How to Know When the Emerging Church

[Xenia]

I think this is an awesome commentary. It's too long to post but well worth the reading.

How to Know When the Emerging Church
Shows Signs of Emerging in Your Church

Commentary by Roger Oakland

The world is changing. So is the Christian evangelical church. There was a time— not that long ago—when the Bible was considered to be the Word of God by the majority of evangelical Christians. Now that we are well into the third millennium and the post-modern, post-Christian era, the term evangelical can mean almost anything. What has happened? Why is this happening and what is the future for mainstream Christianity?

For the past several years, I have been speaking around the world on current trends that are impacting Christianity. After these presentations, I am approached by Christians who come from many different church backgrounds. Many are expressing their concerns about what is happening in their churches, troubled by the new direction they see their church going. While they may not always be able to discern what is wrong, they know something is wrong and that it needs to be addressed.

Further, many have told me they have attempted to express their concerns with their pastors or church elders. In almost every case, they were told they had a choice to make—get with the new program or get out of the church.

This move towards a reinvented Christianity (one designed to “reach people”) seems to be here for the long haul. It is not just a passing fad. I am often asked by concerned brothers and sisters in Christ to provide an explanation in order to help them understand what they have encountered. They want to know why these changes are underway and what to expect in the future. As well, they want to know what, if anything can be done, to stem this tide. It is for this reason I am writing this commentary—to provide biblical insight regarding the Emerging Church and where it is heading in the future.

Please read the rest of this important commentary here: http://www.understandthetimes.org/commentary/c54.shtml

[Tamera]

Very interesting article. I see a lot of this happening in my denomination, but couldn't quite put my finger on what was wrong.

Added Comment:
When I first read this article, I just skimmed it. I went back and reread. I agree with some of the things he said but very much disagree with others.

[ProfessorAlan]

The "Emerging Church" is an interesting movement, and like all movements has good and bad points.

I disagree with the overall thrust of the article -- that the current state of the the Protestant church is just peachy and that any change by definition has to be destructive. It always worries me when Protestant leaders (remember how we came into being -- by revolution, by questioning the ruling authorities, by reinventing the church) look upon any movement that questions THEIR leadership and judgement and theology and priorities as being from the enemy. The underlying assumption that the Reformation restored perfection to the church in terms of practice and doctrine and attitude is just a bunch of ....... stuff I don't agree with.

And just between us, some of the "warning signs" presented I judge to actually be good things ...

[Cymrugirl]

An interesting article. I would point out though, that there is some presumptions in this article which innaccurately blanket the emerging church philosophy. While I don't subscribe to all the ideas of that particular movement, I have read enough of their thoughts and theology from their own mouths to know that this article misrepresents a lot of people - if not everyone - a lot. I'm currently reading A Generous Orthodoxy - which is a title written by one of the foremost voices in the Emerging Church. I disagree with him from time to time, but some of the changes that the Emerging Church is pushing towards, seem to be Biblically sound.

I'm very cautious of articles that talk about groups of people vaguely - and make veiled references (I spotted at least one indirect reference to Rick Warren) without quoting any of these people directly or showing sources. This article writer seems to be assuming that he is entirely right, and these folks are entirely wrong, and assumes the reader will believe him without asking for details.

In that sense, his article is ironic because the focus that I've picked up on from reading Emergent Church leaders so far, is that the church has, for the last several centuries, erred in their focus on being right rather than being a living example of the gospel of Christ. The primary focus of the gospel was not: For God was so right and people were so wrong that He had to kill Jesus in order to prove His point - it was a message of love.

The apostle Paul was keen to point out the importance of righteousness, but also even more keen to stress that righteousness without love is a clanging cymbal.

With the exception of the current book I'm reading (which I must withold commenting on until I've finished) I have never heard an emergent church author/leader say that the law of God is not important or void or old-fashioned - rather that it is not the central point of the gospel. The word "gospel" means good news. The good news isn't that there's right and wrong (the ten commandments established our depraved state) - the good news is that the love of Christ - the love of the Father - usurped the boundary between them and brought us back into a relation with the Father.

