emergent church

Another fancy term for a post-modern liberal church devoid of sound doctrine which tries to entertain people. They may use different terminology, but in the end, they are all basically the same. POMOs, Emergents, seeker sensitive, progressive, liberal, sojourners, heretics...

Joseph Botwinick

 

mighty big question if you have no idea where it is gonna go . . .

Term coined I believe by McLaren.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/november/12.36.html

Emergent and emerging are often interchangeable.

The problem is theology . . . some emergent churches are heretical and some are othodox.

No - I will not research what is in my memory chip - it there and I am done researching a fad movement.

It is compared to the Jesus People movement of the 60's. But, I think honestly it is just a bunch of new churches with differing methods for starting new churches and by happenstance they are growing big.

We measure big as success.

Don't we gb?

 

I'm not sure that they know what they are talking about either. As near as I can tell it is what happens when postmodernism and liberalism collide. Check out the Wikipedia page on "Emerging church" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerging_Church and see whether you can make sense of it.

 

If you have some time on your hands get yourself on over to http://www.desiringgod.org/Events/NationalConferences/Archives/2006/#ConferenceMessages and download the audio messages from this conference. The conference was in response to the postmodern culture in general and the "emergent" church movement specifically. I particularly got a lot from Tim Keller's message, but all of them are worth the time and effort.

 

As already mentioned, the emerging church is a group that not only wants to seriously re-think methodology, but also re-think what being a Christian looks like, acts like, thinks like, ect. Brian Mclaren is the big name most people go to as the "representative". I think that is mainly because he publishes the most books and speaks at the most places. Again, as mentioned, emerging and emergant are often different terms with different meanings, depending on who to talk to. Unfortunately, many church plants are grouped with the emerging church, thus associated with Mclaren (who has serious doctrine issues) just because they are changing methods. For example, Mark Driscoll, a reformed Pastor in Seattle may be lumped under being emergant, but not in the same sense as Mclaren. He is actually very outspoken against the "emerging" movement (Mclaren), and uses the term "missional" as opposed to emerging. I'm actually a part of a church plant that is unfortunately, and foolishly, smirked at because it is a part of Driscoll's "missional" church planting. Many view it all in the same category as "emerging". When, in actuality, it is very much different. Some churches are being planted and taking new efforts to reach people by breaking some traditional stances (like don't hang out with those who drink), but not changing theology. Mark Driscoll's first book "Radical Reformission" is a great example of what a "missional" church is, as opposed to the "emerging" church, which is changing not only methods, but re-defining doctrines for the sake of accepting all. That is my summary. I've read quite a bit of Mclaren, some Tony Jones (another emerging guy), and of course, Mark Driscoll. I'm a fan of his, and my church is a part of his church planting network (acts 29).

 

I don't see anything doctrinally unsound in the emergent church movement. I can see that a lot of Baptists will have problems with it because there are some aspects of it that don't conform to their predispositions about the superficial, social aspects of Christianity, but those are elements of human, not Biblical, wisdom. As a matter of fact, a lot of emergent churches have been started, and populated, by younger Baptists who seem to be leaving the Baptist family in droves these days.

Perhaps the anger that has been expressed against the emergent church, as well as other "seeker-sensitive", evangelistically oriented Christian movements is a result of jealousy. God is clearly blessing them, and opening the doors for their people to share the gospel in a lot of places that the traditional church, and particularly Baptists, have been shut out of for a number of years.

Our church leadership has read up on the emergent church movement, and is familiar with it. I see the previous post is also from Nashville, and I am aware of several congregations here that are thriving, and they are full of ex-Baptists. In fact, I read of one congregation that has leased a large sanctuary and some educational and office space from an SBC church that once ran over 1,000 in attendance and has dwindled down to about 150, and I believe it falls in the category of emergent.

 

http://www.crosspointonline.org/about/contact.html

There is a website for a church in Nashville. They have some audio clips and a video clip in there that will give you somewhat of an idea. You'll have to click on the menu to get to them, and they are still working on the site, but you can get an idea. I'm not exactly sure this particular church would call itself "emergent," but I think they fit the bill. I've been in their services before. The music is loud, but clearly understandable. There is a clear sense of community and corporate worship, lots and lots of congregational participation, a time set aside for prayer ministry in which people were posted around the room to pray with others, and a message that got right to the point, used examples from the pop culture that the audience clearly understood and made a very clear "take away" application. It would be difficult to be "part of the crowd" in that church, in spite of the fact that they run over 1,000 in worship in two services. They really emphasize small group interaction and small community accountability. If I weren't as old as I am, and didn't have the responsibility for raising three teenagers and a pre-teen, I'd go there myself.

 

Perhaps if Christianity was all about God blessing us and satisfying our every want and longing, then you would have some validity to your arguments about non-heretics being jealous of you and your large sanctuary and over 1000 in attendance. Instead, however, I believe Christianity is all about pleasing God and giving all the glory to him alone. This is yet another difference between all versions of the liberal heretic church under whatever name you give it and non-heretical Churches. It begins with the foundation of what the purpose of the Church is. If we are there to please God, then there will be no compromise to the truth no matter how low the numbers get. If it is about pleasing man, then you will compromise everything that is the truth eventually to make sure you have a large auditorium to boast about. "Forbid it Lord that I should boast, save in the death of Christ my Lord...All the vain things that charm me most...I sacrifice them to his cross". May we all come to the point in our lives where the grace and mercy of God is our heart's delight and we are content to give glory to God alone. If these young pastors are advocating the heresies of McLaren and other emergent leaders, I am glad they have and are leaving. We don't need leadership like that which exalts the desires of man over the truth of God.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I am not sure how you can say that given statements like this from http://emergent-us.typepad.com/emergentus/2006/05/doctrinal_state.html:

I can't say whether they are doctrinally sound or unsound if they won't establish a doctrinal position.

