Emerging Church?

Dor

Dor

Bible Thumper
Messages
1,139
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
little town called Dallas, Tx
What does everyone feel about the "Emerging Church"

Some facts to know about current trends happening with "The Emerging Church"
Scripture is no longer the ultimate authority for many well know leaders of the new evangelicalism.
The gospel of Jesus Christ is being replaced by humanistic methods that promote church growth and a social gospel.There is more and more emphasis on “what’s in it for me” in the “here and now”, and less and less concern regarding the warnings of scripture regarding the imminent return of Jesus and a coming judgment ahead for planet earth.
More and more Christian leaders are looking for a kingdom of God to be established here on earth by human effort and deny that Jesus Christ will rule and reign in a literal millennial period that is to come.
An experiential mystical form of Christianity is being promoted to attract and reach the postmodern generation called the “Emerging Church.
We are being told that Christianity needs to be re-invented in order to provide meaning for this generation.
Christianity is being dumbed-down as the Word of God comes under attack and images and sensual experiences are being promoted as the key to experiencing God.
In order to re-invent Christianity we are told we need to go back to the past and find out what kinds of experiences were successful to attract people to Christianity. These experiences include icons, candles, incense, liturgy and the sacraments.
There is a growing trend towards an ecumenical unity for the cause of world peace that claims there are many ways to God and that Jesus Christ is not the only way.


Do we really need all the contemplative spirituality that comes from Purpose Driven, Emerging Church and other avenues that lead to the denial that Jesus Christ is God?
 
He's coming at it from a biblical point not as wikipedia defines it... Wikipedia is not exactly biblical.. lol
 
wil said:
First I've heard of it, the definition and information shown on Wikipedia seem to differ some from the sources your informaiton is derived... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerging_Church
Click to expand...

And of course the page I start on Wikipedia about Wil from CR and his teachings would of course be 100% true and accurate. Remember people Wkipedia is wrote by reg ole people and the have had to remove and change things. It is after all not the Gospel.
 
Kindest Regards, Dor!
Dor said:
What does everyone feel about the "Emerging Church"...

Do we really need all the contemplative spirituality that comes from Purpose Driven, Emerging Church and other avenues that lead to the denial that Jesus Christ is God?
Click to expand...
I haven't heard of this concept by this name, but I *do* share your concerns in this.

There is a growing trend towards an ecumenical unity for the cause of world peace that claims there are many ways to God and that Jesus Christ is not the only way.
Click to expand...
The term "ecumenism" has long raised my hackles. And to a great extent, I'm not certain why. Other than to say I am very much against forcing everyone into the same box. Getting along with each other, to me, only makes sense. Creating a "one size fits all" religion for the benefit of G-d knows who...nah, I'll pass and take my chances.

This is something I struggle with...where to draw the line? How far is too far, and how do I avoid stepping over that boundary?

Yes, I do see things being taught that seem quite contrary to what I understand the Bible to say...and I'm pretty well self taught, so I am not quite as prone to a bias as some might be and others could rightly argue.

Yet, I am also human, I do make mistakes. I like to think my mistakes are not made often, but I would lie if I said I didn't make mistakes. There is always the possibility I do not understand...but not for lack of trying. If I am ignorant, I come by it honestly. I have long ago put away the things of a child and took up the things of a man. I strive to not be ignorant.

Even in writing the "master of my fate" thread, I tried to underline and highlight some of the struggle I go through, daily. Not so long ago I thought I had it all correct, and even more...if you didn't have it too, you were damned. Period. "My" way, or no way. I was right, and I knew it! I was on fire for the Lord! (I was on fire alright...I'm convinced now it was the wrong kind.)

While I never have been formally affiliated with any fringe groups or survivalist groups, I was (and to a point still am) sympathetic to their cause.

In the extreme though, this mindset combined with fanatic zeal leads to a person like Timothy McVeigh, or John Eric Rudolph, or Ted Kaczynski (sp?). This mindset leads to fertilizer bombs and gasoline grenades and booby traps (and flying airliners into skyscrapers...) Ruby Ridge and Waco are battle cries. Not only is the Tribulation of Revelations believed in, it is looked forward to with anticipation. "This is our moment, this is our time for Messiah to *kick a.. (dragon tail)* for us this time, it is our moment to usher in the millenial rule!" And we're trained and ready to fight on His side, if we gotta buy our own ticket to Megiddo!

Seriously.

Of course, two things should jump right out to a rational person. 1. the use of the "royal" we, by someone who isn't royalty. In certain circles this is an indication the person may not be playing with a full deck... 2. Interpretation. Even as a loving Christian looking at my former self, I can see the lack of love, the lack of forgiveness, the want of vengeance, the desire to lead G-d into battle. Any sense of irony, yet? I was telling G-d what to do, even though I took my cues from His word. Instead of G-d leading me where He wanted me to be, I was doing my darndest to lead Him into battle. I was creating my own anti-Christ, just to have a monster to battle with.

