i should preface this post with a cautionary word. i am a member of an emerging church here in tallahassee, florida full of post-modern people and i love every bit of it. that being said, i read a book this past week by a couple of young, hip pastors in their early 30s who completely rip apart the emerging church, rob bell, brian mclaren, and erwin mcmanus. i got so angry as i turned the pages that i started shaking. however, since i didn't want to respond without reading their whole argument i pressed on until i read the entire book and i've come to a conclusion. the modern movement of the church is trying to attack the post-modern movement and i haven't the foggiest idea why. to top it off, the stuff the wrote was downright hurtful and their views are bent from only one perspective.
i don't want to rehash their whole book and then destroy it because then i would be no better than they are and i certainly don't want to come across like i have all the answers but there are several things that i want to bring up for discussion.
the two authors of this book grew up in the modern evangelical church. they then state they wear those hip black glasses every post-modern thinker wears and one of them even writes for espn: the magazine. their main idea is that even though they should be post-modern, they aren't and are instead going to do what they can to call into question the emerging church movement. first of all, why you would want to bring down a ministry that is nothing like your own....and second, why would you write a book attacking rob bell, brian mclaren, and erwin mcmanus when you never even bothered to contact them to interview them for your book is beyond me. rather than write a book about how terrible their ministry is, shouldn't it be your first mission to first interview them, then write your book if you aren't satisfied with their answers? just throwing it out there. i also find it very interesting that nowhere in their book do they attack passion or northpoint church even though they're primary demographic is post-modern college students and young singles and families. i wonder why that is?
now, i think what bothered me most about their book is they didn't even bother looking through the lens of the target demographics of the two schools of the church. the two authors wrote their book from their perspective. both grew up in the modern evangelical church, one is a pastor of a modern evangelical church, and one is only an attendee at the other guy's evangelical church. let me make this crystal clear that there is nothing wrong with that, at all. jesus is meant for all people and i applaud them in their ministry but they forget (or have no clue) the main point of the emerging church. the emerging church emerged (pun intended) because the numbers at modern evangelical churches started shrinking and a whole generation (i use this broadly, not literally) quit coming to church and searching for jesus. so, the emerging church was created to help minister to people who had never grown up in church, been to church outside of a wedding or easter, and people who had been to modern churches and felt something not resolving within themselves. let me illustrate my point here with this:
at the author's church, the average attender has grown up in church, understands the church lingo of words like "salvation", "trinity", "sin", etc... so these things make sense to him. when the pastor gets up on sunday and talks about sin and how homosexuality is wrong and things that are such his congregation agrees because that is what they have grown up hearing and fits in with their value system.
now, take an average college student, 20, or 3o something. never been to church, has had homosexual friends, drank, smoked stuff, done drugs, and was brought up without any knowledge of church lingo. if this person walked into the author's church their first instinct would be to leave. not because what is being said isn't true but because they were raised differently and have no firm foundation for anything of what's being said. so how do you reach these people?
it starts with friendship. not saying we want to save you. not saying you're going to hell. not saying gay people are going to hell if they don't repent. it starts with being a friend. then as you get to know the friend and they ask questions about your life you can start sharing about Jesus. your church, etc. they may be interested, they may not be. but if there comes a time to bring this friend to a church and introduce them to a community of believers, where do you take them? the modern evangelical church? or an emerging church?
let me clarify once again, my aim is not to attack the evangelical church or defend the post-modern church even though it's probably apparent where i stand in this argument. i just want to ask these questions and let you decide for yourself what you think. i encourage you to read their book, then read rob bell, brian mclaren, and erwin mcmanus's books and then decide for yourself.
one more issue i want to cover before closing out is the author's stance that the emerging church has to take a stand on certain issues like homosexuality, etc. the authors want them to publicly come out and say how they feel on this issue. i want to point out this is the worst idea on the planet for the emerging church leaders. we live in a day and age where homosexuality is more or less accepted and if you have a problem with it then you are a crazy bible thumping jesus freak. brian mclaren has a book out about his correspondence with a young woman who was a not a believer at all. she was however at one of his book signings as a harp player and she met him and read his book. she emailed him and said she was intrigued by his book and what he said in his presentation because the gospel he presented was one she hadn't heard before. she had gone to church in the past and been told homosexuals were going to hell, she was going to hell if she didn't get saved, and that she needed to be born again. she said she had questions, and the book is their email correspondence. by the end of the book by showing her love and support and asking questions, brian was able to take a post-modern girl and teach her how to love jesus. here's the kicker though, before she became a believer, she was a staunch supporter of gay rights and wanted nothing to do with him if he started any gay bashing. now here is the question i pose for you to think about. if these emerging church leaders dealing with this demographic were to come out in public and condemn and take stands on certain issues, would they be able to effectively minister to who they are called to minister to?
i know a counter-argument to my writing today could be, well where do i stand? well i'll tell you. i believe jesus loves us all and has a plan for each of us. there are things like sin, lifestyle choices, etc. that keep us from him on a daily basis. only with the love of christ, and the guidance of his word will i know how i am to live my life. it is not my place to judge anyone else's lifestyle because i have so many thorns in my side keeping me from walking the path christ wants me to. instead of finger pointing, can't we all just love each other like christ would and let that love convict ourselves on what thorns we need to pull out of our bodies? one day, when all this fades away christ is either going to accept us into himself, or he won't. jesus said, "above all, love the lord your god with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength; and love your neighbor as yourself." if we can accomplish these two goals, then all these other issues these authors want emerging leaders to take a stand on won't matter. but until we can accomplish these two goals, i guess we'll be making these same arguments 20 years from now.
Posts
