3 books in the bathtub with me this morning. All of them trying to name our present changing culture. A culture radically transformed by new media, communications, the internet, and the people who are transforming it.
Douglas Rushkoff calls it Renaissance. (OSD)
Hugh Hewitt calls it Reformation. (Blog)
George Barna calls it Revolution. (Revolution)
How will the church respond?
Ginkworld says Evolution.
Richard “Passmore says Redefinition
Me?
I think ‘Renaissance’ best describes our response to the new media culture and ‘Evolution’ (through emergent behavior) best describes the way these changes are coming about.
i try to keep them out of the bathtub. It makes them soggy and hard to read.
How will the church respond?
I think re-incarnation.
By which I don’t mean re-invention, but a serious re-appreciation of the significance of incarnation, and its subsequent repercussions at pentecost. If we can get this right, then the present changing culture will be a challenge that we will meet byte by byte, pixel by pixel, second by second, organically, and as naturally as getting up in the morning and checking email.
In short, get incarnation right, and the modern/postmodern problem disappears.
My vote is for evolution. After reading some big chunks of Barna’s book (which I shouldn’t confuse with the complete, finished product), I felt that he’s mostly right. But I don’t believe we’re in a situation where emerging churches will “replace” and topple over older churches. In the cultural context the fittest will survive.
Are re-incarnation and evolution in danger of getting sidelined in the same way as the dissenting voices in the christendom shift, where as redefintion may give a shape from which to build?