<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/775492</link>
		<description>Comments by geoffholsclaw</description>
<item>
<title>Reclaiming the Mission : Is the New Calvinism a New Fundamentalism? </title>
<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/is-the-new-calvinism-a-new-fundamentalism/#IDComment108874853</link>
<description>did you all see Dr. Stackhouse&amp;#039;s take down of Driscoll&amp;#039;s commitment to Scripture?  Sound fundamentalistically connected to the text to me.   &lt;a href=&quot;http://stackblog.wordpress.com/2010/10/25/time-to-give-mark-driscoll-a-sabbatical/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://stackblog.wordpress.com/2010/10/25/time-to...&lt;/a&gt; </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 9 Nov 2010 19:09:08 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/is-the-new-calvinism-a-new-fundamentalism/#IDComment108874853</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Reclaiming the Mission : Is the New Calvinism a New Fundamentalism? </title>
<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/is-the-new-calvinism-a-new-fundamentalism/#IDComment108873580</link>
<description>i agree with @emalwitz.  Tats, a faux hawk and some more cussin&amp;#039; don&amp;#039;t make something new, just, dare is say, a little more hip. </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 9 Nov 2010 19:01:45 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/is-the-new-calvinism-a-new-fundamentalism/#IDComment108873580</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Reclaiming the Mission : Is the New Calvinism a New Fundamentalism? </title>
<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/is-the-new-calvinism-a-new-fundamentalism/#IDComment108872556</link>
<description>Fundamentalism is usually also characterized by an overly simplistic (convenient) reading of texts, and therefore for Christian fundamentalist this would be the Bible.    Not only is their brand of evangelicalism (which was always reformed?) but their brand of being &amp;quot;reformed&amp;quot; is something that many in reformed denominations would refuted, and those claim to be reformed outside of America generally can&amp;#039;t see themselves in the Neo-Reformed articulations of faith, gospel, spiritual formation, and leadership.  the Neo-Reformed brand is more a blending of American Pietism and scholastic-dogmatic reformation.  </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 9 Nov 2010 18:57:59 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/is-the-new-calvinism-a-new-fundamentalism/#IDComment108872556</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Reclaiming the Mission : 4 Building Blocks for a Missional Ecclesiology (Leading a Church Into Mission): #1 Missio Dei</title>
<link>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/4-building-blocks-for-a-missional-ecclesiology-leading-a-church-into-mission-1-missio-dei/#IDComment106240581</link>
<description>oh, busted.  Len, great observation.  SALOM is what we need. &amp;quot;My peace I give to you&amp;quot; so that we can pass it on.    But in Dave&amp;#039;s defense, we do pass the peace every Sunday, so at least our practice is working on this.  </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 26 Oct 2010 20:05:54 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/4-building-blocks-for-a-missional-ecclesiology-leading-a-church-into-mission-1-missio-dei/#IDComment106240581</guid>
</item><item>
<title> : Being Missional Without the Church?</title>
<link>http://bensternke.com/2010/09/being-missional-without-the-church/#IDComment97648058</link>
<description>I guess I wouldn&amp;#039;t count them equally.  an unmissionary Church is the greater monstrosity.  and unchurchly mission is laudable but incomplete.  an unmissionary Church is not even laudable, it is to totally miss the point.  </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 8 Sep 2010 17:36:46 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://bensternke.com/2010/09/being-missional-without-the-church/#IDComment97648058</guid>
</item><item>
<title>lifeasmission : We Need WAY More Missional Conversations: A Response to Ed Stetzer</title>
<link>http://lifeasmission.com/blog/2010/02/we-need-way-more-missional-conversations-a-response-to-ed-stetzer/#IDComment55063842</link>
<description>yeah, I think Ed is probably conflating his EC interactions and Missional ones, or perhaps we are trying to make a distinction that he doesn&amp;#039;t.  For sure, I&amp;#039;ve been much more interested in Missional conversation, exactly b/c they are more than conversations!  I dropped out of blogging for awhile exactly b/c I didn&amp;#039;t have time after being in a missional community. </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 2 Feb 2010 19:40:37 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://lifeasmission.com/blog/2010/02/we-need-way-more-missional-conversations-a-response-to-ed-stetzer/#IDComment55063842</guid>
</item><item>
<title>lifeasmission : We Need WAY More Missional Conversations: A Response to Ed Stetzer</title>
<link>http://lifeasmission.com/blog/2010/02/we-need-way-more-missional-conversations-a-response-to-ed-stetzer/#IDComment55047250</link>
<description>JR,  for me, and this is reading &amp;quot;me&amp;quot; in this post, he was talking more a swipe at the &amp;quot;emerging church conversation&amp;quot; which usually talked theology and the need for change, but more often than not just ended in &amp;quot;continual conversation&amp;quot; rather than the continual conversion of the church.  But with that said, I also love the above points. </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 2 Feb 2010 18:17:43 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://lifeasmission.com/blog/2010/02/we-need-way-more-missional-conversations-a-response-to-ed-stetzer/#IDComment55047250</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>