The Church Emerging

NOTHING NEW

2008-05-01T19:16:00.000-07:00

I’m sorry for the long time in between posts. I wrote the first installment in a three part review of Tony Jones’ “The New Christians” earlier this week, but when I tried to retrieve it the file was no longer accessible. I will try to recreate that article before the weekend is over.

I do want to take this opportunity to share some insights about the nature of the Emerging Church. The primary value of the EC is community. Community is at the heart of the EC formulation of the Kingdom; community is at the heart of the EC’s understanding of the church; and community serves as the glue that holds the various theological positions together.

I recently spent some time on the community message boards of the “ooze.com.” I won’t go into what was said, but it occurred to me in the course of my conversations there that the EC is really not all that different from the traditional church. Traditional Christians also gather to form online communities. One example is “crosswalk.com.” Crosswalk is a web site that offers, among other things, community forums where Christians from every tradition can gather. Currently, Crosswalk has 89,000+ community members from all around the globe that represent virtually every denomination or tradition.

The more I thought about this, the more I realized that much of what emergents claim is unique to their movement is really not unique at all. This fact tends to get lost in all the talk about reclaiming historical Christianity, post modernity, and the influence of culture on theology. However, when we strip away all the “what’s” and “why’s” of the EC, we see something that can most aptly be described as, nothing new.

Instead of me describing other examples of the similarities between the EC and the traditional church, I am asking for input from you, the reader. Do you recognize some characteristics that emergents claim are unique to the EC but are actually “nothing new?”

Looking forward to your responses!

"The New Christians " Awakening The Sleeping Giant

2008-04-24T14:05:00.000-07:00

Tony Jones’ “The New Christians” is the latest dispatch from the emergent frontier. In The New Christians, Jones describes the genesis of the EC and explicates emergent theology. While a casual perusal of emergent blogs reveal that Jones has succeeded in impressing the “choir”, it remains to be seen if the effort will also succeed in achieving the primary purpose for its writing.

Purpose of “New Christians…”
Jones believes that the “academy” must accept EC theology as a legitimate critique of, and alternative to, modern era theology. Nowhere is this view more apparent than in his blog post about the rejection of his Wheaton Theology Conference paper.

Because of this belief and considering the subject matter, it is reasonable to conclude that Jones has two separate, but interrelated, purposes for writing this book. The first is to present the theology of the EC for consideration by people of faith; second, is to promote and expand the EC movement. It is unlikely that current participants in the Emerging Church community were among his primary target audience, as most emergents are familiar with the information contained in the book (with the possible exception of the events leading up to the establishment of EmergentVillage). It is arguable though, that Jones desired for emergents to also be encouraged by the stories, and their faith buttressed by the explication of emergent theology.

I have not interviewed Jones, nor have I read any interviews on this matter, so the most I can do at this time is speculate about his purposes. However, no matter what his purposes are, it is likely that in the final analysis this book will do more to harm than help the EC movement.

Awakening a Sleeping Giant
The New Christians is touted as the seminal source for accurate information concerning the theology and construct of the Emerging Church movement. Dan Kimball’s endorsement says it well: “This is the book to read to get the actual insider’s view of all things emergent.”
The New Christians will do more to damage than promote the EC precisely because Jones does such a good job describing the movement.
It is undeniable that the EC is growing in numbers and influence; and emergents know it. What emergents apparently do not know is that one reason for their success is most evangelical Christians do not know anything about the EC.

I have spoken to pastors all across the USofA about the EC. Most of those that I talked with believe that the EC has something positive to offer the church. However, when I ask them what it has to offer, they cannot answer. As it turns out, they know precious little about the EC, other than it is an effort to communicate the gospel in terms that are relevant to the postmodern generation. These pastors take this position concerning the EC because they heard or read someone say that the traditional church can learn from emergents (usually referring to EC criticisms of modern era Christian practices). In other words, the reason so many evangelicals are willing to entertain the notion that the EC is good for the church, is because they heard it or read it somewhere.

