It sure would be nice to have a viable 'third way' in this presidential election.

As someone who falls into McKnight's "ironic faith" category, I am enamored with the "Third Way" concept. But I am frustrated by some emergent leaders who claim that they are operating outside the right/left polarities, because I actually see very little evidence of it. The grenade throwing metaphor works nicely here. It's also easy to ignore this reality when I find myself agreeing with the emergent folks most of the time.

At the end of the day, I don't see much hope of escaping the left/right labels (either the ones we claim or the ones that others attach to us). Instead, I admire McKnight's approach. He places himself within the political continuum by calling himself a moderate evangelical. But even as he makes this claim he values others' perspectives and listens to others as he makes very fair (and generous) critiques.

I think we can make our theological/political claims, but the hope of the "Third Way" is that we can treat everyone with dignity.

But perhaps I'm wrong...Have others tried to escape the polarities? How have you been successful? What has been frustrating?

God's truth is not to be viewed on a spectrum. There is one truth and many brands of error.

"Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it."

I don't think anyone is denying absolute truth or trying to place God's truth on a political spectrum here. Rather, we have to acknowledge that our interpretations do differ. We know that we only see through a mirror dimly...We know in part now but we shall know fully (1 Cor. 13). So how do believers interact with each other when our honest efforts to seek God's unified truth lead us to different conclusions? Are we going to treat each other like enemies or we going to approach people with different perspectives with generosity and dignity? I think these questions are at the heart of this conversation.

I agree with RDM's point here. Scripture, interpretation, faith and practice is not to be a subset of or defined by the polical or cultural spectrum in this century and country, or any other. Scripture, faith and practice are to transform people and their hearts and politics and culture. Seek first the kingdom of God. Where doing that will land you on the current liberal-conservative divide should certainly not be of primary concern.

I think even trichotomous frameworks are overly restrictive. There is considerable diversity even amongst these so-called "third way" thinkers, so much so that we may as well start talking about fourth and fifth ways as well ... and so on ad finitum. The body has many limbs.

While I understand the perils and promises stated, I think that the growing voice of this 'third way' is fresh and needed and one that I have thought about for a long time... I am tired of the polemics... and the weariness that comes with it and cannot wait for November 4th... because, God will, then comes November 5th... and then what? Hopeful some attempts by courageous people to forge a third way

When the church abandons the gospel of Jesus Christ's dying for our sins and goes toward trying to make the world a better place we have false doctrine. The church is to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, in whom dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. If we get caught up in a social gospel, trying the change the world through whatever formula (PEACE), or trying to change God to look like something we like better (the Shack), we fall into a deep pit of heresy. Jesus said he was "NOT OF THIS WORLD", and the same way we are "ALIENS", "STRANGERS", and our home is heaven. The ministry of the church should be foremost SPIRITUAL, addressing the sin nature that needs the blood of Jesus Christ to cleanse. When a man changes from him, he helps himself. If he stays devoted to mindless idol worship, he will never be set free. AFter dealing with our sin problem, God wants us to understand SANCTIFICATION, and the ongoing laying aside of sinful behaviors (idol worship, murder, stealing, gossip) and allow the Holy Spirit to correct and discipline us in our walk with Him.

Brent,

from I Peter 1:

20 But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation,

21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

did you copy this from my blog? that's exactly what i've been talking about there for the better part of a year.

hmmm... a prophet is without honor in his own circle of commenting friends.

Chad,

Your observation of a desire for some to pursue a "third way" is accurate. There's some irony in what you find in what I have written:

So let me explain the origins of your two pieces of evidence:

First, my new book, The Blue Parakeet, originally had a book project title of "The Third Way" and it was going to be a piece that got beyond the polarities of evangelicalism and liberalism. The more I got into the book, though, I decided I had to deal with only one of those issues -- reading the Bible and living it out in our world -- so the book lost the title "The Third Way." What you picked up from the ads about this book is information that hangs over from the original ideas. (More of that below.)

The piece in CT about ironic faith was originally a one-piece article that was split into two pieces: one about Brian and one about ironic faith. The subtitle that "ironic faith" is the 3d way was an editorial decision and I wish I had picked that up. I don't think ironic faith is the 3d Way, but perhaps part of the 3d Way. Oddly enough, the paragraph in the original ms prior to the "Ironic faith" section had something like this: many of us think the emerging movement has potential to be the 3d Way.

So, the two flags you pull from written material are less my own expressions and more those of others. But...

Having said that these two pieces of evidence are not really mine, let me stand by the idea of the 3d Way. I am committed to a 3d Way, a way beyond the polarities, and I wish I were better at it. But, I'm trying. I see Jesus Creed and Praying with the Church and Blue Parakeet to be part of my larger 3d Way project. I have a few more books to write that I hope will make that clear.

