Part II: Criticisms of the Emerging Church
Whether it is in its attempt to become "relevant to the culture" or if it is solely done in the name of tolerance and unity, the Emerging Church makes many 'concessions' in its regards to Christianity. Many of these 'concessions' tear at the very heart of the Gospel itself and the implications of which, despite their importance, are rarely discussed. It is thus our duty to expose these implications.
The Emerging Church and Propositional Truth
Although Emerging speakers often hint at the Emerging Church's stance on "propositional truths," they rarely explain the full implications of Emergent thought regarding these truths. One recurring problem with audiences who are not familiar with Emerging jargon is that they often do not understand what "propostional truths" are. So, what exactly are "propositional truths"? In the context of Christianity, propositional truths make claims dealing with Biblical issues that are objectively agreed upon. In other words, propositional truth for Christians is not merely a matter of opinion or "feeling," it is foundational. For example, the deity of Christ is a biblically-based propositional truth, yet the Emerging Church discounts the necessity of propositional truth to Christianity. An individual cannot simply discard the deity of Christ and still claim to genuinely follow Him. To do so would be like chasing a phantom or grasping at shadows. Truths like the deity of Christ or the Resurrection, being central to the gospel itself, are among the first casualties of this movement's ambiguous and "inclusive" contentions. The Emergent movement claims to be missions-oriented, but what is the point of missions with a dead or false Christ? Is the Gospel truly only a humanistic, deeds-based enterprise?
The Apostle Paul says, "Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures" (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). Paul continues, "If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith" (1 Corinthians 15:13-14). Therefore the Gospel Paul lays out is founded upon propositional truths - the Resurrection of Jesus is undeniably a foundational propositional truth. Without it, there is no "gospel" at all. Faith without propositional truth is "useless," as Paul says.
What hope do we have to offer a lost and dying world if not the Gospel? A materialistic hope of earthly fulfillment? A consumerist utopia? motional satisfaction? Intellectual enlightenment? None of these offer true and lasting hope. If Christ's claims are not true, there is no hope for any of us. Christianity, once holding the power of the Gospel, becomes only a hollow shell and its life-changing Word is replaced with a "life-changing discussion." Unity is fabricated because the Cross, the great equalizer, becomes just another story in an ancient book that can be taken and distorted to fit any reader's opinion of what it should say.
Emerging Church: Unity or Tolerance?
One of the major themes of the Emerging Church is an emphasis on "unity." The call is for all denominations and sects to put aside their differences and come together in "unity." Too often, however, their idea of unity is intercepted by another gospel - the gospel of tolerance. The foundation of Christian unity is based upon the Gospel, not tolerance. Denying propositional truth in the name of tolerance essentially creates a pick-and-choose Christianity, a "theological buffet." Whatever strikes one's fancy - even evil itself - becomes merely a unique perspective on the truth. Consequently, accountability cannot exist; there is no basis on which to hold another Christian accountable. What's right becomes "what's right for you" and moral relativism erodes away at biblical principles. The concept of unity becomes a mask concealing the tensions that really exist underneath.
If we offer up the heart of Christianity on the altar of tolerance, then the hope we once had is lost for the sake of "cultural relevance." Not even the bones of the Gospel remain. Embracing tolerance while forsaking accountability creates a superficial unity where people greet each other with plastic smiles and one arm behind their backs grasping the dagger of deception - wounds fester and serious issues are not resolved for fear of offending one another. Christians who make any attempt at holding one another accountable are labeled "divisive" and destructive of this superficial unity.
Although this allegiance to tolerance has created problems when discussing different denominations and sects that claim to be part of Christianity, some Emergent thinkers and sympathetic theologians have taken religious "tolerance" to a greater extreme. Lee Camp, a theologian at Libscomb University, recently commented about tolerance during an interfaith gathering at the university:
"The most basic Christian commitment … is that we say we believe in the Lordship of Jesus. But, if we claim that, how can a Muslim or Jew trust us, if we say Jesus is the Lord of all Lords?"
If we compromise on our most basic Christian commitments to earn the trust of other religions, we have made our own meaningless and futile. Why are the tenets of Christianity to be sacrificed and those of Judaism and Islam preserved? Do they not contain statements of exclusivity as well? Didn't Jesus say "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me"? If we sacrifice the Gospel to gain a platform to speak out to other religions, we will have nothing of value to say once we gain it!
Christianity and Cultural Relevance
"See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ." Colossians 2:8
The Emerging Church claims it seeks to be "relevant" to a culture they see as postmodern. The question we must ask as Christians, though, is this: "Is the Gospel itself not relevant to all cultural settings?" We should note that there is a difference between using contemporary knowledge to communicate the Gospel rather than actually changing what scripture says. Jesus used parables with contemporary language in His time, and there is nothing wrong with us doing the same. Distorting principles and propositional truths, however, goes far beyond just being "relelvant." Scripture itself cannot be changed; the Gospel is relevant for all times, it cannot be obsolete.