 

I'm probably one of the more pro-emergent folks on this board. I have read two of McLaren's books (A New Kind of Christian and A Generous Orthodoxy) and have enjoyed his writings as being insightful. I've also made some significant contributions to the Wikipedia article about the Emergent Church which I admit needs lots of work before it becomes a useful article.

Some introductory sites that may be useful include:

Christianity Today: Emergent Mystique
Emergent Village

It is difficult to characterize and encapsulate the emergent church in a few phrases since it is a diffuse movement that emergents like to call a "conversation".

But some key characteristics include:

1. missional living: all Christians being missionaries wherever they are, however they have been gifted
2. conversation/dialogue: an openness to considering different often disagreeing perspectives
3. postmodernism/postcolonialism: a recognition of how cultural thinking has moved beyond the rationalistic reductionism of modernism and the superiority of colonialism
4. authenticy: favouring the sharing of personal sincere experiences over scripted formulaic interactions
5. technological: extensive use of multimedia and the internet, particularly blogs to communicate and share ideas

Worship varies greatly. Many emergent Christians are found in traditional denominations, like myself who I consider to be an emergent Christian in an evangelical baptist church. Others are emergent Christians worshipping in emergent churches.

Let me know if you have any other questions.

 

If that's your perception of the emergent church movement, then you don't know much about it, and have certainly not experienced very much of it.

 

Would Erwin McManus fall into the "emergent" movement?

1. missional living: all Christians being missionaries wherever they are, however they have been gifted
2. conversation/dialogue: an openness to considering different often disagreeing perspectives
3. postmodernism/postcolonialism: a recognition of how cultural thinking has moved beyond the rationalistic reductionism of modernism and the superiority of colonialism
4. authenticy: favouring the sharing of personal sincere experiences over scripted formulaic interactions
5. technological: extensive use of multimedia and the internet, particularly blogs to communicate and share ideas

I have no surface concern with any of these statements, it would be how they ultimately express themselves that one may have a problem, but that is true with any church, method, or practice.

 

More accurately stated:'Who needs the bible anymore. Times have changed. We've got a better way to do it!'

Or as stated in the days of the judges: 'And men did what was right in their own eyes!'

 

I would say yes. I know he is a big influencer of those in the emergent movement, yet don't want to be identified with Brian Mclaren. Unfortunately, many off hand comments regarding the emergant movement as a whole (including some in here) show ignorance about it. Mclaren is the big name, the guy everyone always hears about. There are a lot of churches that would be classified as emergant but would not align themselves with him. Many that I know would line up more with Erwin Mcmanus. Reggie Mcneal is another name, actually a Southern Baptist, who has written concerning the emerging church. It might be a good idea for some to learn to practice some "emerging" church suggestions, such as dialogue. Calling everyone a heretic who doesn't line up with your exact boxed up views does nobody any good. It may be good to learn a little about the movement, and everyone in it, and people will see that many are more about changing aesthetics, methods, and not all are about changing theology.

 

Not at all.

Have you noticed that the Bible is not a formula? (It would be a whole lot shorter if it was!!) Rather than a formula, it is a complicated set of writings from multiple authors through many ages that tells stories (as well as the occasional systematic teachings, lists, geneologies, and poems) that tell the story of how God relates to humankind.

Formulas and systematic theologies can be very helpful, but they always simplify, systematize and depersonalize God. If we are to be faithful to the scripture, we must move beyond formulas and systems to understand God as He has revealed Himself in scripture.

That's what the emergent movement is trying to do.

 

good post. it's hard for people (i'll admit myself included) to understand what you just said. but it's so true.

 

People I have great respect for say NO! Not true!
Emerging Church

In religion of a Christian kind, we listen; in spirituality of a contemporary kind, we talk.
- From Eros Spirituality Vs. Agape Faith by David F. Wells
"...the emergent church is the latest version of liberalism. The only difference is that old liberalism accomodated modernity and the new liberalism accomodates postmodernity." - Mark Driscoll
“Emerging Churches define themselves as those (1.) who take the life of Jesus as a model way to live, and (2.) who transform the secular realm, ( 3.) as they live highly communal lives. Because of these three activities, emerging churches (4.) welcome those who are outside, (5.) share generously, (6.) participate, (7.) create, (8.) lead without control, and 9. function together in spiritual activities.Boiling it down to one sentence: Emerging Churches are ... communities who practice the way of Jesus within postmodern cultures.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Emerging Church "...arose as a protest against the institutional church, modernism and seeker-sensitive churches... has encouraged evangelicals to take note of cultural trends and has emphasized authenticity among believers." - D.A. Carson

Since the beginning of the bible man has been trying to 'fix it' to suit himself, rather than to obediently read, understand, follow to suit Himself!!

 

Sorry, I tried to edit and give source but it wouldnt let me go back.
(source:monergism.com)