For those that have followed the various conversations I’ve been involved in here, it may come as a surprise that everything I’ve written on my blog about emergents have been less than overwhelmingly positive.
What happened? Why have I been forced to defend Rob Bell, Tony Jones and even Brian McLaren? How did I end up in Bizarro World?
The short answer to that is Ken Silva, the slightly longer answer is the arrogant, unloving, deceitful people like Ken Silva who have seen fit to vent their spleens and their terribly mistaken theology on the web. You see, while they are right, that doctrine matters, and it should be guarded carefully they’ve never learned that the way we go about doing that is just as much a matter of doctrine as the gospel itself.
Paul commands in Colossians 3:12: “Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.†Contrast that command with the various posts we’ve seen condemning Perry Noble, Rick Warren, Rob Bell, Tony Jones and others. For example, here Ken Silva, in reference to Brian McLaren says, “Frankly I am astonished that evangelical leaders even listen to this fool and accept him as brother in Christ.†Or consider this post in which Ingrid takes a story in which a church is opening an outreach center and uses that as a jumping off point to accuse this church in particular and emergents in general of being confused as to what the gospel is. Check out this line, “But with so many emerging churches denying the existence of hell, what sort of message do they bring?†Other than the guy she reported earlier who was run out of his church for saying hell doesn’t exist (which kind of gives you an indication how well this teaching is tolerated) how many emerging churches do you think Ingrid is familiar with, much less “many†emerging churches that teach hell doesn’t exist? As usual when these kinds of accusations are made no specific examples are cited.
But, let’s get back to the weaknesses seen in many emergent voices today. As much I like Rob Bell, and enjoy reading and listening to him, there are weaknesses in either his theology or the way he presents his theology. Ironically enough Ken links to an excellent breakdown of those weaknesses by Ben Witherington (BW3). If you read through that post you’ll notice a marked difference in the style of BW3 and the people we discussed earlier. Notice there’s no condescending tone, there’s no name calling, and perhaps most importantly, there’s no questioning of motives or salvation. Instead it is simply a gracious critique of Bell.
And, that, ladies and gentlemen makes BW3 a far more effective counterweight to Bell’s teachings. Because when Silva, Ingrid, and the rest of the folks at the “Christian†“Research†Network show up, it makes the dirty, dirty hippies of the emergent/emerging church look like the best thing going. It’s kind of like trying to pick up carnie chicks: sure the Lobster Woman may not be the one you actually want to ask out, but when the bearded lady shows up suddenly those lobster claws seem more quirky than disgusting (my apologies to carnies, lobster women, and bearded ladies).
I don’t want to sink to an extreme level of self-promotion, but my recent sermon covered this topic (not in response to these people, this series had been planned for several months) and there’s movie clips from Employee of the Month that accompany it. If you’re interested its right here.