At the moment I have a three sided mirror in which to reflect on some big questions about change and the nature of the christian message. I am reading Phillip Davies Whose bibe is it anyway for my post grad in practical theology, Reading Pete Rollins The fidelity of betrayal and the third mirror is my own practice side of church on the edge driven by the missiology developed over the past decade or so. All which are provoking me to look deeper at the meta-narrative I think the christain faith and Biblical text carry and the implications for mission.

Davies discusses the nature/approaches of biblical criticism and argues that there are esentially two perspectives, confessional (coming from a theological/faith perspective which he also uses emic, Bible studies and Scripture to differetate those who see the Bible as canon) or non confessional (coming from a humanist perspective where he also used the terms etic, biblical studies and non canonical). His typeology is good and useful but I find his understanding of the confessional perspective (a kind of fundemental/literalist to liberal) limted and dated.

From my third confessional perspective (which I would say borrows from modern emerging church perspectives that in themselves also borrow from traditions although reframed, post modern theory, and mission encounters) sees faith about the redemptive processes that consistantly ruptures our worldview (inc our faith paradigm) and is a series of revolutionary moves

that form and shape a new (at the time) but growing (in hindsight) understanding of God.

So I have no qualms about Davies exegisis of texts as they may help us with the rupture, indeed I approach Biblical studies with this mind (part of the third confessional perspective) and may even argue that this is why we have the text, however Davies would argue that confessional perpectives limit. I would agree when looking at narrow confessional perspectives and that there is a danger of this within the third, but I would argue that biblical criticism from the third perspective more in line with etic approaches than the emic as it demands a rigour and openess that could even beyond a humanist perspective as this a truth understanding that may be less open than the third confessional perpective.

Rollins in both the fidelity of betrayal and how not to speak of God goes someway to underline both the need for a third confessional perspective (although he doesnt use the term) and identifies and develops (particularly in fidelity of betrayal) the perspective as he reflects on the place and notions of truth held within/by the historic confessional perspectives.

Davies exergesis of Abraham in chapter 5 Male bonding leads him conclude “there are no historical or theological truths that need to be won from this, only the wisdom and experience of the tellers.” and the writer may be suggesting that god is much like politican that makes promises that change, and not to be trusted, and that we shoud hold these lightly, esentially that neither Abraham or Yhwh are what they are cracked up to be. So what Davies does is very consistant with a third confessional perspective perhaps even biblical evidence for this perspective, and supports how Rollins develops the perpective as the God we know cannot be G-d as G-d is beyond, more etc.

(sorry about the spelling but spell check not working and low on time)Miss Conception movie

• The Doom Generation movies

I was chatting yesterday Iain about stories that break the narrative and creating fissures in the christendom/ corrupted christian worldview. Thinking about how both pressure from within and outside can help open the cracks up. However over the years there have often been stories that oppose the establishment eg anabaptist but cant get away from the thought that lots of people see the need to paste over the cracks hence the slow pace of change.Definitely, Maybe dvdrip

Minotaur movie

• Impact Pt I film

I was asked today to join with a meeting the new way of being church The Passion of the Christ rip community. A mixed bunch of faithful radicals that have been exploring new ways of being church long before the term emerging church became trendy. Lots of connections, it was interesting how we shared many links, basic eccelesial communities, friere, alinsky, jim punton, fyt. They have lots of resources online and worth a visit.

• Behind Enemy Lines: Colombia ipod

I was revisiting some of Off the Beaten Track today and this story hit me again as I thought about church and change.

The prison walls had become the home they had forgotten, so long had they been there amongst the dust and dirt that any memory of the outside world was but a dream to them.
One day, which started like any other, they huddled together to talk. Having the same conversation they’d had every day for as long as any of them could remember, talk of escape. In the middle of this discussion something unusual happened. The cell door swung open.
The prisoners cowered against the back wall, shielding their eyes from the bright sunlight. A man stood there, someone they didn’t recognise, for had they not seen or heard anyone for these long years? The man spoke to them saying;

‘You are free to go.’ The group sat in silence, for though they had planned to leave; now they were too afraid to do so. What world was out there? A place that surely must have changed beyond recognition. The prison walls suddenly seemed appealing, for hadn’t it become their home? No one moved, until one man, cautiously making his way to his feet, crossed the small cell and averting his gaze from what lay beyond quietly closed the door.

Juncture dvd

I have been exploring the issue of bounded and open sets, one thing that is often talked about is about being committed at the core and open at the edges, yet I wonder if we are missing an opportunity for growth here. I am part of a network that describes itself as A network of mission practitioners and communities who are restlessly trying to follow Jesus in the midst of a changing contemporary culture. The Ugly Truth full I cannot underestimate the support I have found within group and how important the space to be open and vulnerable with like minded people is. In many ways this group is not fully open (nor should it??) but this is what I am questioning. At one level all open groups are self selecting and will attract people around the ethos of the group etc, but open set groups for people exploring spirituality will mean the members come into contact with those they disagree with, those they think are off the wall etc, all of which if processed worked through, dialogued about, motives, passions and actions searched and questioned help us on the path to enlightenment. You can hear a talk on patience a 100 times but try living with someone you think is a Muppet, what has the greater benefit for the soul?

Over the weekend I am facilitating a conversation on Church on the Edge with the subtitle Emerging church gets missional. So I will be introducing the concept and process via a handout and as part of the session asking the following questions, and would appreciate any comments.

1. Is the emerging church in missional mode?

2. Are EC’s still a bounded set model but just with better PR?

3. Is community development a core part of your mission approach?

4. How does the church on the edge model/process fit your situation?

5. Where should church on the edge go from here?

The Company of Wolves release