Innovation

Innovation is a far better word than "change."
What good American can be against innovation?

It is through inventions (which I am sure has some greek-latin root or something) that we are able to type, play Madden football, smoke good cigars, play poker and do all the "fun" things in life. On the other hand, change is seen as an interuption to our ordered life. Change is moving to New Jersey, change is getting fired, change is often forced, cumbersome and painful. Innovation is fluid, risky and emergent (throwing that out there so I can rise in the GOOGLE rankings).

Last night Erwin McManus of Mosaic spoke about innovation as a necessity for evangelism in the church. Innovation provides space for unique people, "normal" people to be brought before the cross. Innovation says that I am not satisified with the status quo and want to overlap what is with what will be.

To me, that is wonderful, who could be against that?

Then I have to remember that many people don't see the overlapping as innovation, but change. The VP of GM motors who was interviewed on NBC Nightly News two nights agao, said that they [GM] were not going to "change" the way they made cars, they believe that the system they have in place is suffecient. Is it that mindset that makes it appearant why 44% of Americans now drive foreign cars? Compare that to GOOGLE, whose creators invented a logrythym that will constantly update, reorder, redirect and restructure their search results (their product).

Now which organizational structure would the PC(USA) fall under? Aren't we being "standardized" by Princeton Seminary and our CPM's to act, look, talk and think theologically the same, because we fear having to change?

So now I know why "Christians" are concerned about allowing change or innovation to occur (And I am not talking about plugging in a guitar and using powerpoint, I am talking about providing a space where diversity and even heresies can be expressed). I am talking about allowing "normal" people to be heard. I see why there is concern that postmodernism, emergent, hindus, catholics, whatever, might say something that converges with my understanding of "truth"; suddenly I would have to change my understanding of Biblical truth. But I have to believe that these "outsiders" cannot damage God. There may be some distortion of God, but it is through distortion that amazing innovations have and will come about.