Scot, how can this be? “He [Long]finds each of the seven [gnostic impulses] in Borg, but this does not make Borg a gnostic.” Is it just because for Borg “the old orthodoxy still defines Borg because Borg’s work is a response to its categories.” That seems like a weak deflection in light of the entire post.

John, it appears to me that Tom Long sees Borg’s gnostic impulses in his spirituality more than anywhere else.

It’s probably worth pointing out, even though I don’t much care for that hymn, it means something very different from what the writer had in mind when someone who doesn’t believe in (or see the need for) Christ’s resurrection sings it. For those who don’t accept a bodily resurrection, Jesus “lives on” pretty much the same way that anyone who died has–as an inspirational memory. This, of course, is a far cry from the sense in which Paul believed Christ “lives” and a far cry from what it means to have the Holy Spirit within (and surrounding) us.
It seems a little unfair to let people who don’t believe in a robust Holy Spirit and a resurrected and active Christ to hijack such lines and even references to a “divine spark” as gnostic or otherwise outside of orthodox faith and life.

I’d love to know what Long prescribes for this problem (maybe I’ll read the book). Does he think we should paper over the untrustworthiness of Christian tradition like some Texas Public School textbook commission?
I’m not a particularly big fan of Borg, but he is very successful making aspects of Christianity compelling to people minted in a culture that has no use for traditional/institutional faith. Couldn’t we affirm him as a sort of “gateway theology,” giving people the opportunity to go deeper? I know people in my congregations who are there at least partly because of Borg, but here they say the creeds and hear the liturgy every week.
I’ll disagree with one of Longs 7 signs, though — #5. If Christianity needs revision, it should be bottom up, not top down!

Borg clearly has some gnostic tendencies. But why focus only on liberals — even many (most?) conservative Christians have some very strong gnostic impulses, as N.T. Wright argues fairly forcefully (e.g., many believe the end is all about going to a disembodied heaven when you die).
MarkP — I certainly understand some of the concerns that led Borg and people like him to where they are (some of the same concerns tug at me at times). But I just recently read Borg’s explanation of why he believes he can still say the creeds, and it struck me as quite a stretch. He doesn’t believe the words as they were meant, but is simply affirming that those words spoke to questions a particular culture had at a specific time, in their own language and meanings, so that by saying them he is somehow participating in their spiritual communion at that particular time. But he doesn’t believe what the words were intended to mean. I was left wondering, if you reach that stage, why bother with the creeds, or even Christianity? (That’s not a rhetorical point — I honestly wonder why he bothers).

EricG, Long focuses upon Borg and liberals because he’s a mainliner himself.

Scott-I read McLaren’s A New Kind of Christianity, and what I long thought to be true is revealed there. I no longer feel his views need to be entered into the discussion if the discussion pertains to serious biblical dialogue among evangelicals. He very sadly stands opposite Scripture on God’s nature and character, the gospel, the cross, inspiration, & other religions. Sadly, he is a confused Universalist. If we want to see what he has to say relative to this subject, then we would certainly want to know what the B’hai’s, the Unitarian Universalists and the followers of Lao-tzu have to say. There seriously is very little difference in the value of their opinions. I’m not trying to be cute, nor do I believe I am overstating. The title of your upcoming interview with him at Q Chicago, advertised as “Conversations on Being A Heretic”, in light of his new book, has lost all semblance of novelty or humor. It in fact carries a dark irony.

I have not read any of Marcus Borg’s books, but lately I hear a lot about him, so I did an internet search to find out more about him. I found this three page interview of him at http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2003/11/Why-Be-Christian.aspx?p=1 to be interesting.