Comments on: forge - Jesus in entertainment land #3

By: phil

phil — Sun, 20 Feb 2005 06:36:27 +0000

Darren, I guess I wasn’t thinking of a time line. But, I think you are right about the validity of short term expressions of community. However, there are benefits that long-term communities do have obviously.

I might ask Mark whether he meant (or I heard right) the word sustainability

By: the other darren

the other darren — Sun, 20 Feb 2005 03:38:37 +0000

thanks phil, so when you hear “sustainable” what’s the time line you hear?

i hear “forever”

By: Dan Harper

Dan Harper — Sat, 19 Feb 2005 23:49:37 +0000

Mark sure made me think! Problem is I still don’t know what to think of it all. Part of the problem with looking at this culture thing, is that there are just too many examples that don’t fit the trend. Sure I can see what Mark was saying, and I definitely see examples of youth obsession, entertainment obsession, and liquidity, but I would say that these people are the extreme, most people are slightly affected by these things, but not right in the middle of them.

Something I can’t help thinking is that nothing beats Jesus in the flesh. Somehow I don’t think it matters too much what a culture trend is, once you’ve met someone and show Jesus to them (like really love and accept them), it may be idealistic, but with love, culture becomes secondary.

Anyway, maybe it’s best to focus on people who are becoming dissatisfied with all this crap. I mean, many in our generation are resisting their parents ideals because they know that they come up short and the world can be a miserable place full of pain. I’m sure there are those that realise that these extreme aspects of culture still hold no hope for happiness. Those that have been there and are searching for more need to be met with the love of Jesus. Maybe those that currently find meaning in those aspects of culture would see no need in themselves to pursue Jesus.

I think studying culture has its values, especially for incarnational ministry, but when you’re talking extremes, maybe it’s best to help those who are currently crying out?

By: phil

phil — Sat, 19 Feb 2005 21:26:37 +0000

Ah I see what you mean. I would definitely see a two year time line sufficient for a community. In fact at nccc we have congregations in our multi-congregations that have started and concluded within two years and they have definitely offered deep community.

By: the other darren

the other darren — Sat, 19 Feb 2005 14:23:55 +0000

actually, i had an interesting conversation with someone over the question of if a 2 year community is a project or a community, i debated that it was community but the other person said it was a project.

so if i were to put together a community of people to produce a drama production it was a project instead of a communtiy.

makes me wonder what the time length of community/project is in that line of thought.

how long is sustainable? is it sustainable if it keeps going for 2 years or 10 or if the community continues in other ways?

By: phil

phil — Sat, 19 Feb 2005 10:55:29 +0000

yeah, I was surprised by the use of the word sustainable. Although, I am not sure that building sustainable communities is completely out of the question even allowing for risk/vunerablity and possibility of closure.

By: the other darren

the other darren — Sat, 19 Feb 2005 10:02:37 +0000

There is no such thing as sustainable anymore.

“sustainable” ia a word used by rationalists to avoid trying something that’ll only work for 2 years.

2 years is ok with me.