So I am new to this conversation and have plenty to learn, which is why I won’t speak too much about what I don’t know right now; however, at the same time I’ve been discovering a trend in the way the emergent church is being described by those within it and want to quickly voice a simple opinion of hesitance.
Tony Jones spoke a few weeks ago about how the emergent church began at a Leadership Network in Dallas Texas in the 90’s when the issue they were discussing was “Who will make the gospel relevant to these Generation X’ers who have left the church?”
From this two groups diverged:
The first group consisted of focusing on how to make the gospel relevant. So this meant taking the same old evangelicalism, the same old penal substitutionary atonement, the same “invite Jesus into your heart,” while the only difference was (as Tony put it) to shave our heads, bring in starbucks, and upgrade the music.
(Obviously Tony wasn’t part of the first group from how he described it 
)
Then the second group consisted of a thoroughgoing reconsideration of the gospel in America. It’s not just about doing it differently, but a whole new way of thinking. It’s about epistemology. How do we reconsider the gospel and structure our church accordingly? Do we still use clergy? (The Emergent Church grew from this second group)
Still part of this emerging conversation is the first group however, and a member of this group was Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church in Seattle, WA. who described the difference of Reformed vs. Emergent this way,
“The two hot theologies today are Reformed and emerging. Reformed theology offers certainty, with a masculine God who names our sin, crushes Jesus on the Cross for it, and sends us to hell if we fail to repent. Emerging theology offers obscurity, with a neutered God who would not say an unkind word to us, did not crush Jesus for our sins, and would not send anyone to hell. I came to Reformed theology by preaching through books of the Bible such as Exodus, Romans, John, and Revelation, along with continually repenting of my sin.”
I find it sad, how quickly we are EVEN STILL characterizing and demonizing the “other side”. How arrogant it would be to say (and I don’t think this is what anyone in the emerging conversation WOULD say this, nor do I think that Tony Jones was implying this, but it is felt by me at times as I listen to interviews and read articles from those in the conversation) that this emergent theology and “new way of thinking” is THE way of understanding the gospel.
Understanding the gospel through a postmodern lens may very well be useful and necessary for some (for many in America) but that doesn’t mean for all. There are those who understand the gospel through a modernist Reformed theology and so to change the structure of their church to “seeker friendly” and engage in the emerging conversation without adhering to the Emergent church but remaining in the old ways of viewing the gospel through a penal substitutionary atonement theory…is okay. The Gospel must be understood through a mosaic of perspectives, and each has its own validity. By Tony Jones’ own admission, the Emergent Church is young and immature it has many mistakes. We mustn’t blindly consume any new perspective just because it’s hip. We need to constantly eat the fruit and spit out the seed. Chew the meat and spit out the bones. Take what is good and spit out what is bad. This process will always be present, this is why I promote not the assumption of ONE theology (ie. Emergent or Reformed or some other) but rather a healthy understanding of the entire mosaic.
What we come to realize as we do this, and why I am attracted to this Emergent Church is because we have had centuries of Reformed Theology, we get it…it’s old, we’ve chewed this meat (which was once new and fresh and wonderful, but has now become tasteless) and we have spit out the bones. Now the Emergent Church provides that new, fresh, and wonderful meat (and boy are we hungry). We have been waiting for this for a long time and now that it’s here we are tempted to simply consume the whole thing, but we mustn’t, we must remain discerning. We must recognize the good in reformed theology, the truth of penal substitution, while we promote the fresh understanding of the gospel through the lens of a postmodern framework, as Eddie Gibbs and Ryan Bolger, in their book, Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures (Baker Academic, 2005) define emerging in this way:
Emerging churches are communities that practice the way of Jesus within postmodern cultures. This definition encompasses nine practices. Emerging churches (1) identify with the life of Jesus, (2) transform the secular realm, and (3) live highly communal lives. Because of these three activities, they (4) welcome the stranger, (5) serve with generosity, (6) participate as producers, (7) create as created beings, (8) lead as a body, and (9) take part in spiritual activities.
Did you recently read the Christianity Today article on the 5 Streams of Emergent?
I think I’m somewhere near where you are.. trying to figure it out and work through a balance of what Christianity looks like for me. I really appreciate your insightful posts.
Hey thanks bro, yeah the quote at the bottom of this post is actually from that article, and that article is one of the links to the right
(good call)
Ha. I was discussing with another blogger (Endlessly Rocking) the idea of the emerging church and read that article right before he directed me to your site.
Hey, I’m new to the conversation too, and I’ve gone through an emergent phase and am now Reformed, so I think we have an opportunity for some good discussion here. Basically, I think the Reformed faith offers some really good insights into what the Bible is talking about and who God is, and I think the best thing the Emergent Church movement can do is to find a new way of making Christian knowledge meaningful in the context of the 21st Century USA and the rest of the world. What is unsettling to some, including me, is the way this is also creating an adjustment in theology. The argument isn’t necessarily that it is being changed, for we Reformers created a pretty big change back in the day, and the mindset was to be constantly Reforming. No, the problem is how the theology is being altered. Now, as a Christian, not as a Reformed Christian, Mark Driscoll has the responsibility to challenge a new movement if he thinks it is going to lead people astray on a certain point, and I think the dialog is good for us all. So what do you think about Emergent Theology? Do you think it is Biblical? Relevant? What do you think it gets right that something like the Reformed theology doesn’t?