Hi Andrew,

I haven’t commented here in such a long time, but I did read and review this book on my site recently. I felt the book was weak because it is mainly an a collection of short essays. I think it is unfair to expect a theological treatment of ideas in short essays. The format is meant to introduce a larger community to some new voices (fyi… that means launch the writing careers of a few new people that likely will write for this publisher).

I’m a big fan of the people that put the book together and many of the writers, but I agree the book is very shallow and I wouldn’t recommend it with the exception of a few bright spots. Samir Selmanovic is WONDERFUL. I’m a fan already. I loved his essay.

Also, I don’t think you can openly discuss theology with people, Andrew, if you are going to insist that your way of looking at the world (and the bible) is the only way. You can argue everyone else is wrong (you have that right to do so) but you can’t expect them to frame their views into your language and write to YOU everytime they write a book. The world doesn’t revolve around Andrew. I know I’ve heard you focus on narrative of Israel over and over and it grew so tiring that I stopped listening. You can’t expect everyone else to want to play your game or use your language.

The fact is that these people HAVE THOUGHT THIS TROUGH and they have moved past those aruguments. For many it is over. I can’t speak for them, but I’m tired of having to go back and frame every discussion so that all the people who can’t (even for the sake of discussion) imagine a different image of God or interpretaion of scripture will be able to “get it”. There is a growing feeling of frustration with the need for apologetics. Every conversation doesn’t have to be an apologetic argument over details and enterpretation to come up with ONE SINGLE CORRECT solution. I think that is the heart of Emergent Village/conversation/church. We are all done fighting over it. Sometimes the answer is that the Bible is wrong. Sometimes the characters were wrong and sometimes the authors were wrong and when the authors write God as doing wrong things then in that context, God is wrong too!

For me, Emergent theology or the “core conviction” is this: Stop fighting over this crap and start living it. PERIOD. If your theology doesn’t impact how you treat your neighbor, spend your money, and vote, then throw it out. It is uesless. If it does then it is working so you may want to keep it, but it may not work for everyone else.

That conversation may not be for you and that converstaion may not be appropirate for OST. Open source theology may just be a place to sell N.T. Wright and that is fine if that is what you want it to be, but if it is then change the friggin name already.

Collaboration in a true “Open source theology” could really shine a light for the world if when people read other views they would allow themselves to read through the lens of that person’s view of God and view of scripture. You are not going to be able to read someone like Samir Selmanovic and “get it” unless you can for a few minutes imagine that God is not what you think it is or that the Bible is not what you think it is. Let go of your view long enough to understand him. You are free to throw the views away when you are done, but it is silly to think that his logic is going to fit with your world view.

Danutz (Progression of Faith)
http://www.faithprogression.com