Comments on: Criticism

By: It’s a bitter pill, I swallow here « charlieDEAN’S Blog

It’s a bitter pill, I swallow here « charlieDEAN’S Blog — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 22:59:56 +0000

[...] a bitter pill, I swallow here February 1st, 2007 Dave asked a question that really hit a point of contention with me…something that I’ve wrestled with for the [...]

By: Steve

Steve — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 06:29:42 +0000

I think it is a fine line between being critical of Rob or Jim/Jerry, and not offending them in some way. Even if the criticism is well said and accurate and gracious, we are just way to human and we take it personally. It takes a rare soul to humbly recieve criticism. It is proper to be accurate and direct and gracious when we critique someone, but it is eqaully proper for the criticism to be recieved humbly.

By: eric

eric — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 01:30:54 +0000

oh yeah, before anyone gets to criticize me, i meant “sometimes” instead of “sometime’s”

By: eric

eric — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 01:29:55 +0000

ahh criticism… a word that i oft times spell incorrectly.

(but not anymore with firefox)

criticism is the window to improvement.

but sometime’s it’s a doggy door that’s just hard to fit through.

By: vintagechristianity

vintagechristianity — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 06:14:38 +0000

Dave, I think (not that it matters that much what I think) that the main thing to remember in handling criticism from others about something I have written is that I asked for it. I have published something for the world to read, and by that I have opened myself up to critique, especially the critique of the larger Christian community. This criticism can be a good corrective against the mistake of overzealous authorship, or just down write wrong thinking. If I am convinced that what I have written is the truth, then I will trust God (by his grace) to be able to handle any criticism I recieve (good or bad), remembering that Jesus himself was heavily criticized. On the other hand, when I am judging someone elses material I must do so in love, out of a genuine concern for not only the community that might be affected by his/her writing, but also for the person I am critiqing. If I am not genuinely concerned for that person, and I am not genuinely concerned with the wellfare of the community that might be affected, then I am simply trying to prove myself right and the other wrong. That is un-Christian. If I am not motivated out of love (and I would have to admit that I struggle with the “loving-the-heretic” part (not that all whom I would critique are heretics, but you get the point). It comes easy for me to be concerned about the larger Christian community and attempt to rescue us all from the misleading or uncorrect ideas of others, but how much of that comes from a prideful, self-oriented motivation that only gives me an ego boost. I am glad you bring up this point. Prayerfully, I will try to examine my own motives in the future for any critique I may dole out. May God’s grace be with us all.

Soli Deo Gloria,
Chris.

By: Ryan Imel

Ryan Imel — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 04:57:15 +0000

I think the key to critiquing theological ideas and methods is to do so honestly and humbly – but focus the criticism on the method or idea itself, not on the ones responsible. The idea is the real problem, not necessarily the person. This is my gut instinct, at least…

I have trouble feeling any sort of compassion for the supporters of Left Behind. Just recently (it was while browsing a Circuit City during a break at the conference, actually) I ran across The Left Behind Eternal Forces PC Game and was pretty shocked.

“Conduct physical & spiritual warfare: using the power of prayer to strengthen your troops in combat…Enjoy a robust single player experience…or play multiplayer games as Tribulation Force or the AntiChrist’s Global Community Peacekeepers with up to eight players via LAN or over the internet!”

That gave me the chills. It also shows the true purpose behind that series from the beginning. Like I said, when it comes to that book series it seems pretty dang reasonable to call it theologically damaging; at the very least it’s psychologically disruptive.

When it comes to many forms of theological critcism, however, I do believe a degree of humility and self-awareness must come into play. It’s also important to remember that unless you are respected as you are you won’t affect anyone with your spiritual/theological critcism (from my own experience). So this might be a reason why Bell goes without ridicule when making these kinds of jabs – he is well respected.