Ignorance is not the same thing as acceptence. Emergents have made a terrible miscalculation, if they confused evangelical ignorance of the EC movement with acceptence of the liberal theology of the EC. Contemporary evangelicals have not abandoned the struggle with theological liberalism. Conservative evangelicals are no more willing to acquiesce to the theological presuppositions of liberalism than did their forebears twenty-five, fifty, or a hundred years before. The reason contemporary conservatives are silent about liberalism is because they believe it is dead.

I attended the SBC national convention in San Antonio in June 2007. On more than one occasion, someone speaking to the members emphatically stated that liberalism is dead.
Conservative evangelicals are woefully unaware that liberalism is not dead. To the contrary, it is very much alive and thriving in the form of the Emerging Church. Though they are unaware of liberalism’s resurrection, I am seeing hopeful signs that the sleeping giant of evangelicalism is stirring - not waking up just yet - but beginning to stir.

Changing Perspective
The evidence of this stirring is the fact that only a year ago, few people outside the EC itself could speak knowledgeably about the movement. Now, an increasing number of blogs dedicated to informing conservatives about the EC are showing up on the internet. Not long ago, the only book of any consequence about the EC was D.A. Carson’s “Becoming Conversant With The Emergent Church”; now a number of books explicating an evangelical response to the EC are available and more are due to be released.

To summarize, one reason the EC has been able to grow in size and influence is that conservative evangelicals were largely ignorant of emergent theology. However, the situation is changing. As more evangelicals realize what the EC is teaching, and when they realize the influence emergents have gained, the limited response we are seeing now will explode into an all out effort to expose the folly of the new liberalism of the Emerging Church.

Tony Jones’ belief that EC theology is a legitimate alternative to conservative evangelical theology, and his desire that the academy accept him as a legitimate intellectual, blinds him to the fact that the EC’s success is due in large part to its anonymity. His blindness and his desires are behind his efforts to force the EC out into the open - into the mainstream of Christianity. Jones is effectively saying to the church at large, “Here we are; this is what we are about; this is what we believe. Prove me wrong!”

Jones’ goal might be to inform and promote, but instead of growth and legitimacy, his effort might spell the beginning of the end for the "New Liberals that he calls "The New Christians."

Steve

Welcome!

2008-04-21T23:37:00.000-07:00

Hello Everyone! My name is Steve, and as the title suggests, this blog is about the Emerging Church (EC) movement. Specifically, I will be focusing on introducing, analyzing, and discussing with you the origins, construct, theology, and future of the EC. Before explaining the format of this blog, let me take a moment to introduce myself and explain how I got involved with the EC.

I am a pastor of eighteen years serving in the SBC. Prior to vocational ministry, I was a truck stop chaplain. One day, two years ago, I decided to find out about this thing called the EC, because it is my duty as a minister to be informed about anything on the horizon that I may need to warn my congregation about.

IS THE EC DOCTRINALLY ORTHODOX
My initial inquiry led me to conclude that the EC was just another in a long line of attempts at making the gospel relevant. Relevant is good, as long as the Gospel message is not changed in the process. As the saying goes: “Change the methods, as long you don't change the message.” My research project revealed that while emergents were defintely changing methods, the message being proclaimed was orthodox. I read and dialogued with emergents who, among other doctrines, proclaimed Jesus alone is the “way of salvation” and ”Scripture is God breathed and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness…(2Timothy 3:16)

However, my opinion of the EC began to change as I read the writings of Brian McLaren. McLaren is criticized for being overly vague about his theology, which is certainly true in his book, A Generous Orthodoxy. While McLaren did discuss doctrines, appropriate Christian behavior, and Christ-like attitudes, he did so in such a way as to leave himself a degree of plausible deniability against criticism from both conservative and liberal theologians; a “plausible deniability” that he employed whenever conservative theologians like Albert Mohler and D.A. Carson challenged his doctrine. However, accusing McLaren of doctrinal ambiguity is understating the situation; for he is not guilty of simple doctrinal ambiguity, I believe the evidence will demonstrate that McLaren is engaging in willful deception.

