin ady said
am May 8 2008 @ 2:01 pm
One thing I’ve been noticing on this blog and JaC over the last few days is that …. “I” statements are so much more palatable (hearable) than “you” statements. I knew this from previously, but it’s just been really clear in an examplish kind of way the last little while =).
You know what I mean, right? “I feel ….” “I hear ….” “I am ….” rather than “You did ….” “You said ….” “You are ….” This is especially true when there are some negative emotions going on for people.
tammy said
am May 9 2008 @ 1:57 am
benjamin,
I just thought you might like to give your comment( what you said:-) about “palatable” some more thought if shown the problem with it.It would be sad to limit yours or someone elses art of communication by judgements that aren’t accurate. I would hate to see you avoid “You did ….” “You said ….” “You are ….” or want someone else too.
I love you, but you are wrong.
I hate you but you are right.
You are beautiful, I don’t like you though.
You are mean , but I see your point.
Even though I think you are mean, it doesn’t make you wrong.
I must speak out against your teachings, as you have spoken out against my teaching. We may find we are both wrong.I assume the best, that you do it with the same concern as me.
I am YELLING because I am mad.
You are gracious and you lift my spirit.
You said beautiful things.
You did say that?
You said,”You know what I mean, right?”
So can we agree?
love tammy
Helen said
am May 9 2008 @ 9:01 am
Tammy wrote
Yes, he did, didn’t he?
I understand where Benjamin’s coming from. Making negative assertions about other people is very inflammatory. But as you point out “You” statements that are compliments are very affirming. I hope Benjamin is not going to end his delightful practice of posting “You rock!” just because it’s a “you” statement.
I prefer “I agree with you” and “I disagree with you” over “you are right” or “you are wrong” except where I am qualified to use the latter statements, for example, if I am responding to a comment about me. I think those latter statements should be backed up with evidence so they show I have reasons for what I say. Rather than implying I have all knowledge - which is what it implies if I make assertions someone is right or wrong without backing up what I say.
benjamin ady said
am May 9 2008 @ 5:39 pm
Tammy,
You rock =)
And
When you say “I love you, but ….”, I feel … distrustful.
And
I see what you mean
And.
I meant to say … that I learned this really kewl helpful technique for deescalating conflict in relationships from Les and Leslie Parrott which is about complaining rather than criticizing. The way it is supposed to work is that when I feel negative emotion toward her, rather than criticizing my super lovely spouse (i.e., “You make me so mad” or “You never ______” or “You always _______” etc.), I ought to (there, I put an oughty should on myself) choose to complain instead. Complaining can be accomplished using the XYZ model: “In situation X, when you do or say Y, I feel Z.”
By the way, the “Z” here, in our household, is to be pronounced in the Australian fashion, “zed”.
Sometimes this leads to a bit of hilarity, if I am feeling very strong negative emotion, accomanied by a generalized inability to put it into words, I will simply say with strong emotion the actual formula to her, including the actual “XY and ZED” rather than filling them in with the situation appropriate words.
I have found this ongoingly and enormously helpful relationally with both my spouse and others.
=)
Helen said
am May 10 2008 @ 8:25 am
Benjamin, I’ve learned that technique too and also found it very helpful.
Timothy Wright said
am May 10 2008 @ 8:27 am
Hi,
Learned lots from your folks in the past years. Recently listened to ”
Off The Map Interview with Rob Bell, Todd Hunter, Doug Pagitt, & Sunil Sardar”
I think it was Jim asking the people why they following Jesus. I was shocked, honestly shocked, especially by Doug who follows Jesus because he got their first. Wow that is really sad? What about Jesus being who he said he was, ” I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
Not bad, but not as good as He got their first. That does not have the authority to transform a culture let alone set us free from our sin.
Please, don’t loose the moorings of the TRUTH of Jesus. I know Truth in the emergent world can give off bad vibes, but your gift of helping us to walk in OE will be lost if we don’t lift Jesus to whom he is: “LORD OF ALL”
Bless you
Tim
Helen said
am May 10 2008 @ 9:16 am
Tim, thanks for expressing your concerns respectfully.
I thought Doug was simply being honest when he said he follows Jesus because he got there first.
I think that’s true for a lot of people. How many Christians just before becoming a Christian said “Wait - I need to go check out every other religion first!” Not many, I’m guessing. So they, like Doug, follow Jesus because they got there first.
tammy said
am May 14 2008 @ 2:37 pm
Error: please fill the required fields (name, email).
Yep that’s what happens when you press the Say it! button before you enter your name and email.Then when you arrow back the comments are all gone.
Guess I might type up my musings again later …..
Geoff said
am June 9 2008 @ 2:27 am
People. Calm down.
The Emergent Church is harmless and Rob Bell seems like a pretty good guy. Love the nooma videos. I think the fact that there are over 33,000 denominations should make everyone cut each other a bit of slack; not sure anyone is tapped into the ‘exact’ truth of what Jesus wants from His church. I mean, 33,000? The things Christians choose to fight about makes me laugh and cry at the same time.