<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: new(ish) directions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.paradoxica.net/2006/08/30/new-directions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.paradoxica.net/2006/08/30/new-directions/</link>
	<description>new media developer / urban nomad</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:16:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: kristin p.</title>
		<link>http://www.paradoxica.net/2006/08/30/new-directions/#comment-490</link>
		<dc:creator>kristin p.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2006 02:05:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://paradoxica.net/2006/08/30/new-directions/#comment-490</guid>
		<description>Hooray for newish directions! I'm pretty much on board with what Andrew said, however it was rather vague. I'm not certain what each point would look like, but it seems like the emerging church will come out of millions of changes in the heart. Those changes, however, can be prompted by preaching emerging theology. 

I think emerging church doctrine is more flexible. This is good because:
1. It's challenging. We grow by doubting and disagreeing and questioning the status quo.
2. With flexible doctrine and flexible hearts, there will be more togetherness and less squabbling. If two people disagree about an issue, it's ok because, in many cases, they're both right (or at least neither of them are wrong.)

And it's bad because:
1. Some people are sure to swing too far away from the truth and to be too tolerant of sin.

Hey, CS. Don't give up when someone staunchly disagrees with you. You're doing a good job.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hooray for newish directions! I&#8217;m pretty much on board with what Andrew said, however it was rather vague. I&#8217;m not certain what each point would look like, but it seems like the emerging church will come out of millions of changes in the heart. Those changes, however, can be prompted by preaching emerging theology. </p>
<p>I think emerging church doctrine is more flexible. This is good because:<br />
1. It&#8217;s challenging. We grow by doubting and disagreeing and questioning the status quo.<br />
2. With flexible doctrine and flexible hearts, there will be more togetherness and less squabbling. If two people disagree about an issue, it&#8217;s ok because, in many cases, they&#8217;re both right (or at least neither of them are wrong.)</p>
<p>And it&#8217;s bad because:<br />
1. Some people are sure to swing too far away from the truth and to be too tolerant of sin.</p>
<p>Hey, CS. Don&#8217;t give up when someone staunchly disagrees with you. You&#8217;re doing a good job.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brandon</title>
		<link>http://www.paradoxica.net/2006/08/30/new-directions/#comment-432</link>
		<dc:creator>Brandon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 06:28:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://paradoxica.net/2006/08/30/new-directions/#comment-432</guid>
		<description>Be sure to behold the MP3's of Tom Wright at that site, too, everyone.  You may shat yourselves.  He's rockin' my world.  For those who don't know, he's THE pre-eminent New Testament scholar of our time.  Brilliant mind and an awesome communicator.  A real blessing to the people of God.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Be sure to behold the MP3&#8217;s of Tom Wright at that site, too, everyone.  You may shat yourselves.  He&#8217;s rockin&#8217; my world.  For those who don&#8217;t know, he&#8217;s THE pre-eminent New Testament scholar of our time.  Brilliant mind and an awesome communicator.  A real blessing to the people of God.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
