more about - my book
So, I've mentioned in passing in here that I'm writing a book. I've only written 26 pages so far - but I have hopes that more will come. Actually - I'm sure that more will come. I wrote 3 pages today out of nowhere. Anyway - I figured that I'd mention what it's about and get some feedback.
I think that I'm going to title it Why I'm Not a "Christian". This title is basically swiped from Bertrand Russell's Why I'm Not a Christian. Except that he means it literally - where I mean it as "Christian." It was through reading some of Russell's work that I felt compelled to write this book. I was so frustrated by his assumptions about Christianity and his, literally, pointless argument against it. As a philosopher, he really doesn't prove his argument well and frankly, I understood what he was saying the first time I read it. To me, that doesn't say much when it comes to philosophy. It's the most profound thinkers that make me read what they're saying 3 times, at least, to be able to start grasping what they're talking about. But that's not really what I'm writing about.
My book takes on more of the attitude of Brian McLaren and his work in A New Kind of Christian. I tend to raise more questions and wrestle with questions more than I actually offer any sort of resolution. While I reference McLaren once or twice and Dan Kimball once - I find myself reflecting on shows like Sex and the City and America's Next Top Model. Strange, huh?
I don't know. I think it's turning out well. If you're interested in hearing more about it - I'll gladly tell you more. But, I think the best way to describe it is - - As a follower of Christ, am I really and authentically living that out? I think that's a question we all have to ask ourselves.
So - there you go.
peace,
~Jenna
I think that I'm going to title it Why I'm Not a "Christian". This title is basically swiped from Bertrand Russell's Why I'm Not a Christian. Except that he means it literally - where I mean it as "Christian." It was through reading some of Russell's work that I felt compelled to write this book. I was so frustrated by his assumptions about Christianity and his, literally, pointless argument against it. As a philosopher, he really doesn't prove his argument well and frankly, I understood what he was saying the first time I read it. To me, that doesn't say much when it comes to philosophy. It's the most profound thinkers that make me read what they're saying 3 times, at least, to be able to start grasping what they're talking about. But that's not really what I'm writing about.
My book takes on more of the attitude of Brian McLaren and his work in A New Kind of Christian. I tend to raise more questions and wrestle with questions more than I actually offer any sort of resolution. While I reference McLaren once or twice and Dan Kimball once - I find myself reflecting on shows like Sex and the City and America's Next Top Model. Strange, huh?
I don't know. I think it's turning out well. If you're interested in hearing more about it - I'll gladly tell you more. But, I think the best way to describe it is - - As a follower of Christ, am I really and authentically living that out? I think that's a question we all have to ask ourselves.
So - there you go.
peace,
~Jenna
posted by Jennifer at
3:03 PM
4 Comments:
Jenna, you make reference to "Sex & the City" and "Americas Next Top Model" as strange for a book written on the subject matter you have chosen. I once felt God speaking to me through a Cindy Lauper song...so maybe your references aren't so strange after all. A wise woman once told me that God will use any and all means to speak to us. In Cindy Lauper's song, he said, "If you're lost, you can look and you will find me....time after time....If you fall, I will catch you...I will be waiting time after time." Isn't that just like Him??? Mome
By
Anonymous, At
2:55 PM
bertrand russell doesn't know how to argue? didn't he co-author potentially the most significant work in symbolic logic?
By
Anonymous, At
12:19 AM
Even if Bertrand Russell did co-author "potentially the most significant work in symbolic logic", Mr. Anonymous, that doesn't make his argument very convincing, AT ALL, in the book that I am making reference to. Sorry. Go read it - and then you'll understand.
By
Jennifer, At
12:23 PM
"mr anonymous" says:
whoa, easy there. i wasn't saying he was convincing. (i have read it and i wasn't impressed either) and i wasn't attacking you. i was just wondering if it was less of a philosophical argument than it was his simple statement of "why he is not a christian" (like your simple and non-philosophical statement of why you are not a "christian") just trying to seperate the two a little, he really is a brilliant philosopher even if he relies on non-logical grounds for his "faith" the same way we as christians do. (although, the rationalist that he is, it may well undermine his whole philosophy for him to admit the "faith" he has) if you want to be impressed by his profundity or you hope "not to be able to understand him the first time" maybe you should look at his less personal and more philosophical works... but like you said, i understand, "that's not really what it's about."
By
Anonymous, At
12:00 AM
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home