Emergent churches

The newer concepts I could never accept were were these:

1) Preaching of the so-called prosperity gospel (Osteen and the Rev. Dollar are good examples).

2) Viewing the pastor as the "CEO of the church." What we really needed was a great administrator not a spiritual leader, shepherd of the flock, preacher using sound Biblical principles.

3) Mixing politics with religion in the church. "Posting the colors" on July 4th. Preaching against political rather than moral and spiritual enemies.

4) A church that is absolutely non-supportive of an outreach effort to the community. This was earlier called "missional living." Visiting has always been a part of the Baptist churches I've belonged to. We need it now more than ever. Now is not the time to baracade ourselves up inside beautiful new church buildings and preach to the choir.

 

One thing that has never been a question since my older teen years was whether or not I attended church. I have made the choice to attend--Where was the question.

Over the years, I have have only attended SBC churches. They weren't that diverse from each other--typical Sunday morning, sunday night wednesday night, missions emphasis, etc, etc, let's say we are doing church.

In the last ten years, I guess I have come to a place where I have become aware of some things.

A. It really doesn't matter what color the carpet is.

B. It really doesn't matter the style of music. The message needs to be clear.

C. It doesn't matter when and how you take up the offering.

D. The Holy Spirit is the convicter, not legalistic granny.

E. Services don't have to end in one hour.

F. Whether I choose to carry a big gulp into church is only a matter of my conscience.

G. What is important is reaching the Judea, Samaria and the uttermost part of the world.

H. I don't mind a visually oriented service==sometimes I need it. Sometimes it is distracting.

I. I am probably more emergent/emerging than half this board, but you won't catch me attending Olsteen's church as a positive thing--I would in a critical fashion.

J. Powerpoint music is great because who wants to sing to a book? Besides, I can't dance well holding a book. I might break out in a David Dancing Naked praise dance.

 

I agree with you that all of those points are things to criticize. But I don't believe any of these points are about the emerging church.

1) prosperity gospel, Creflo Dollar=Word-of-Faith; Osteen=non-denominational megachurch
2) pastor as CEO=megachurch model
3) mixing politics and religions=some evangelical churches
4) non-supportive of outreach=hypercalvinism

Your last point may be close to a valid criticism of the emerging church.

In the emerging church, there is less support for organized mass outreach efforts and more emphasis on smaller more individualized outreach through missional living. It leaves a lot up to the individual who may not to follow through on their good intentions. Or possibly are not well equipped/prepared for outreach. Or in attempting not to be "in your face" evangelising, missional living can become being like the world with no real missional aspect.

So the end result might be a lack of outreach in some emerging Christians. But that is not the original intent.

 

There are a lot of "old school" churches who don't out reach.

 

Carson's "Becoming Conversant ..." is one of the more well known books that is critical of the emerging church. Carson is probably the most prominent and commonly quoted evangelical critic of the emerging church. I think he does a fair job of describing some of the strengths and weaknesses of the emerging church. Here is an article that excerpts parts of his book. Modern Reformation - The Emerging Church by D.A. Carson

Interestingly, Carson in speaking in Sydney this August in a conference called Engage with Mark Driscoll who is one of the most prominent American leaders in the "Emerging but not Emergent" church.

 

I agree. That criticism applies to churches from many different backgrounds.

 

Carson's article was infromative. I may buy his book. I've got a few in my church who are talking "Emergent" language. Some of what I'm hearing I like. Some of it I don't.

 

The church I am a member of went hyper calvinist. That brought services about 2 hrs long with the strident "who says services should end in an hour or so?"

Consider this: if you are elderly, you probably cannot sit much longer than that.

If you have small children, you are not going to be able to do a 2 hr service.

Many folks with various disabilities from varicose veins to the wheelchair bound cannot remain in basically one position too long.

Now if all you want are the 20-30 somethings in good health with no kids, go right on with the super long services.

Otherwise, let's stop making it about "support me as I do my thing" and actually consider the real physical needs of the congregation.

 

1. If you are elderly, sit down, stand up, get up and leave.

2. Put your small children in the nursery. Otherwise, go to the nursing room or something when your children are tired of sitting there.

3. Sometimes I have pain in my leg. I sit where I can get up and move around then sit back down.

OR, OF COURSE, GO TO A CHURCH THAT IS AN HOUR IN LENGTH.

 

YOU mean YOU would be willing to Offend a person by not shortening your services to suit them?!!!!! I mean after all, we are told to not offend someone... and if someone truly believes that services should not be longer than an hour, the church should ignore the majority and not offend the minority here... I am shocked...



Nah... not really just pickin on you.

But that is the way a lot of people think... from Music, to lighting, to worship styles... they feel that if they are in the minority instead of changing to match the majority, they have a right going around declaring...

"YOU are offending me!!!"

"The music is tooo worldly... either stop singing praise songs, or I am leaving"

And of course some churches cater to these people... all under the banner of "Offend no one"

 

Here is how our pastor addresses the problems his sermons (one hour and fifteen minutes at least) cause:

NNE is to stand or leave the service after he begins preaching.

Children under 5 are welcome only until the song service ends. That means if you have kids under 5, and attend SS, they are in the nursery/children's services for nearly 3 hours. Nursery attendants do not feed. Parents are not to leave the service to go feed. For many infants, that is tantamount to child abuse. If you prefer to worship together as a family you are told "too bad so sad go somewhere else."

Song service is standing--and if you sit before it ends you WILL be publicly chastised from the pulpit.

We get the history of long services--been around long enough to know this is an attempt to revive Puritan practice. We are told that to not want this shows a lack of spirituallity. Uh, no, just a refusal to embrace another form of works based salvation.

 

RUN!!! Next thing you know another Baptist church will be ministering to your people by allowing the government to use their busses to bus your people out!!

IF what you are saying is true.. it is child abuse.

It sounds very cult like.