From what I can see, a lot of emergent church followers stress the relational point of the gospel foremost, and the law as a secondary point to that gospel. It is still a point, obviously, but Christ's sacrifice usurps it.

And as far as I can tell, there doesn't seem to be any Scriptural evidence that they are wrong on that count.

While I don't think the modern church actually believes that righteousness saves, I do think some churches have strayed from the central point of the gospel which is "come as you are" to focus on the command to "be transformed by the renewing of your minds." The working out of salvation, with fear and trembling, cannot, I think, become a formulaic step by step program - it must be individualized by the Holy Spirit, according to each person's needs and design.

It's important to remember that where God's love is concerned -where we focus on the the fact that we are saved in spite of ourselves through His love - we can never go wrong. In contrast, historically, when the church poured its focus into being right, it has sometimes been radically wrong. The same churches which breathe many disparaging comments toward the emerging church, are some of the same churches which believed the civil rights movement in the sixties was from Satan. They believed that women shouldn't work at all - that young women who had "cross-bred" with members of another "race" or become pregnant outside of marriage, should be ostracized and punished for the length of their lives for such a mistake.

And the trend toward political activism from the pulpit seems to be on an upswing rather than a downswing.

For an institutition obsessed with being right, the church seems in many ways, to be an historical failure. I think at the heart of the emergent church is a rebellion against the us vs. them mentality and a search for the Him mentality. Perhaps it is an unrefined, imperfect rebellion, but its motivation is not so evil as some critics seem to want us to believe.

After all, shouldn't our greatest goal be to learn to love God with all our hearts, our minds, and strength, and to love our neighbor as much as we love ourselves? Jesus seemed to think so.

[Daniel]

Right now I am reading the article myself. But here is also a site about the Emergent Church. I find it interesting reading, but again, always look over what you are reading, take with a grain of salt and look at the evidence for yourself.

http://www.letusreason.org/Emergedir.htm

[Xenia]

I will let the article stand on it's own. I believe it's a big problem in churches. I use to hate it when someone would speak of another preacher/teacher, whatever in a negative light. It still turns me off to a big extent. I think we are smart enough to learn about false doctrine and recognize ourselves who it applies to. BUT, I think Satan appreciates it when we keep our mouths shut too.
I can listen to ANY religion or movement and find good things about it. In any case, not trying to do combat with anyone ;)

[ProfessorAlan]

I just don't think every change/evolution/revolution in the church is a false doctrine ... some might be restoration.

[Tamera]

I just don't think every change/evolution/revolution in the church is a false doctrine ... some might be restoration.

I agree. A lot of the changes in the church world are good. But the emphasis on valuing a ministry by how many members it has, and the de-emphasis of end times theology and study of God's Word are two things that could hinder the church and IMO are not good changes.

I have just heard the term emerging church here, so I'm not sure what all it entails, but I have noticed a number of changes in the church world, both good and bad. I'm not sure which of these changes are part of the emerging church and which are part of the powers that be trying to stop the movement.

Good Things I've Seen:
Young people taking greater roles in ministry.
Acceptance of cultural trends that don't go against scripture. (tatoos, contempary Christian music, clothing, etc.)
Freedom in Worship

Bad Things I've Seen:
Bible Studies are almost non-existance.
De-emphasis on End Times.
Water down gospel to not offend.
Stopping exuberant worship so not to offend and making sure the service ends at the right time.
A ressurgence of stopping people from being involved in ministry. (women, youth, children)
Emphasis on giving so that those who give more are listened to most.
Numbers in churches being all important.
Pastors becoming "professional" and doing what is best for their careers rather than being interested in the leading of the Holy Spirit.
Judgemental people pushing personal convictions on other that are not in Scripture.
An emotional experiance is the only criteria to determine God's move.

That's a few things I've seen. There's a lot more I could mention. So is the the emerging church or the mainstream trying to stop the emerging church?

[Cymrugirl]

I will let the article stand on it's own.


Since the article only makes one brief reference to Scripture at all (to 2 Timothy), it looks like the author feels he can stand on his own as well.

