<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Image of Fish</title>
	<atom:link href="http://theimageoffish.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://theimageoffish.com</link>
	<description>we swim in interpretation</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 02:05:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Theology After Google</title>
		<link>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/03/07/theology-after-google/</link>
		<comments>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/03/07/theology-after-google/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 01:52:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Callid</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media Studies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hermeneutics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quakerism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theology After Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theopoetics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theimageoffish.com/?p=159</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160;

&#160;
Via their website:
&#160;
&#160;

Why &#8220;theology after Google&#8221;?
Progressive Christian theologians have some vitally important things to say, things that both the church and society desperately need to hear. The trouble is, we tend to deliver our message using technologies that date back to Gutenberg: books, academic articles, sermons, and so forth. We aren&#39;t making effective use of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/03/07/theology-after-google/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Question: Friesen, the Internet, and Heretical Cultism</title>
		<link>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/02/11/a-question-friesen-the-internet-and-heretical-cultism/</link>
		<comments>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/02/11/a-question-friesen-the-internet-and-heretical-cultism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:58:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Callid</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media Studies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Accelerated Pluralism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bruce Bimber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dwight Friesen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theimageoffish.com/?p=151</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
I recently received the following email and figured that since I was going to reply anyway, I might as well post about it and see if others have opinions they want to share.  Please give the questions below a read and weigh in if you have any thoughts about them.  I&#8217;d be interested for sure, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/02/11/a-question-friesen-the-internet-and-heretical-cultism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Response to Wesley Menke #1</title>
		<link>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/02/07/response-to-wesley-menke-1/</link>
		<comments>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/02/07/response-to-wesley-menke-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 05:24:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Callid</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Interpretation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marshall McLuhan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stanley Fish]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theology After Google]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theimageoffish.com/?p=144</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
Wesley&#8217;s Blog Post (which is the inspiration for this post) is here.
My original post on McLuhan, the medium, and the message, is here.
An article about Epistemological Coherentism is here.
To learn more about the Theology After Google class which inspired most of this, click here.
 Tweet This Post]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/02/07/response-to-wesley-menke-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Top Ten Myths about Emerging Church</title>
		<link>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/01/26/top-ten-myths-about-emerging-church/</link>
		<comments>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/01/26/top-ten-myths-about-emerging-church/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 21:37:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Callid</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Emergent/Emerging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bruce Reyes-Chow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Emergence NOW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Emergent Church]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tony Jones]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theimageoffish.com/?p=114</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Short list (for posterity&#8217;s sake) of Tony Jones&#8216; 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 &#8221;Emergence is just about theological debates and publishing contracts.&#8221;
#2 &#8221;Emergence only appeals to younger people.&#8221;
#3 &#8221;Emergence is a reformation [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/01/26/top-ten-myths-about-emerging-church/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>16</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>McLuhan, Media, and Ministers</title>
		<link>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/01/26/mcluhan-media-and-ministers/</link>
		<comments>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/01/26/mcluhan-media-and-ministers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:54:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Callid</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Emergent/Emerging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pastoral Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marshall McLuhan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Studies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Phillip Clayton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theology After Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transforming Theology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tripp Fuller]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theimageoffish.com/?p=109</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As part of the Transforming Theology Project over at Claremont, Tripp Fuller and Phillip Clayton are teaching a class called &#8220;Theology After Google.&#8221;  Given the content of the course, Tripp has been interacting with the Twitterverse and Blogosphere as part of the course content and prep.  He recently suggested that I throw a little somethin [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/01/26/mcluhan-media-and-ministers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ethics, Eschatology, and Avatar</title>
		<link>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/01/11/ethics-eschatology-and-avatar/</link>
		<comments>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/01/11/ethics-eschatology-and-avatar/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2010 12:17:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Callid</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Interpretation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Avatar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eschatology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Studies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theimageoffish.com/?p=101</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
I recently saw the film &#8220;Avatar,&#8221; prompted by lots of press and the opportunity to spend time with my family, who also wanted to see it.  Long story short?  Pretty good movie if I&#8217;m just thinking about it as a movie.  Fairly concerning if I think about it with my theologian hat on.  Why? Two [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://theimageoffish.com/2010/01/11/ethics-eschatology-and-avatar/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Interpretive Communities, a Request, and a Heraldic Gospel</title>
		<link>http://theimageoffish.com/2009/12/14/interpretive-communities-a-request-and-a-heraldic-gospel/</link>
		<comments>http://theimageoffish.com/2009/12/14/interpretive-communities-a-request-and-a-heraldic-gospel/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 02:45:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Callid</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Interpretation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blake Huggins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hermeneutics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jonathan Brink]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Phillip Clayton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stanley Fish]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theopoetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tony Jones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transforming Theology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theimageoffish.com/?p=95</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
On a recent video from the Transforming Theology project, Phillip Clayton asked Tony Jones how the internet and Google have been at work changing theology. Jones replied that it allows for a greater, more broad based, access to information, and forum for feedback.  I agree.
In a Dec. 14 post on his blog, Jonathan Brink writes about [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://theimageoffish.com/2009/12/14/interpretive-communities-a-request-and-a-heraldic-gospel/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;It Is&#8221; and &#8220;It Means&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://theimageoffish.com/2009/12/04/it-is-and-it-means/</link>
		<comments>http://theimageoffish.com/2009/12/04/it-is-and-it-means/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 18:08:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Callid</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Interpretation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Carl Raschke]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[doubt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hermeneutics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[religious belief]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stanley Fish]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theimageoffish.com/?p=87</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
I&#8217;m still several posts away from actually addressing the importance of community in individual interpretation, but it appears I am one step closer. What I am interested in for this post has been inspired by a number of relatively unrelated pieces of information I have recently come across:

 A story from Stanley Fish&#8217;s book, Is [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://theimageoffish.com/2009/12/04/it-is-and-it-means/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
