It is becoming clearer to me that the main complaint of EC critics like Ken Silva and Slice of Laodicea is that EC leaders do not spend their time taking public hard-line stances. They couch this criticism as “not taking scripture seriously” or something along those lines.
By “take scripture seriously,” they really mean “complain loudly and publicly about other people and their beliefs.” I, however, do not usually find it healthy or productive to spend my time talking about how wrong other people are (except on occasions such as this :). Ah, irony…).
This does not mean I don’t have beliefs that are quite deeply held and quite important. It doesn’t mean I think everyone is fine or that everyone is right. It simply means that I choose to live my life without presuming to sit on God’s judgment seat all the time.
Curiously, there seems to be a 1-to-1 correlation among the anti-EC crowd between talking about righteousness and being righteous - though it happens to be expressed in the negative:
The louder you go on about how wrong something is, the more righteous you must be.
Volume also seems to cover ignorance. Even if your position isn’t very well thought out or theologically defensible, you can yell and scream and condemn others, and perhaps no one will be able to tell. But perhaps they will.
Conversely, if bad theology exists anywhere, and you don’t speak out against it (or don’t speak loudly enough), you must not care about doing the will of God. Huh. The Lord hates a nuanced statement, apparently.
I don’t think this could be farther from the truth. I think EC people have seen the futility of preaching to the choir and to the unready. We’re tired of telling ourselves how wrong others are, and we’re tired of telling people who don’t care (nor have any reason to care). We’re tired of simplifying issues down to the binary, black-and-white level, and tired of the name-calling and boundary-drawing that puts us on the right side all of the time.
On the other side of the equation, perhaps those of us in the EC community have been too hesitant to speak out against what we are opposed to. We’re vocal about justice and ecclesiology, but not much in the way of morality, ethics, or the intersection of faith and politics.
Thoughts?
Amen. Well said. I’m glad that someone finally spoke what has been on the mind of a bunch of us. There have been way too many times I’ve read Ken’s stuff and thought, “Why is he so angry?”
Thanks, Justin!
Ken is certainly a scary guy. I think his specious logic and unfounded anger is the best advertisement for emergent-type fellowships. I say just keep doing what you do and watch the good that happens. Meanwhile, Ken’s brand of “Awakening to the Light of Scripture” will continue to alienate seekers and drive them into the arms of fellowships that care before they condemn.
Yes, yes, and yes indeed. How refreshing and liberating to read what has been on my mind for years as a closet emergent!
Being a fan and influenced by most of the people prominent in the emerging church through their writings . . . your last paragraph really resonated with me. I have become increasingly disenchanted with the whole deal because I feel like many emerging leaders speak like politicians. I have read a ton of Brian McLaren and been influenced for the better, but when I go to his website and read his dialogue or listen to interviews I often feel like he is unwilling to really stand for anything outside of social justice, environmentalism, and acceptance. Morality issues are all up for debate. I find that frustrating, just like listening to someone running for president. I think there are a whole segment of us out there who appreciate the changes the emergent movement is promoting, but also want some conviction and talk of truth to go along with it. (I know absolute truth is difficult for a postmodern to believe exists, but I also think postmoderns crave it). I know I find myself drawn to churches that both engage the community and proclaim God as holy and good. (Sorry, I went off on a tangent, not completely relevent to your post.)
Very, very good stuff. I think that last paragraph needs to be fleshed out. There are thing in there that need discussion.
I think willc is on to something too. [tangent alert] I have a frend that calls the EC “The CHurch of the English Majors” because everything is spoken in so many words and big obscure words at that. For a group that claims to desire relevance and to be real, so much of their writings seem out of reach to me.
salguod-
Our church is about 70% English majors. No kidding.
[more thoughtful response to come later]
What if the Emergent Church crowd could re-write some of the “meanie” parts of the Bible? What would it look like? The following is an account from the story of Elijah & the prophets of Baal. Much of the narrative is from actual things Brian McLaren has written in his books (McLaren is one of the main advocates of the “emergents”).
The Emergent Elijah
Roderick-
While that’s interesting and funny, I don’t think it’s quite a parallel. It’s sad how many people still think the best approach to spreading our faith is confrontation and battle.
Isn’t truth-speaking (and evangelism) an attempt to change hearts? Have you ever had your heart changed by being attacked and demeaned? I don’t expect anyone to.
Sometimes ego & arrogance must be laid low before a person’s heart can be changed. Or as the Bible says, you must die to self before living for Christ. And there is a big need for many in the EC to have a “die to self” experience.
But not for Silva et al, Roderick?
