Another week has gone by and so has Colossians 2. It's full of things like 'stop fussing and get on with it', 'don't get caught up in endless arguments and details', don't get hidebound by religious rules', 'you know what it's all about so just get on and live it'. Forgive the paraphrasing but that's how I understand it!
I do want to live it, and I hope that in some way I do. It would be nice if the 'living it' were much more up front and vital though.
We discussed the bit that says the universe is empty without Christ. Does that mean that people without Christ experience that emptiness constantly? I'm not so sure about that; the people I know who have shown no interest in him are not constantly searching for some relief to this emptiness, they're much too busy living their lives, often doing a lot of good where they can in the process. In the past Christianity has been proposed as an answer to 'God-shaped holes' (oh dear!) implying that the emptiness is universally experienced. Is it true? What is the attraction of Christianity? In crude terms how do you sell it? My suspicion is that God seeks people out (several biblical references spring to mind); this results in a longing, a desire, even an emptiness (i.e. a feeling) causing people to search for information to explain what's happening to them in order to make an appropriate response. If this is so then it contributes to the objectivity/subjectivity debate as it's a case of the subjective being the instigator. Perhaps I'm getting lost in endless arguments and details so I'll stop there.

Last Wednesday was the inaugural meeting of the reconstituted THIRD, or 3a, but let's not worry about what we call it! Suffice to say that 6 of us met and had a good time looking at Colossians ch1, chatting and praying.
The phrase "Christ is in you" was noticed in Colossians and it was interesting to ponder for a moment what it meant. No serious conclusion was reached. It can't mean Jesus is in you, as a body can't exist inside another body, and he's only got one anyway. If it had meant the Holy Spirit is in you then surely that is what it would have said.
Two comments from friends have been helpful. One suggests we compare it with the thought that elsewhere we are stated to be in Christ - an interesting duality! Another commented that he had heard that 'Christ' isn't Jesus' surname, it's his job (as in John the cooper etc.). So if Christ is in us, it's the very essence of why he came and what he accomplished that is in us. The outcome of his death and resurrection is in us. Redemption is in us. I'm interested in Mark's comments about subjectivity and objectivity in this regard, but the essence of what it is to be called the Christ being in me sounds pretty good.

Well, on Wednesday we had a celebration meal to mark what I have called the end of Chapter 1 as far as THIRD is concerned. 14 of us turned up at a Chinese restaurant - it seemed very natural and was a good way to mark the occasion; the food was very good value as well.
I am not disappointed, it just seems right somehow. I am delighted that 6 of us have decided to regroup and meet together to see where it goes from here. Our first meeting of Chapter 2 (or possibly 3a) is next Wednesday and I am looking forward to it.
Thanks to everyone who has been involved in my life through THIRD over the past year and x months, you remain very important to me.

Quoted in an "Emergent" newsletter:

The primary reason I ever attend a church service (or frankly, even have serious or long conversations with Christians) is the hope that I will hear something proclaimed out of heaven, something that carries the majesty, the revelation, the heart and breath of G od. I want my heart to burn with a word from Heaven. I want to hear something which rumbles through the corridors of His chamber and then creates a sonic boom when it enters my "earth space." I am not interested in a 3-point guide for living or recycled Oprah or political perspectives or even a Bible study or exploring "styles of worship." And, I'm not looking for more apologetics and theology.

The following quote is from Alan Jamieson talking about "Post-church groups":

But they are not static places. The people in these groups have no desire that the groups should become institutionalised like the churches they have left. Rather they are groups that exist for as long as they are meaningful and helpful to the core group of people who make them up and give energy to them, and when that ceases then they end. That ending is not seen as failure, but as the opportunity for members to form - or link up with - other groups, and make other connections with people of like faith.

Seems to be pretty much what's happening with THIRD, except that we are privileged to have a "post-church" group within and with the backing of a church!

Just beginning to have a few thoughts following on from a previous post. I wonder if some of the problems we have in trying to understand the relationship between God / Creation / Us are due to the tendency to view creation as something other than God, i.e. it's something He made. If I can stretch the Adam and Eve analogy a little (I begin to think it is a multi-faceted analogy by the way) creation would be something that came out of God, or it is in fact a part of Him, and remains a part of Him.
I've never been able to accept, for example, that God exists outside of time, and in this scenario time becomes an expression of part of God's character. It does not limit Him or control Him, it's just a part of the way He has expressed Himself in creation.