I think I understand zealous. I think I understand zealous pretty well. I understand how it can cloud the mind, and the heart, and the soul, when it is not properly governed and directed. Zeal is a wonderful tool, but just like fire it can heal or it can kill. Zeal without temperance leads to so many of the horrors of religious history, and fans the flames of smaller battles. Who is saved by this? How is this ultimately righteous? (What happens when the zealous one commits a crime in the name of G-d while in the throes of zeal? How great the fall when "he" realizes his error!)

After finding CR, I found a lot of kindred spirits. Not that we agree with each other to the letter, but that we all are actively searching. None of us are slaves to some person behind a pulpit in vesture. We may, or may not, learn from and participate in such by going to church and being members of a formal church body. But we are also confident enough in our faith to look outside of the "church" box. That means a lot. That means we have faith that G-d is real...and that because He is real, He doesn't mind a few questions, as long as those questions are respectful and the search is sincere. Christians are not alone in this search for meaning. Monotheists are not alone in the search for the way home. Those of us who are sincere in our search at the core use the same ulterior methods and motives, even if we do not share the same words and means and expressions. Love is love, and love is universal. A mother's love in India is *no* different than a mother's love in Santiago, and is no different than a mother's love in Cucamonga. We, those of us who search in sincerity, are the same in our souls and spirits. G-d knows us. It is not ours to judge, let go and let G-d be the judge.

Judge only in the sense of protecting yourself and yours, which includes friends who will listen. Keep yours from harm, and counsel them in wisdom. Influence your circle...that is what we are asked to do.

Part of that wisdom is not to be judgemental...uncontrolled zeal with prejudicial judgement is a dangerous combination, and nobody wins.

two dollars tonight...:)
 
I guess this is a kind of carry-over from the name Spong coming up again. But it's really the essential question at the heart of what we've been experiencing here at CR. I keep hearing about different lines that separate official Christians from non-offical ones. It seems to be this idea about wanting to water down the Bible and the message. It may have that effect, but I don't think Spong and other "liberal" Christians have that in mind.

See, there's this little problem about not subjecting the Bible to the same kind of critical thinking that we would anything else ancient and precious. Biblical scholarship and theological necessity are in different universes. Spong thinks that the gap between objective scholarship and the pew sitters has to be narrowed if Christianity is to survive and thrive.

I agree with Spong, but I put him in a class with other idealistic intellectuals who have become insulated from the needs of the common people. It's good that he's saying what he is. He's a fresh voice, and we need fresh voices. But the rank and file ain't gonna give up what works for them. It's kinda hard to pray to an intellectual's God when you need rain for the crops.

Chris
 
Namaste Dor & FS, regarding my Wiki reference, as I said, I had not been introduced to the Emerging Church concept prior to your reference. So I looked it up. You have an opinion, I don't know if you offered your own opinion or provided one that had been provided to you as fact.

As far as I know of Wiki it is a work in progress with many fingers massaging and correcting information until it reflects fairly straightforward unbiased knowledge.

Now yes if you set up a wil page it would be wil according to Dor, but others would read and possibly agree with some, disagree with other parts, add more information until a fairly representative piece on wil was done. Wiki bible or Jesus for instance, are they that irreputable? I'm sure you won't agree with everything that is written, but you must agree that overall they are presenting the facts as they are understood today...

I suppose I shouldn't have responded at all when you asked "What does everyone feel about the "Emerging Church"?"
 
Dor said:
What does everyone feel about the "Emerging Church"

Some facts to know about current trends happening with "The Emerging Church"
Scripture is no longer the ultimate authority for many well know leaders of the new evangelicalism.
The gospel of Jesus Christ is being replaced by humanistic methods that promote church growth and a social gospel.There is more and more emphasis on “what’s in it for me” in the “here and now”, and less and less concern regarding the warnings of scripture regarding the imminent return of Jesus and a coming judgment ahead for planet earth.
More and more Christian leaders are looking for a kingdom of God to be established here on earth by human effort and deny that Jesus Christ will rule and reign in a literal millennial period that is to come.
An experiential mystical form of Christianity is being promoted to attract and reach the postmodern generation called the “Emerging Church.
We are being told that Christianity needs to be re-invented in order to provide meaning for this generation.
Christianity is being dumbed-down as the Word of God comes under attack and images and sensual experiences are being promoted as the key to experiencing God.
In order to re-invent Christianity we are told we need to go back to the past and find out what kinds of experiences were successful to attract people to Christianity. These experiences include icons, candles, incense, liturgy and the sacraments.
There is a growing trend towards an ecumenical unity for the cause of world peace that claims there are many ways to God and that Jesus Christ is not the only way.


Do we really need all the contemplative spirituality that comes from Purpose Driven, Emerging Church and other avenues that lead to the denial that Jesus Christ is God?
Click to expand...