Define arrogance & ego ScottB,
Notice salguod in these very comments seeks a simplified version of whatever message the EC is trying to formulate (Do they even know?), & what was Justin’s response? An ego/arrogance trip about how 70% of the people in his congregation are English Majors — well whooped-de-doo!
Jesus was merely a carpenter who called fishermen, taxcollectors & such.
salguod, I know you are looking for a different expression of faith but the EC isn’t it. They think they are soooo “beyond” & “postmodern” of everything, they speak down to simple, plain spoken folk.
I encourage you to read:
A Case for Consistent Cessationism
It’s written to plain folks who simply want to follow Christ.
In Christ our King,
Roderick
I like how Rob Bell puts it, and I’m paraphrasing here…Truth is truth, regardless of who says it, or even the context in which it is placed. Jesus is truth incarnate and those who belittle, judge, condemn are playing God…not being truthful with themselves or with God.
Roderick-
The english majors statistic is a fact about our church that I found to be a humorous coincidence with what Salguod said. You can read ego and arrogance into that if you want to, but it will be an entirely eisegetical reading.
For future reference, you are welcome to provide links that you feel are relevant to a current discussion. If you are out to promote your own website regardless of whether its content is relevant, please find somewhere else to do so. And by “relevant,” I do not mean “Oh, you guys are discussing some aspect of the emerging church. Here’s an article I wrote about how the EC is bad.”
You said
Fair enough. But does that mean we are to be the executioner on Christ’s behalf? Is it our job to tear others down enough that the Holy Spirit can get his foot in the ventricle? It seems like ego and arrogance fuel the attempts to lay low the hearts of others.
Is that really what we’re called to? Is excoriating people you don’t know really a spiritual gift?
Well, I thought during a “conversation” (which EC’ers are so fond of saying they are having) all input is relevant, even input that is criticial, unless you only want to hear things that tickle your ears? Which may answer your own question about how to “lay low the stony hearts” of ego & arrogance. You see, it appears you only want to hear flowery words that sooth your soul, & indeed you will get that from fellow EC’ers — they will not help you see your own ego & arrogance — they are too busy playing the same back-patting game as yourself.
Truth love is sometimes hard to take because it speaks straight to the heart.
I don’t have to personally know you to call you to repent & seek the kingdom — Isn’t that what Christ has commanded us to preach, to all? Amen?
Justin - 70%, eh? That’s a punch line I couldn’t have written myself. Too funny.
Roderick - You seem to have an axe to grind here. I do not consider myself emergent, and yes, I find much of what little I’ve read overly wordy and hard to understand. That said, this site is the most honest of the limited number of emergent sites I’ve visited. They are willing to ask these kind of questions and point out where the EC needs to improve.
I’ve also seen he fruits of my own elitism and exclusion of other viewpoints. I know that just because I don’t understand their point of view doesn’t make them wrong. They may be wrong, but not because they’re different from my view. Even if they are, cramming that fact down their throat rarely accomplishes anything.
I share my view, they share theirs. Hopefully we both learn something and we both leave a little closer to God. I enjoy interactions with folks not like me because I nearly always learn something.
I don’t know about you, but when I have conversations, I bring up things that are relevant to the conversation; I don’t condemn people and ascribe to them negative motives right after meeting them; and I don’t engage in promotion of my own stuff unless appropriate.
Say what you feel needs to be heard, though.
What would it be like if you could have a real “conversation” with a postmodern advocate? Not some fluff, “Kumbyah!” conversation that never comes to any conclusion about anything, but real solid conversation. And what if you could get them to say what they really mean instead of constantly evading any direct questions? (since many of them will claim they don’t have to answer questions & will even break off conversation)
Well, you’re in for a treat as we are able to interact with a real postmodern leader…well kind of, since as you know the real postmoderns only have conversations they can control. So we have to settle for this parody! — Enjoy!
Click this link:
http://thekingdomcome.com/cryin_convo
If Ken thinks that only he knows “proper” scripture and the EC doesn’t then why is he not treating people of other religions the way Jesus did? I must say that if anyone here is guilty of false teachings its ken. As far as I can tell, Ken hasn’t read the bible at all. Sure, he has memorized the words but when he repeats them he is just resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. What did God have to say about that?
Roderick said: “…What would it be like if you could have a real “conversation” with a postmodern advocate? …And what if you could get them to say what they really mean instead of constantly evading any direct questions?”
Are they really evading the questions or are they trying to explain to you that your question is just not that important in their eyes. If someone came up to you and wanted to argue with you the whole afternoon on whether Jesus wore boxers or briefs, how long would you try to explain to him that you feel the fact he wants to argue is just not that important to Jesus’ message and how we follow it.