excellent thoughts on the nature of the emergent/postmodern conversation over at the ginkworld blog. i've been thinking many of the same things. here's a snippet, but be sure and read the rest.

"define the shape water takes? think about it for a moment, and tell me what shape is water? you can't, unless you know the shape of the vessel it is placed in, because water has no 'shape' of it's own it takes the shape of the vessel. the same can be said of the emerging/postmodern conversation. i am asked all the time to 'define what it means to be emerging/postmodern?' the best thing i can ever answer is, 'what shape is water?' what i am asking the person is thing, in what context are you asking me to define the 'emerging/postmodern conversation?' after all, to define something as fluid as the emerging/postmodern conversation one needs to fist know the shape of the vessel it sets in. but for many in the modern/evangelical movement do not like that, they demand a definition, a constant definition and one that applies to all in the emerging/postmodern conversation. given this, many in the modern/evangelical movement strive hard to define the emerging conversations, and never even strive to know the vessel. just as there is no way to know the shape water will take, there is no way of know the shape of the emerging/postmodern conversation will take."

ginkworld; inside the mind of punk monkey: what shape is water?

Another excellent source is Andrew Jones recent talk at Harambee (podcast on Urban Onramps, thanks to TheOoze blog for the link)

1 comment:

  1. Since beginning my bloggin adventure, I've been juggling this whole concept of emerging churches, post modern churches, and in the process, have read some really negitive pieces on evangelical churches and the Roman Catholics. Then I go to our denomination's annual conference and discover that we are both emerging and post modern. But I know they don't preach a false Christ, they still call sin, sin...and they believe the Bible is the ultimate and inerrant source of truth...but that doesn't go with the stuff I'm reading from the critics. I think your question about the shape of water is a good one. Except we have to be careful not to apply that idea to the person Jesus...he is who is he, right?
    Meanwhile, I'm struggling with such a personal dilema, that I can't really spend time trying to be theoLOGICAL. thanks for visiting my site.