DECEPTION
Having spent much time in the land of the LDS church - that is Salt Lake City - I have had many conversations with Mormons that taught me some valuable lessons about how people communicate. Mormons use Christian terminology, i.e. ”trinity” and “born again” but they infuse them with different meaning. If you pay attention to how people communicate, you might notice how they assume that others mean the same thing as they do when using shared terminology, i.e. saved. These assumptions allow groups like the Mormons to mislead people into thinking they are saying something they are not. Familiar with this practice, many Christians in Utah have learned to allow people to define their own terms, which they will do if you listen long enough. It is this art of “self-defining terminology” that protected me from assuming McLaren was using Christian terms the same way I, and my fellow evangelicals, use them.

While I am convinced that many emergents are not intentionally deceptive, I realized that Brian McLaren has turned this "rhetorical deception" into an art form. He couches his doctrine in terms that he can safely assume will be interpreted differently than he is using them. Stated as simply as I can, Emergents mean something quite different than most Christians when citing phrases like Jesus being the ”only way” or when quoting verses such as 2Timothy 3:16. Additionally, McLaren and a few of his friends have engaged in historical revisionism and slanderous portrayals of the traditional church. All for the purpose of justifying the need for a new and more authentic version of Christianity that emergents propose is found in the EC.

Another troubling realization was the fact that most Christians, including a majority of pastors and teachers are unaware of what the EC teaches (conclusions are derived from personal surveys, and are not meant to be interpreted as the product of anything even remotely resembling a scientific inquiry). Worse, many of those that do know something about the EC are the recipients of mis-representations; hearsay, and outright fabrications. As a result they believe things about the EC that simply are not true. This mis-information has led them to the conclusion that the EC is, at worst harmless, and at best, the future of the church. Almost as troubling, I discovered that even though they participate in the EC community, many practicing emergents are woefully uninformed about the doctrines and goals of their own movement.

WARNING THE CHURCH
For all these reasons, I decided to commit myself to learning everything I could about the EC, in order to both provide Christians with an accurate description of the EC, and warn the church about any dangerous teachings or practices of this movement. To accomplish this task, I resigned my pastorate and spent the two years in full time research (still ongoing) that includes reading numerous books, articles, and essays authored by emergents; participating in blog and web forum conversations with emergents (one such conversation went on for three months), and visiting emergent congregations.

This blog is one of the fruits of that research. It is my intent to write brief, thorough and accurate, descriptions of the various elements of EC thought and practice.Some commentators use bitter tones, insulting characterizations, and exaggerations in their discussions of the EC. If you have been offended by this behavior in the past, let me assure you that not all commentators ignore the command of 2Timothy 2:25 to teach with gentleness. I give you my word that I will present the information with compassion, gentleness, and a commitment to the truth.

So, if you have heard about the EC, but don’t know anything about the movement; if you even went so far as to begin researching the EC, but soon became overwhelmed by the constant references to philosophical theory, history, and the undefinable nature of the EC, then this blog is for you. I will discuss all these issues, but in plain and simple english, not the technical jargon of the academy.

METHODOLOGY
The articles will be filed under traditional theological categories, e.g. Bible, Soteriology (salvation); the church; God; ect. The present post is the first and only post at this time. Please be patient, I will try and add at least one article a week; more frequently when I have time. The next article…the first article on the EC itself will be up in a day or two. You are invited to respond with any questions, comments, or challenges to anything I, or others post here. I only ask that you observe two simple rules:

1-always communicate in a respectful manner.
2-provide references to support anything you cite from or about someone other than yourself.

I intend to interract with respondents each day, but the articles will require more planning and time, thus they must be spaced further apart. That said, let me conclude this fist post, with this: “I not only invite you to respond, but I am looking forward to us all being challenged by one another; learn from one another; and sharpening our conclusions on our interraction with one another!"

May God bless you today and every day!

Steve