Posted by Helen on: 05.18.2006 /
I chose ‘the Edge’ because I’d like to take people to the edge of their comfort zones (at least some of the time).
‘The Edge’ is a challenging place to be, but I think we have to go there to truly listen to people whose viewpoints are different from ours.
Here’s the idealistic fantasy that ran through my head as I thought about the name Conversation at the Edge:
Imagine there’s a war going one with shots being fired. An ordinary soldier on one side sees an ordinary soldier on the other, who looks like him except for the uniform. One soldier calls to the other “Hey, come over here!”
They both meet at the “edge’ (the border between enemy territories) where they can talk to each other [in real wars there may be no such place, and the language barrier might be insurmountable, but bear with me]. They do talk and what they find out about each other surprises them. They discover that neither of them really knows what the war is about and they have a lot in common.
They go back and tell their leaders about the Conversation at the Edge, which results in each leaders finding out things about the other side that surprises them. One leader is brave enough to call the other to talk. They do and as a result they realize the war is over nothing and very costly for both sides. So they mutually agree to end it.
We don’t want Conversation at the Edge to be a ‘war zone’. There are already more than enough groups out there invoking battle imagery - and sometimes using real battle tactics.
We want to try a different approach. One we hope will change us all in ways that enable us to change the world around us, making the world a better place (MTWABP).
Comment by: jim
1 05/24/06 6:47 PM | Comment Link |this looks good
Comment by: Helen M.
2 05/24/06 7:24 PM | Comment Link |thanks :)
Comment by: Bruce
3 05/31/06 5:40 PM | Comment Link |My wife and I are planting a new church in a new (for us) community. We love the experience, especially being able to visit other churches in the time before we start our own services. We’ve visited liturgical churches and evangelical churches, African American and anglo churches, traditional churches and contemporary churches.What we have found is tremendous correspondence among all the churches. The differences are minuscule. Truly, if we met at “the edge” and really listened to each other, we would probably be surprised, even shocked, at what good we could accomplish together.
Comment by: Helen M.
4 05/31/06 7:30 PM | Comment Link |Yes, I hope so! Thanks Bruce.
Comment by: benjamin ady
5 02/11/07 10:27 PM | Comment Link |I wonder how Jim would do in Africa–have you been there? In West Africa, they sort of expect church services and sermons to go on for hours. Jim is *so* adept at communicating cultural-sensitively, which here means keep it short and simple, period. That’s part of what made revolution conference so aweomse, speaking to we who grew up with sound bites in short clips, so we don’t get bored. I bet Jim would be able to handily reverse that and speak for an hour at a time in a west african church service, and we’d all be totally blown away to watch him go.
Comment by: Alex Castro
6 02/18/08 11:31 AM | Comment Link |Thanks for the link. I like the information and the challenge that your website brings into the perspective of my project. I am so intreagued by the concept of conversating with someone that believes something different than I do. It in not necessarily for conversion but to challenge both my and an unbeliever. Question: What do you think about the project so far?
Comment by: Helen
7 02/18/08 12:52 PM | Comment Link |Alex I love talking with people who think differently from me as long as they respect I have reasons for the views I hold. Rather than judging me as wrong or deluded simply because I disagree with them.
It’s more interesting than talking with people who agree with me all the time. (Although, actually I’m not sure there ARE any of them :))