I welcome and appreciate comments that question the intent or perspective of my posts. One particular comment, which may seem adversarial but I would suggest is written for constructive or at least clarifying purposes (tone and intent are largely lost in the blogosphere), reads as follows:

"im a little confused on your opinion of journey. i have been there a few times but not much scripture was used so i haven’t been back. may come again sometime though.

speaking of scripture…. i appreciate your writing but would like to see more scripture references.

i’m also curious to why you chose the name “subversive reformation”. a lot of post-modern movements (like rob bell, donald miller, shane claiborne kind of thing) make me wonder if we are too cynical and proud of our big words and creative artwork that we miss the point: LOVE."

Please note that I am not degrading this comment but rather continuing with the invitation for discussion. There are many directions in which to go but I want to begin by addressing only one small element of the comment. I may return to the ideas of postmodernism, movements, naming, and cynicism but first want to conisder "scripture references."

We have been conditioned to expect Scripture to be used in a certain way. Don’t get me wrong, I highly value the recitation of Scripture during church gatherings. I sometimes need to go to a Catholic or Episcopal gathering just to hear the public reading of God’s written communication with humanity. It is good for the soul of my recovering popular-evangelical self.  However, to quote Scripture doesn’t mean that one has to "quote" (pun intended) Scripture. Modernism has conditioned us to want references, bullet points, quotations, citations, enumerations and many other "ations." Our western, post-enlightenment minds that place an overly-high value on reason and logical processing have difficulty recognizing that Scripture is interlaced within our stories.

Here, I will draw a parallel using a specific reference from Scripture . The book of Esther found in the Hebrew Scriptures (TNK ) never uses the actual word "God" in any of its forms (YHWH, Elohim, etc.) Esther is the only book of the Bible that does not use the word "God." Does that mean that God is not present throughout the story? Should the book of Esther not have been included in the Bible? Should it be discluded from that which is considered in the Judeo-Christian tradtion to be "holy writing" simply because the word "God" isn’t quoted? Equally, should any writing that does not "quote" scripture be tossed out as though it is irrelevant and removed from the narrative of God with his people?