I do not wish to be combative either, but I will say that the author should be made very familiar with the command: thou shalt bear no false witness against thy neighbor. Evidentiary support for such demonstrative claims against another person are essential - especially when those claims are being made by a person aligning themselves with Christ.

[ProfessorAlan]

For now, I am not going to delineate my disagreements, for purposes of remaining collegial. I will say, however, that some of the things the article -- and Tamera -- regard as negative, I view as positive.

And many of those traits that we all see as negative, I don't see as being unique characteristics to Emergents, but to many churches all over the spectrum. I don't view "watered down Gospel," "focus on numbers," and "judgmentalism" as new problems in the church, or problems inherent in Emergent churches. That stuff is all over.

[Cymrugirl]

Bad Things I've Seen:
Bible Studies are almost non-existance.
De-emphasis on End Times.
Water down gospel to not offend.
Stopping exuberant worship so not to offend and making sure the service ends at the right time.
A ressurgence of stopping people from being involved in ministry. (women, youth, children)
Emphasis on giving so that those who give more are listened to most.
Numbers in churches being all important.
Pastors becoming "professional" and doing what is best for their careers rather than being interested in the leading of the Holy Spirit.
Judgemental people pushing personal convictions on other that are not in Scripture.
An emotional experiance is the only criteria to determine God's move.

That's a few things I've seen. There's a lot more I could mention. So is the the emerging church or the mainstream trying to stop the emerging church?


I can understand your concerns with this list, Tamera. But, in all honesty, some of those attributes have frequented church buildings for years - not just recently. Churches obsessed with numbers - pastors who are more interested in careers - lack of interest by congregants in hard-core Biblical studies - disallowing certain types of congregants the ability to minister in certain areas - begging people to give more money - judgementalism - offense to exuberant worship......none of these things sound radically new to me. They have existed within the walls of Christian fellowship for ages.

I imagine that as long as people are in church, these attributes will always exist to some extent. They certainly aren't to be blamed on a group of new revolutionists - because these things are hardly revolutionary. They are old hat.

[Tamera]

I'm not saying that these negative things are a part of the emerging church. I don't know what the emerging church is. I've just heard that term for the first time. What I'm saying is in the churches I've been going to for the last ten years - not including the one I'm going to now - these negative things have become more noticable, not that they haven't been in the church for years.

I'm asking what the emerging church is. Are the negative things I mentioned (I don't think that most of the things mentioned in the article are negative) part of a backlash against a new movement or are they the movement? I'm just trying to understand, so I'm asking questions.

[ProfessorAlan]

It is hard to exactly pin down the term, as it is not one organized movement, but comes from a range of similar thinking leaders, who would probably define the term differently themselves ... part of the Wikipedia definition includes:

"The emerging church (also known as the emerging church movement) is a controversial 21st-century Protestant Christian movement whose participants seek to engage postmodern people, especially the unchurched and post-churched. To accomplish this, "emerging Christians" deconstruct and reconstruct Christian beliefs, certain culture norms, and methods in ways which will accommodate postmodern culture ... Proponents of this movement call it a "conversation" to emphasize its developing and decentralized nature ... Emerging church methodology includes frequent use of new technologies such as multimedia and the Internet. Emergent blogs are quite numerous, as are blogs of their opponents. They have not neglected more traditional means of communicating their ideas, however. Many emergent books and articles have been written, and leaders in the movement often conduct seminars. Parallel books, articles and seminars have been generated in opposition to the movement."
--------------------------
I am not an Emergent, nor is my church, so my comments don't come from that perspective. But going back to the core of the original article, some of the complaints the author has ... are things that I think are positives. That was my focus, not what label we put on certain activities.

[Cymrugirl]

I think it would be hard to summarize the Emerging Church in a single online forum post. I'm still reading up on it myself. I don't see them questioning Biblical values as much as the methodology for presenting those values to a dying world. They emphasize (in presenting the gospel) God's desiring relationship with people, more than man's need for God. In other words - and I'm doing my best to sum up what I've read accurately, rather than saying first "you're depraved" - the emphasis is "you are wanted."

