Are you there Jah? Its me, Shane Claiborne

23 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

1. dan says

   I totally have better and longer dreds than he does. That can only mean that I am more radical than he is. Sweet.

   September 30, 2009, 7:16 pm
   • Halden says

     Yeah, well dreadlocks aside anyone who doesn’t publish with Zondervan is more radical than Shane Claiborne.

     October 1, 2009, 12:28 am
     • Andy Alexis-Baker says

       Yeah you have to publish with Wipf and Stock to be radical. I sold out with Brazos…maybe I’ll have to do penance and pay you to publish my work next time Halden. :) Now I get it…

       (Note: this is all in jest and in some sense a private joke, for those who read this besides Halden).

       October 1, 2009, 9:30 am
       • Halden says

         Well, at least Brazos isn’t owned by Rupert Murdoch. Yet.

         October 1, 2009, 10:17 am
         • dave says

           Is Zondervan really owned by Murdoch?

           October 1, 2009, 11:37 am
           • Halden says

             Zondervan is own by Harper Collins which is owned by News Corp which owned by Mudoch.

             So yes indeed.

             October 1, 2009, 1:01 pm
             • dave says

               That’s unsettling, but good to know. I’m not sure I own anything that is owned by Zondervan, except maybe a Bible somewhere.

               October 1, 2009, 2:08 pm
             • Andy Alexis-Baker says

               I am much less concerned about people who publish with Zondervan than I am with people who publish with Jim Wallis!

               October 1, 2009, 2:17 pm
               • Halden says

                 Agreed, sadly.

                 October 1, 2009, 2:29 pm
                 • Scott Coulter says

                   Can you illuminate that comment for me? I’m rather out of the loop on Jim Wallis. I have a vague notion of who Sojourners is; I get their e-mails.

                   October 1, 2009, 5:08 pm
                 • R.O. Flyer says

                   Really? This sounds kind of like Craig Carter to me.

                   October 1, 2009, 8:51 pm
                   • Halden says

                     Hey now, lets not say things we can’t take back.

                     Wallis is just way to invested in the American project to be of any real help to Christians.

                     October 1, 2009, 8:58 pm
                   • Andy Alexis-Baker says

                     Flyer,

                     Do you think Wallis is any less controlling and domineering than the Zondervan types of the world? I know, I know, that he has his tentacles in some people we assume are radical and pulls strings and controls to a degree what they say. For instance, during the election, some of his supporters were against voting but refused to say so, in part, because Jim Wallis was in the background threatening to pull endorsements and support. I know of a huge conference that happened where a non-voting session was planned but then pulled. In its place, Wallis and Tony Campolo gave their mindless pitches for the Democrats and voting in general.

                     You don’t have to become some kind of ultra conservative to see how liberal protestants are just undercutting theology and also mirroring the right.

                     As far as I am concerned, Wallis is as bad as Falwell. I say that and mean it.

                     October 2, 2009, 9:15 pm
                   • Scott Coulter says

                     [That replies get squeezed into narrow columns at a certain level is really annoying.]

                     Re: Andy
                     I totally don’t see the connection between Jim Wallis and liberal Protestantism. He’s politically liberal, sure. And maybe his theology doesn’t fall into the “conservative evangelical Protestant” category (I’m not sure), but what about it is liberal Protestantism?

                     October 3, 2009, 10:54 am
     • Daniel says

       Oh man. And I thought the Simple Way was pretty awesome before it burned down.

       October 1, 2009, 2:14 pm
       • Halden says

         Just to be clear, I’m not trying to insult Shane or the (late?) Simple Way community. Just having a bit of fun.

         October 1, 2009, 2:30 pm
         • Daniel says

           Yea, I got it :) (Shane’s publishing house has little, if nothing, to do with the simple way beyond publicity, which wasn’t really the point in the first place)

           October 1, 2009, 2:59 pm
2. Ben Myers says

   I can testify: Dan’s dreds are totally better.

   October 1, 2009, 6:12 am
   • dan says

     Hey, if the Ben Myers is testifying, y’all better listen up!

     October 1, 2009, 10:27 pm
3. R.O. Flyer says

   And Zondervan isnt?

   October 1, 2009, 9:14 pm
4. Jody says

   Did any of you read Jesus for President (even if Zondervan published it)? The book contains much that would offend Rupert Murdoch! I led a discussion of it last fall in the Adult Education class I taught at my church. The book is hardly imperfect. However, I thought the book was a very useful tool for encouraging laypeople who aren’t likely to read Yoder, Hauerwas, William Cavanaugh or even N.T. Wright to examine their political theologies more closely and critically.

   October 1, 2009, 9:35 pm
   • Andy Alexis-Baker says

     I have met a good number of folks who read that book, and for whom it helped them begin to question nationalism in their own thought. I have not read it, though I skimmed through it, and recommend it to people who probably could not even understand the theologians you mention, and recommend on the basis of what it has done for some of the people I met and also on the basis of knowing Shane personally and having talked with him about some of these issues. I like him a lot. He’s a decent guy.

     October 1, 2009, 10:10 pm
     • Brad A. says

       And how do his dreads compare to yours, Andy? ;-)

       October 5, 2009, 1:30 pm