Think I'll stick to my Celtic Catholic Christian roots...;)
 
Dor

As far as I know there is no single set of beliefs common to the "Emerging Church". I attend an Alternative Worship group which has loose ties with the local Anglican church. It is these various alternative groups that are being listened to by the present Archbishop of Canterbury, and which are becoming known as Emerging Church.

They differ not so much in what they believe as in the way that they believe and the way they worship. They tend to be smallish groups of friends, there is no standard liturgy, services are all different and creative. Participation is optional.

But there is a sense of being allowed to be different, of not trying to force your views on others. This I suppose makes the experience different from churches where doctrines are mandatory.

The kinds of things we do and think about are not however new. We borrow from forms old and new. We have used annointing and foot-washing as part of our services for example. And the theological approach we use is derived from a very old tradition of Christian mysticism. I am currently re-reading Julian of Norwich for example.

But I agree with Chis, it's horses for courses. The simple straight-down-the-line black and white pray-for-rain type belief is the only one that makes sense to very many people in the same way that Boy Zone or whatever is the epitome of musical taste for many others. I'm biased on both issues.

For those lucky enough to live in England I thoroughly recommend the annual Greenbelt Festival held at the Cheltenham race course every August (Greenbelt Homepage), where you can attend seminars given by those pioneers working away at the edge.
vc
 
juantoo3 said:
The term "ecumenism" has long raised my hackles. And to a great extent, I'm not certain why. Other than to say I am very much against forcing everyone into the same box. Getting along with each other, to me, only makes sense. Creating a "one size fits all" religion for the benefit of G-d knows who...nah, I'll pass and take my chances.

Even in writing the "master of my fate" thread, I tried to underline and highlight some of the struggle I go through, daily. Not so long ago I thought I had it all correct, and even more...if you didn't have it too, you were damned. Period. "My" way, or no way. I was right, and I knew it! I was on fire for the Lord! (I was on fire alright...I'm convinced now it was the wrong kind.)

While I never have been formally affiliated with any fringe groups or survivalist groups, I was (and to a point still am) sympathetic to their cause.
Click to expand...

(General Reponse)

I guess God is the ideal and perfect mentor that wants us to figure it out for ourselves. As the ideal mentor, it would make sense to say that He might be giving us too much credit . . . :confused: He expects more of us than we can gather in ourselves.

So . . . what about Christianity's boundaries . . . . ?

Christianity, I believe, does have boundaries. It's just that the boundaries aren't solid. Christianity is like a fuzzy picture that you have to stare long and hard at to understand its meaning. That's because it's not driven by raw logic, but by "fuzzy logic."

So how do you know where to find the boundaries? I think the idea is not to try and find them at all. I think it's important to first figure out how it hangs together.

What's Christianity's story? What does it mean to you? How does it make you feel? My personal opinion is that Christianity is not driven by logic at all, but your own, innermost feelings. The meaning and purpose of Christianity is realised in your own personal purpose with Christianity itself. In other words, you have to find your own unique place in God's kingdom.

Can you trust your feelings? Why not? Didn't God create your feelings? If God created your feelings, and you don't trust your own feelings, then it means you don't have faith in what God created in you!!!! We're often told to trust logic because it "makes sense," but rarely do we hear religious leaders telling us to trust our own feelings. Unfortunately, feelings have sentimental value. Logic does not have sentimental value.

Have you found your place in God's kingdom? Well, that is your purpose. That is the agenda God wants you to follow. Stay true to it. Follow it. Devote yourself to it. You have been created, dedicated and ordained for that purpose.

Your boundaries are defined by what you discover and realise to be your purpose within Christianity. Deviate and fall short of it and you are crossing these "boundaries." Always stay true. Hold on to it and don't lose it.

Ok, maybe you're afraid this is a "what's in it for me" attitude.:eek:

But then, what purpose does a pessimistic attitude like that serve? How else do you connect to God?

Is it always selfish to have a "what's in it for me" attitude?

I would disagree. A "what's in it for me" attitude can also be "maybe this is what God wants" attitude. Moreover, God gave us certain feelings so that we'd instinctively behave certain ways in response to needs. It's not always wrong to insist on having your needs met. You're just responding to your innate instincts, which God gave you.

It's only wrong when it becomes unhealthy. For example, someone else may have had needs and you could have done something to help, despite your own needs. You may be 20 times more fortunate (wealthier, more secure) than your next-door neighbour and yet you're still too worried to help him.

Having needs isn't wrong. It's how we respond under the circumstances.

A "what's in it for me" attitude may not accommodate a "this is what God wants" attitude. I think the attitude is inherent in the way we approach worship, perform liturgical rituals, etc. It's a "this is what God wants" attitude when it's an act of devotion. When there's no devotion, it's no more than a self-indulgent (ie. what's in it for me) attitude. Self-indulgence is for personal gain; devotion seeks a personal relationship with God.

So it's a question of devotion vs. self-indulgence.

I think the question we should really ask is whether a worship style or system of beliefs is driven by devotive or self-indulgent attitudes. It's probably not the worship style or belief system at all. It probably varies from individual to individual.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top