Straight From The Horses Mouth

Posted by Jonathan Brink
July 4, 2008

A lot of people talk about deconstruction like this.They say, “Well we’ve got to deconstruct and then once we’ve deconstructed, we can rebuild.”

And I want to stop at that point and say, “No.  We never cease to deconstruct.  Deconstruction is not like knocking down a building so we can clear a space to build something new.  Deconstruction is like the heat that keeps our ideas fluid and molten and moving and dynamic.”

———————————————————–

I do not believe Christians are called to believe in the resurrection of Christ.  I believe we are called to be the resurrection of Christ.  To be the site where resurrection takes place.

———————————————————–

Revelation has been reduced to the idea of God whispering something into your ear….but this is not what we find in the Bible or in the deep tradition of Christianity.  Revelation is not something that makes manifest an idea.  Revelation is what transforms us.  We know a revelation has taken place when there is incomprehension, bedazzlement, and transformation.

———————————————————–

But my favorite:

I try and keep in dialog by finding what is authentic and beautiful.  What we tend to do is…whenever we are in an argument I will argue from the place of strength, the strongest part of my argument and direct is at the weakest part of your argument.  And you will in turn take the strongest part of your argument and attack the weakest part of my argument.  And what I really want to do is to enter into dialogs where I can talk about the weakest part of my argument and you can talk about the weakest part of your argument.  and I can accept and celebrate the strongest part of your arguments and visa-versa.

Peter Rollins from the Nick and Josh Podcast Interview.

NOTE: If you read this in a reader in the morning, my original quote of some of Peter’s words were misheard, specifically the word “hate”.  He said “heat”.  It’s the thick Irish accent.  They have now been corrected.

Share and Enjoy:
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Technorati
  • Reddit
  • Google Bookmarks
Uncategorized

If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.

  • Chad
    Can we resurrect and deconstruct at the same time?
  • Chad, sometimes we need to tear down the house to build a better one. Part of living the resurrection is allowing God to build the house and participating in what he is already doing.
  • chad, i think resurrection IS deconstruction. it is a deconstruction of the predominant narrative of finality and defeat in death. it tears through that thick, certain curtain and sees an alternate path.
  • I was thinking more about what Peter said and I think the tension is to want to come to a conclusion about God...and often what happens is we create an icon/image that becomes solid. Deconstruction is to keep that image fluid, always adding, always subtracting, always growing.

    The tension inside is to want to be finished.
  • Becca Clark
    Wow, thanks for that, especially the last one. I had a conversation like that almost 2 years ago with a clergy colleague about homosexuality and the Bible. Over a three hour lunch, we shared our opinions and beliefs, and eventually came to a place where we shared even the weaknesses in our arguments and came to almost grudging respect for the strengths of one another's. It was a profound experience. No one's mind was changed, and we have since spoken against one another on the floor of our Annual Conference, but not with the same rancor as we had before.
  • Becca, I think its why I like generative conversation as opposed to argument. I realize that I'm not interested in changing minds. I'm comfortable letting the Holy Spirit do that. So that leaves me with my original calling which is to love (the Great Commandment).

    But what I find is that generative conversation actually does have a part in that. Arguments typically come at the expense of feelings and we walk away rolling our eyes. Nothing changed. But generative conversation requires listening rather than just being heard.
  • Chad
    Does there need to be a end to the means in regards to generative conversation? And doesn't mean that, if in conversation, one will dominate the other or can both walk away feeling that they listened as much or equally as they were able to talk?
  • Chad, I think one of the indicators of generative conversation is that both parties feel listened to.
  • Jonathan, I wonder if you'd consider writing a post, expanding on the comments you've written here? This is powerful, powerful stuff and I think you are touching on something that is very (sadly) neglected in many of God's children.
  • Hell of a podcast. .
blog comments powered by Disqus