To Be Continued: Part III - Criticisms of the Emerging Church by Tacitus and Aquinas
Whether it is in its attempt to become "relevant to the culture" or if it is solely done in the name of tolerance and unity, the Emerging Church makes many 'concessions' in its regards to Christianity. Many of these 'concessions' tear at the very heart of the Gospel itself and the implications of which, despite their importance, are rarely discussed. It is thus our duty to expose these implications.
The Emerging Church and Propositional Truth
Although Emerging speakers often hint at the Emerging Church's stance on "propositional truths," they rarely explain the full implications of Emergent thought regarding these truths. One recurring problem with audiences who are not familiar with Emerging jargon is that they often do not understand what "propostional truths" are. So, what exactly are "propositional truths"? In the context of Christianity, propositional truths make claims dealing with Biblical issues that are objectively agreed upon. In other words, propositional truth for Christians is not merely a matter of opinion or "feeling," it is foundational. For example, the deity of Christ is a biblically-based propositional truth, yet the Emerging Church discounts the necessity of propositional truth to Christianity. An individual cannot simply discard the deity of Christ and still claim to genuinely follow Him. To do so would be like chasing a phantom or grasping at shadows. Truths like the deity of Christ or the Resurrection, being central to the gospel itself, are among the first casualties of this movement's ambiguous and "inclusive" contentions. The Emergent movement claims to be missions-oriented, but what is the point of missions with a dead or false Christ? Is the Gospel truly only a humanistic, deeds-based enterprise?
The Apostle Paul says, "Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures" (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). Paul continues, "If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith" (1 Corinthians 15:13-14). Therefore the Gospel Paul lays out is founded upon propositional truths - the Resurrection of Jesus is undeniably a foundational propositional truth. Without it, there is no "gospel" at all. Faith without propositional truth is "useless," as Paul says.
What hope do we have to offer a lost and dying world if not the Gospel? A materialistic hope of earthly fulfillment? A consumerist utopia? motional satisfaction? Intellectual enlightenment? None of these offer true and lasting hope. If Christ's claims are not true, there is no hope for any of us. Christianity, once holding the power of the Gospel, becomes only a hollow shell and its life-changing Word is replaced with a "life-changing discussion." Unity is fabricated because the Cross, the great equalizer, becomes just another story in an ancient book that can be taken and distorted to fit any reader's opinion of what it should say.
Emerging Church: Unity or Tolerance?
One of the major themes of the Emerging Church is an emphasis on "unity." The call is for all denominations and sects to put aside their differences and come together in "unity." Too often, however, their idea of unity is intercepted by another gospel - the gospel of tolerance. The foundation of Christian unity is based upon the Gospel, not tolerance. Denying propositional truth in the name of tolerance essentially creates a pick-and-choose Christianity, a "theological buffet." Whatever strikes one's fancy - even evil itself - becomes merely a unique perspective on the truth. Consequently, accountability cannot exist; there is no basis on which to hold another Christian accountable. What's right becomes "what's right for you" and moral relativism erodes away at biblical principles. The concept of unity becomes a mask concealing the tensions that really exist underneath.
If we offer up the heart of Christianity on the altar of tolerance, then the hope we once had is lost for the sake of "cultural relevance." Not even the bones of the Gospel remain. Embracing tolerance while forsaking accountability creates a superficial unity where people greet each other with plastic smiles and one arm behind their backs grasping the dagger of deception - wounds fester and serious issues are not resolved for fear of offending one another. Christians who make any attempt at holding one another accountable are labeled "divisive" and destructive of this superficial unity.
Although this allegiance to tolerance has created problems when discussing different denominations and sects that claim to be part of Christianity, some Emergent thinkers and sympathetic theologians have taken religious "tolerance" to a greater extreme. Lee Camp, a theologian at Libscomb University, recently commented about tolerance during an interfaith gathering at the university:
"The most basic Christian commitment … is that we say we believe in the Lordship of Jesus. But, if we claim that, how can a Muslim or Jew trust us, if we say Jesus is the Lord of all Lords?"
If we compromise on our most basic Christian commitments to earn the trust of other religions, we have made our own meaningless and futile. Why are the tenets of Christianity to be sacrificed and those of Judaism and Islam preserved? Do they not contain statements of exclusivity as well? Didn't Jesus say "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me"? If we sacrifice the Gospel to gain a platform to speak out to other religions, we will have nothing of value to say once we gain it!
Christianity and Cultural Relevance
"See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ." Colossians 2:8
The Emerging Church claims it seeks to be "relevant" to a culture they see as postmodern. The question we must ask as Christians, though, is this: "Is the Gospel itself not relevant to all cultural settings?" We should note that there is a difference between using contemporary knowledge to communicate the Gospel rather than actually changing what scripture says. Jesus used parables with contemporary language in His time, and there is nothing wrong with us doing the same. Distorting principles and propositional truths, however, goes far beyond just being "relelvant." Scripture itself cannot be changed; the Gospel is relevant for all times, it cannot be obsolete.
To Be Continued: Part III - Criticisms of the Emerging Church by Tacitus and Aquinas
posted by an analytical college student | 12:17 PM
|
6 comments