As for branding ... well, yes, I think you are wise here to raise some cautions. But the first point I made above might clarify why there's not much "third way" in Blue Parakeet and why the publisher says what it does -- it applies to a project rather than to the specific terms of this book. I don't use that expression much, if at all, in this book -- but it is a 3d Way book.

As I think about this, wouldn't it be good for the Church in our day to get beyond the polarities and find a 3d Way that seeks the wisdom of God and attends to the Spirit for our generation?

Again, thanks much for your insightful catching of an expression. I do believe there is hope for a 3d Way approach that gets us beyond our stalemates.

Check out a group that have called themselves people of the third way for a generations, the Mennonites, see the Third Way Cafe at
http://www.thirdway.com/

RDM,

It's difficult to discern you're point since you only provided the excerpt from 2 Peter. How do you explain and respond to different interpretations of the Bible (either throughout church history or contemporary issues)?

I've been reading "The Blue Parakeet" this weekend and it has been immensely helpful in exploring this question. Thanks, Scot!

Thanks for this great article. I am always hesitant with labels because no one can control who claims them. People claim to be this or that, and then the masses judge that label by what they see in that person.

Like you said, follow the Bible and stick to that. Forget the movements or the labels, all the do is confuse the matter.

Did you get that, folks? Emergent is out; Third Way is in. We can now look forward to Third Way conferences and Third Way books and heated discussions about who is really Third Way and who isn't. This should keep us occupied (or better, distracted) for the next few years, until a new phrase is coined.

So refreshing to find someone giving a pretty balanced view.

RDM wrote: God's truth is not to be viewed on a spectrum. There is one truth and many brands of error.

As an earlier poster noted, the issue is really not one of God's truth, but rather of our interpretation. Its easy enough to say truth is truth, so just get it already. But what do you do when well meaning Christians come to different conclusions as they interpret that truth?

It seems to me that to ignore this fact under the banner of "God's truth is not to be viewed on a spectrum" is to assume that one's own interpretation must necessarily be the right one- and everyone else should just fall in line.

Of course, one says this because they're convinced that it is God who has given them this truth - not they themselves. I've heard RDM say almost exactly that in previous Our of Ur discussions. Fine. But what do you do when there is a "spectrum" of people who believe this very same thing, and yet draw different conclusions?

Speaking of Wright and Ehrman, I'll be attending a debate (dialogue?) between these two giants this Thursday and I'm gonna try to record it and post the audio at my site on Friday. For anyone who might be interested.

Grace and Peace,
Raffi

Darren,

Man and his interpretation are flawed. God and His Word are not. God's Word may only be interpreted against itself. You are giving me human wisdom. I am giving you God's Word.

It appears that the "Third Way" concept owes much, if not all, to Hegelian Dialectic (i.e. Thesis, Synthesis, Antithesis - which becomes the new Thesis, ad nauseum).

The weakness of a dialectic is that it presupposes that all truth must be discovered by trial and error. The so-called "balance" that is cherished these days also assumes that we understand what the real extremes are.

What if what we call "right" is center and the real extreme conservatism is something way beyond the blue? Balance then is decidedly off-center.

The goal must be discovering and living truth, not finding middle ground.

RDM,

Friend, even when people "interpret the Word against itself" they STILL come to DIFFERENT conclusions. Plugging your ears and saying it ain't so just doesn't make this go away.

This is not about Man's wisdom vs God's wisdom. This is about you vs. reality.

All of the "merits" of this third way sound like Abraham Kuyper's refinements of reformed theology 100 years ago.

Truths can be held in dialectic tension with one another (God's sovereignty and man's responsibility), without bending one or the other.

Sounds like the "third way" is just 100 years behind, at least in this respect. And ironically, these great ideas come from the conservative, Reformed camp!

My Lord, anyone for linguistic table tennis? What it boils down to is are we sold out for Jesus, the emergent, emerging, progressive (and so on and so on) dialogue speaks of a wider spiritual restlessness, the times we live in are attempting to dilute and convolute our faith, however God by His grace is stirring up preconceived notions of "Christianity", I'm sick of Christianity and I'm pretty sure God is. He requires followers, people of foolish love and reckless faith.Around the globe people are being drawn to reassess their focus. 3 car, 2 house middle american Christianity is being called into question, and who has a problem with this? 3 car, 2 house owning middle america.We can sit around and chin stroke the issue of whether third way theology touches upon Hegel, or we can get our hands dirty feeding the poor, reaching out to the lost and pouring ourself out for others. Words, words, words, signposts to The One Greater than ourselves or divisive diversionary utterances which preoccupy and take our mind of the task at hand, knowing Jesus, loving Jesus, Following Jesus-wherever and however He leads.....