17
05
Patheos blog article on the Holy Spirit.
Phil Wyman's Four Square No More Blog post.
The Transform Gathering East Coast page.
Informational films I've made (with Kristina) about Quakerism are here.
Tony Jones' post about Pentecostalism and the Emergent Church is here.
Sam Laurent's profile (almost to the bottom of the page) from Drew is here.
Sarah Walker-Cleaveland is currently working on some pneumatology stuff and her home page is here.
27
03
This first video is my presentation on the first night of the Theology after Google conference.
This is Barry Taylor's (whose blog is here) on the last day, and for me, it felt like what he added was in a beautiful resonance with my thoughts.
I'm still trying to figure out exactly why, but after Barry finished I commented that I felt like I had met a theological brother.
20
03
First, I'm sorry for such poor (and poorly aimed) video quality. If it helps, just ignore the visual and listen like a podcast. That will fix the problem and you won't have to be exposed to my ridiculously expressive eyebrows.
Next:
I have a more formal, written reflection about the event, here, on a spot that the Emergent Village folk asked me to do.
Bob Cornwall's TAG thoughts are here on his blog, Ponderings on a Faith Journey.
Ken Silva's thoughts on my presentation are here, on his blog Apprising Ministires.
Jonathan Brink's post referenced is here.
Joshua Case's (of the Nick and Josh Podcast) reflections, though not identical to his closing remarks, are here.
And Brian Shope wrote about Missio Dei after TAG in a way that was clarifying for me here, at his blog, Pacing the Cage.
And yes, I am aware that all these links go to work by men. And yes, that makes me sad.
26
01
Short list (for posterity’s sake) of Tony Jones‘ list of Top Ten Myths about the Emerging Church, delivered at Emergence Now at Columbia Theological Seminary January 27, 2010, and reported real time via Bruce Reyes-Chow (who is there as well) through Twitter with @breyeschow.
#1 ”Emergence is just about theological debates and publishing contracts.”
#2 ”Emergence only appeals to younger people.”
#3 ”Emergence is a reformation of evangelicalism.”
#4 ”Emergence does not believe in authority.”
#5 ”Emergence is confined to the American church and white guys.”
#6 ”Emergence doesn’t appreciate church history.”
#7 ”Emergence has a spokesperson.”
#8 ”Emergence is a new way to ‘do church’.”
#8.5 “Pomomusings is the official blog of the emergent church.”
#9 ”Emergence is anti-denominational”
#10 ”Emergence is trying to put the conventional church out of business.”
UPDATE 1/27 : Tony posted the slides from yesterday’s talk here.
26
01
“The medium is the message” is probably the most oft-quoted line from Canadian media theorist Marshall McLuhan. I bumped into McLuhan’s work years ago in my studies in communications theory and was utterly bowled over by his insight, wit, and bizarre eccentricity. Heck, the title of this blog is even because of him. Anywho, the issue (one of them anyway) with McLuhan is that he never wrote “the book” on anything. He never got all of his ideas into one place and came down definitively on anything, instead favoring short questions and comments that he called “probes.” The fact that he did this intentionally makes it no less frustrating for same. He said it was because The Print Age and linear, visual-rational, thinking was closing to be replaced with The Electronic Age’s emphasis on connective thought. Consequently, his writing, even though published in the 50′s and 60′s reads more like what would happen if you published the results of a 12 hour web-surfing spree, rather than a finely honed theoretically work. That point of all this is to say that not as many academics have given him the credit I think he deserves because he wasn’t playing by the rules. This (of course) I love.
Here I’m trying to re-articulate his probes “the medium is the message,” and of “retribalization” in the context of theology, specifically theology after Google.
I may or may not come back here and add to the text of this post, but I think I fairly well said what I needed to in the video, so please let me know if things are unclear, or if you would like a further articulation of something I said. I am more than willing to clarify if I can. Happy viewing, and please comment below.
Related Readings
Great read about how Google might be changing the way we think, “I Google, Therefore I Know.”
An interesting essay which has a long section about McLuhan’s retribalization is here.
An interpretation of ”the medium is the message” from a more “pure McLuhan” standpoint is here.
An article connecting McLuhan and hermeneutics is here.
Less related, but also of note:
An article dealing with McLuhan and revisionist theology is here.
24
11
A video inspired by Tripp Fuller from Homebrewed Christianity, who suggested I give a listen to an episode of The Christian Humanist Podcast about the Emergent Church and the Neo-Calvinists. Well, I gave it a listen, and it was interesting to hear folks from outside the conversation about their sense of Emergent thinking/Church. I especially appreciated that while they were critical here and there, I felt that they generally (with a noted “coolness” exception I address in the video) engaged the material respectfully and in a way that was thought provoking. So much so that three things popped up that seemed like they were work considering:
These questions are not particularly new to the theological conversation, so don’t expect anything mind-blowing, but they are what is live for me at the moment, so there we go.
I’d be interested in hearing from other folks out there about their responses to the above questions and my responses in the video. I would be especially interested in hearing from people that are not directly involved with the Emergent shebang, so if anyone out there has means of sharing this outside the Emergent blog-o-sphere and can get feedback to share, I would love that.
16
11
This morning, Tony Jones published on his blog the contents of a chapter he wrote for The Justice Project. In it he discusses the utility of some aspects of postmodern thought to the faithful Christian. His particular consideration of Hans-Georg Gadamer and Paul Ricoeur and the hermeneutic of humility prompted me to add on to some thoughts I started in my comments of the transforming possibility of text. I have been engaged by the work of Paul Ricoeur since I first read him, and I imagine I’ll further address some of his thoughts as I proceed. He has lots to offer.
In this particular video I am mostly concerned with his idea about the Second Naïveté.
