i think what i appreciate is the environment here at OST. i am hopeful that it is also the environment of the emergent community as a whole (i am new to both and at the moment you guys ARE the emergent movement to me). it seems to be an environment (in part) that not only tolerates my questions, but assumes that they are a healthy part of community.

if this is a community - then by its very nature there will some shared ideas and convictions. even a group that is merely passionate about nothing, would be rallied around that belief and therefore have a consensus.

so for me, vynette’s postulations are as needed as andrew’s, but because of the focus of this site, vynette (and me and sam and everyone else) must understand that the ‘community’ created here (by its definition) is going to check her theology against a historical, narrative reading of scripture. in this instance, disagreement is a sign of a healthy community operating as it promised.

of course vynette or i or anyone else can take our toys and go home if we dont like the way our ideas are accepted or rejected based on this community’s parameters, but the concept here is to wrestle with god, or at least about god, not our own ideas. right? theo:god. ology:the study of.

i think the safeguard i’d like to see is one that (1) encourages anyone who wishes, to finally speak within the community the thing they have been thinking, wondering, creating even - let’s not put those struggling with ideas outside the walls and (2) once they have been heard, to respond with respect and careful attention to a historical, narrative reading of scripture no matter how outlandish or ‘right on’ their concept first appears.

“There has to be some way of rediscovering as a community - through conversation, collaboration - the story that shapes the people whose lord is Christ.”