There seems to be a collective belief among members of the emergent community (which by the way is still a loose term in and of itself) that the modern church loves people hypothetically rather than genuinely. In other words, we view man first through his depravity, rather than through the grace of God. Some have misconstrued this to mean that emergents don't believe that man is depraved at all - but that just doesn't seem to hold water. Emergents believe in depravity - but they don't believe the depravity of man is the centerpiece of the gospel - they believe God's desire for a relationship with the depraved man is the centerpiece. Their contention seems to be that the church reverses this - focusing its energies on depravity - focusing on what's wrong with man - rather than focusing on God's desiring him.


Like I said, not easy to sum up. Dallas Willard's Divine Conspiracy has been highly recommended to me - and I highly recommend Donald Miller. I haven't come to any conclusions on A Generous Orthodoxy yet.

[ProfessorAlan]

That's a good summary, Lucia.

I think of Emergent as a new generation of leaders describing methods that they have found to communicate the core of the Gospel best to their (post-modern, post-Christian) generation.

[Tamera]

I think it would be hard to summarize the Emerging Church in a single online forum post. I'm still reading up on it myself. I don't see them questioning Biblical values as much as the methodology for presenting those values to a dying world. They emphasize (in presenting the gospel) God's desiring relationship with people, more than man's need for God. In other words - and I'm doing my best to sum up what I've read accurately, rather than saying first "you're depraved" - the emphasis is "you are wanted."

There seems to be a collective belief among members of the emergent community (which by the way is still a loose term in and of itself) that the modern church loves people hypothetically rather than genuinely. In other words, we view man first through his depravity, rather than through the grace of God. Some have misconstrued this to mean that emergents don't believe that man is depraved at all - but that just doesn't seem to hold water. Emergents believe in depravity - but they don't believe the depravity of man is the centerpiece of the gospel - they believe God's desire for a relationship with the depraved man is the centerpiece. Their contention seems to be that the church reverses this - focusing its energies on depravity - focusing on what's wrong with man - rather than focusing on God's desiring him.


Like I said, not easy to sum up. Dallas Willard's Divine Conspiracy has been highly recommended to me - and I highly recommend Donald Miller. I haven't come to any conclusions on A Generous Orthodoxy yet.


If what you're saying is an accurate description of the movement, then I would have to say that much of what I've seen wrong over the past few years is a backlash of people against this movement, and some of it is people taking the movement to extremes. I don't know enough about it to make a judgement, but many times when God moves, people take that movement to an extreme before the pendulem swings back to the middle. Perhaps this is a move of God that some are taking to extremes, and because of those extremes, some are decrying against it. Also many in the church world hate change with a passion. I actually heard a preacher say that today's worship music isn't as anointed as the old hymns. I was shocked at his judgementalism and lack of discernment. As I said before, I'm just asking questions.

[ProfessorAlan]

It's off topic, and I like the new worship songs (my church has produced a bunch of them), but I laughed out loud when one musician made this comment:

"We are going to play a hymn now. You know what a hymn is, right? It's like a worship song ... but with content."

An accurate assessment of some worship songs I've heard ....

[Tamera]

True, but probably not all hymns were good either. It's just we don't sing the ones that weren't good anymore.

[ProfessorAlan]

obviously there is some truth in what you say, but it's still a pretty funny comment ... because there is truth in it, as well.

[Tamera]

Yes, it is pretty funny.

[Cymrugirl]

Tamera, I think you are right about pendulum swinging. My overall impression is that the emergent church is an iron - that will, of course, sharpen iron - and vice versa. Stepping back and reevaluating is always a good idea as humans. We become so easily programmed by cultural contexts that even those things that were fresh become stale, and first loves are forgotten.

And Professor Alan, that is hilarious. Something I often think about modern worship songs (which I love for their musicality) in comparison with hymns (which I love for their lyrics). ;)

[Cymrugirl]

*realizes how humorous it sounds to say "Iron sharpens iron and vice versa"*