Sunday, April 05, 2009

the conversation

If you have an hour and a half, here is Kevin DeYoung, Tony Jones, Scott McKnight, and Brett and Alex Harris discussing the Emergent Movement. While Jones and McKnight had some good things to say, I think Jones, in talking the strength of the movement, touches on exactly what I see is the issue with it. He states:

[The emergent conversation] is not a set of beliefs or style of worship, It is an ethos, a general sensibility that is shared among people who decide to live together in a local community of faith and then to somehow network with other communities of faith who share that same sensibility though they may not share the same theology.


While some in the movement seem quite sensible, e.g., TSK, many seem to prefer inclusion over sensibility. Jones implies that this sensibility he speaks of is a preference of community over right v. wrong. On one hand I get that, many (since beginning of time - this is not a postmodern discovery of the human psyche) have said they have faith but have not love. This is a lie. True faith manifests in love.

On the other hand, as I've noted many times before, love has been redefined by many in this conversation and has come to mean universalism and/or an unwillingness to press in to truth. We can agree that we may not know absolute comprehensive truth but pressing into it seems to be avoided under the guise of "love". Scripture clearly demonstrates that in Christ we can have both. As the Harris twins ask, "timeless truth, sound doctrine, and biblical orthodoxy on one side versus really living out the life and teachings of Jesus Christ on the other ... why do I have to choose?" Good news - we don't. We can must have both. I see many in the emergent movement reacting to those who have erred toward the former alone by trying to live in the latter alone. True, the former without the latter is of no value. But the latter without the former is a lie.

DeYoung understands Jones to define emerging as a mood that emphasizes belonging over believing, down play doctrinal distinctions. He quickly outlines 2 Tim 1.8:

  • Paul believed his theology enough to herald it
  • Paul was willing to suffer for the proclamation of his theology ... the message about the power of God to save us ... not other things, i.e., telling everyone that God is love, that people needed to forgive each other, that he tried to fund people's unique spiritual journeys, etc...
  • Paul's confidence in God came from knowing whom he believe; he had confidence in the person of God defined by propositions anchored in promises
  • Paul treasured an orthodox standard of gospel truths
  • For Paul the task of the church is to guard this deposit
  • Paul believed that championing this theology must be done in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus; the way in which we defend this faith is as important as the faith itself but not before it.



Technorati Tags:

No comments:

reftagger