The Logic of Intersubjectivity. Darren M. Slade
mail peppered with a wide range of threats and abusive speech” (NKOCY §17, 174).
54. Cf. Pettegrew, “Evangelicalism,” 175; Woodbridge, “Evaluating the Changing Face,” 185‒205; Horton, Christless Christianity, 64; and Rhodes, “The Maze of Mysticism,” 7.
55. See for example, Geisler and Howe, “A Postmodern View of Scripture,” 92‒108; Gray, “The Emergence of The Emerging Church,” 27‒62; and Johnson, “You Can’t Handle the Truth,” 219‒45; Dixon, “Whatever Happened to Heresy?,” 219‒20.
56. Burk, “Editorial,” 3. Cf. Wells, The Courage to Be Protestant, 86‒87.
57. Winner, “Houses of Worship.” Significantly, McLaren does disclose to his readers that he intends to create controversy in order to challenge the semiotic paradigms of conventional Christianity (COOS1 §Pref., 8; GO §Intro., 22‒23).
58. Jones, The New Christians, 51. See also, Christian Century, McLaren Talk Canceled, 15.
59. Cf. McLaren, “Seeking to Do One Thing Well, 121‒40 and “An Interview with Brian McLaren,” interview by Rachel Held Evans.
60. McLaren writes elsewhere, “I’m not by nature a controversialist, so I didn’t look forward to a hornet’s nest being stirred up” (McLaren, “Brian McLaren’s Post”).
61. Mohler even complains, “This author’s purpose is transparent and consistent. Following the worldview of the postmodern age, he embraces relativism at the cost of clarity in matters of truth and intends to redefine Christianity for this new age, largely in terms of an eccentric mixture of elements he would take from virtually every theological position and variant” (Mohler, The Disappearance of God, 99). See also, Hagerty, “Jesus, Reconsidered” and Murphy, “Evangelical Author.”
62. McLaren, “Instead of Ruling,” 228.
63. McLaren and Schaeffer, “Brian McLaren Talks with Frank Schaeffer,” 00:14:14‒00:14:28.
64. McLaren writes, “Originally, as an author, I used social media as a way to communicate between books and about my books. Gradually, as I began to see my role as a ‘public theologian,’ I sometimes felt that my social media work was as important as or more important than my published work. Now I feel that much of my work is movement building, and for this, social media is paramount” (McLaren, “Public Theology,” 290). As Robert Webber explains, “The new postmodern shape of communications. . . .is knowledge gained through personal participation in a community” (Webber, Ancient-Future Faith, 24). See further, McLaren, foreword to The Hidden Power of Electronic Culture, 9‒11.
65. Cf. Swanson, “Bibliography of Works,” 223‒29.
66. Section numbers (§) to other portions of the book are also included in this literature review to identify those portions of the study that directly relate to or address the contentions of these interactions with McLaren’s writings. For an extended literature review, see Appendix A at the end of the study.
67. See MacArthur, The Truth War, esp. x, 18‒19, 34‒40, 139, 144‒45, 169 and “Perspicuity of Scripture,” 141‒58.
68. Howe, “A Review of A Generous Orthodoxy,” 81‒102. Howe ends his article by stating, “Some may disagree with my review, but if they do, that just means they are Postmodern, unthinking, wishy-washy, McLarenites” (p. 102).
69. Geisler and Howe, “A Postmodern View of Scripture,” 63‒79; “A Postmodern View of Scripture,” in Evangelicals Engaging Emergent, 92–108.
70. Christy, “Neoorthopraxy and Brian D. McLaren.”
71. See Stewart, “The Influence of Newbigin’s Missiology,” esp. 25‒27, 86‒111, 225‒26, 238, 255.
72. Blackwell, “Return or Rereading.”
73. Hatch, “Hearing God Amid Many Voices,” 23‒47.
74. Burson, “Apologetics and the New Kind of Christian.”
75. For a history and schematization of Emergent Christianity, see Clawson, “A Brief History of the Emerging Church,” 17‒44; “Emerging from What?”; and Burson, Brian McLaren in Focus, 273‒83.
76. As Tony Jones amusingly quips, “Evangelical pastors have to read [McLaren’s] A New Kind of Christian wrapped in a Playboy cover” (Jones, The New Christians, 51).
77. Gibbs and Bolger, Emerging Churches, 329.
78. Bradley and Muller, Church History, 29‒31.
79. Brian D. McLaren, email to author, January 24, 2018. As an informal consultant, McLaren was able to provide guidance and further insights into his thought processes. However, this book’s assertions and judgments (in their final form) are solely mine and, thus, any errors or misrepresentations of McLaren’s work are solely those of this author and not of anyone else.
80. Clark, To Know and Love God, 172‒73.
81. This assumption is not unjustified since McLaren seeks to “discuss questions like what faith is, how faith and knowledge are related, whether God exists, and how thinking people can explore and evaluate various ideas about God” (FFS §Intro, 25). As Scott Burson remarks, “In 1974, [McLaren] enrolled at the University of Maryland originally as a philosophy major, but soon shifted to English while maintaining an interest in the aesthetic dimensions of philosophy” (Burson, “Apologetics and the New Kind of Christian,” 272).
82. Peterson et al., Reason and Religious Belief, 10; Rowe, Philosophy of Religion, 1‒2; Clark, To Know and Love God, 297.
83. See for example, Aldwinckle, “Is There a Christian Philosophy?,” 233‒42.
84. Fitch, The End of Evangelicalism?,