Learning the hallmarks and modes of operation of the emergent movement is vital to maintaining the health and prosperity of the Lord's New Testament churches. While most American Baptist Association preachers are doctrinally sound enough to stay true to God's Word, the emergent influence that is so widely published through popular Christian authors that it can easily influence a pastor to lead his church into a direction that will dilute the doctrinal stability and harm the fellowship of the church.
The emergent's goal is to dismantle the church as we know it today, and replace it with a less formal, less authoritative body. It wants a church that establishes a dialog rather than proclaim a message. The emergent movement also wants a church that abstains from politics (thus offering no resistance to pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, anti-family and anti-religious freedom legislation), elevates women to prominent positions (in direct opposition to I Timothy 2), and basically advocates that a church become everything that scripture told it not to become, all in the name of tearing down walls of empty tradition to reach the lost.
Most Missionary Baptist preachers see that agenda coming a mile away. However, there are two premises that the emergents put forth that tend to be Achilles heels to some ABA preachers and churches. (1) The fear of becoming inept at reaching a community for Christ and (2) Ironically, the pastor and church's commitment to scripture.
Change! Change! Change! Change you can believe in! The times, they are a changin'. Listen to the winds of change. George Barna wrote in Boiling Point that life in this world is changing at such a rapid pace, that change has become the one constant in our daily life. He also wrote that the younger generation has grown up knowing nothing but change, and the absence of change bothers the younger generation because they see it as a sign of stagnation.
Our nation's demographics are changing. Political structure is changing. Technology is changing how we do things. Think about it... how has social media (Facebook and Myspace) changed your daily routine? Recently, I chatted with a missionary who is on the field in The Phillipines. Twenty years ago, that conversation would have only been possible via a high-cost international telephone conversation, or by me going to the Phillipines or he visiting me in the states. A week ago, I got to see a missionary in Indonesia address a missions conference at Sublett Road in Arlington via Skype.
Values are changing. American's attitudes are changing. The priority of faith and the church are changing in the lives of people. People are busier, more self-absorbed, more opinionated, and unfortunately, less considerate and more rude.
The emergent will point to the rapid change in our society and say, "Look, to reach this new society, the church must change with it!" I'm not talking about contemporary worship vs. traditional worship... I'm talking in method of ministry and operation and even appearance. Terminology is also under fire. Now, the emergent disdains the title of "Christian" and opts for the title of "Christ follower." In my younger and more ignorant days (two years ago), I though this was cool. Now, it bugs me. The title of "Christian" was given to the believers at Antioch by the heathen because of their faith and devotion to Christ. Now, I am told we have to abandon that title because the emergents claim that people don't like Christians.
So the premise that the emergent puts forward is that society is changing, so the churches must change, or else the churches will become irrelevant and will die off with the last baby-boomer. This premise has scared some ABA preachers into leading their congregations into territory where their congregations are rightfully uncomfortable. Some have taken to cancelling services and replacing them with home Bible studies. While a church is free to do so if it feels so led, doing so with significant opposition leads to discord in the Body of Christ. I'm not saying the preachers who do this are emergent, I'm just saying they have been influenced by emergent thought. Home Bible studies are profitable... but perhaps it is best do so in addition to the current services being offered, instead of as a replacement to them. Hebrews 10:25 says "not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as ye see the day approaching." In other words, as you see the day of Christ approaching, get together more, not less.
The premise that God's churches will be left in the dark is flawed. (1) Jesus said He'd build His church, and the gates of Hell would not prevail against it, regardless of how many Facebook groups are out there. (2) God's churches have endured for centuries. Building styles may have changed, hymn books may have different songs, but the constitution of the church has not changed, neither has its mission. To insist that it all change now is ludicrous. Since the days of the Roman empire, the dark ages, the Renaissance, the Inquisition, Napoleon, American Revolution, Civil War, French Revolution, World Wars, Industrial Revolution, two Darin's on Bewitched, the Digital Revolution, and the so called "post-modern" society, churches have remained stable. They have worshiped by singing hymns, special music (it's in scripture), and sermons have been preached.
Churches actively engaged in mission work and associated freely to assist one another in the Great Commission. The world today is vastly different than the world 2,000 years ago, but the church, it's operation, mission, values and scripture, remain the same. Why change now?
The emergent will claim that church today is nothing like church 2,000 years ago, but the church 2,000 years ago would not be an emergent church. You don't think the Apostle Paul would have taken an opportunity to speak out against abortion and homosexuality on the floor of the senate? Go back and read your Bibles and see how Paul acted in front of those in authority. If Paul could have seen souls saved by influencing the government, he would have. Did Paul establish a dialog? Or did he preach the Gospel and establish churches? Churches today are much like churches 2,000 years ago. I can defend this, scripturally. Read the book of Acts. Churches were sending out missionaries, collecting money for the poor, spreading the Gospel, and associating one with another. They were organized bodies, had membership rolls, and were committed to a mission, just like the churches today.
The second premise of the emergent movement which is a weakness of Missionary Baptist pastors is ironically that pastor's commitment to scripture. The emergent, like I mentioned in a previous post, will point to the book of Acts and highlight all the things we do that are not specifically mentioned in Acts. The Missionary Baptist Pastor, desiring to stick to God's word and not tradition, is then less enthusiastic about defending traditions and customs not clearly spelled out in Acts. Thus, little by little, the actions and activities of the church are eroded away until the church finds itself in an identity crisis. This has happened before, but out of reverence to those affected, I will not discuss those examples here.
The premises of the emergent movement paint a nightmare scenario for most Missionary Baptist preachers... a lost and dying world to whom the church is ill-equipped to minister. The fear of that nightmare entices some pastors to take steps the emergent movement pushes. This should not be so. The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believes, no matter the time period, culture, or social change. People today might be busier, but their spiritual need is the same. They might be pushier, but their need is the same. They might be angrier, but their need is the same.
In a time of constant change... don't let the emergent's desire for acceptance rob your community of the only solid Rock on which it can stand. Be the church. Worship God the way you can in your heart. Preach the Word, the way the Lord has called you to preach it. Reach out to people the way the Word, the Lord, and your pastors have taught you.
Hold fast the profession of your faith without wavering, for He is faithful that promised. Hold forth the Word of life, defend the faith once delivered to the saints, PREACH THE WORD. It is still God's sword, and His answer for a lost and dying world.
This should be my last post on the emergent movement.
2 comments:
I agree. The only thing I don't remember you mentioning was the emergent claim that institutional church members have no active part. They claim all traditional church members do is sit in a pew and watch the backs of heads in front of them. I would like to point out that if a person has a desire to serve, they are encouraged (in the churches of which I've been a part) to simply ask. We can find SOMETHING that not only can they do, but also they would enjoy doing. We can arrange and set up some service they can serve weekly, or monthly. When two girls came to youth group not too long ago, they realized their need for baptism. After joining, a couple of weeks later, they came to me and asked "Brother James, I want to do something for God. What can I do?" I asked them if they were interested in making or running power points slides for Wednesday night worship. Not only were they, but they have been doing so for months, and are absolutely thrilled to do so. They work on them with the band during the week, and at church gatherings. This has been a wonderful ministry, but it is just one example of the many opportunities to serve.
Another includes our AWANA program (whether one likes it or not isn't the issue here, just an example that can apply to any church service to the community). We have probably EVERY church member who shoes up on Wednesdays serving somewhere they want to serve in this program. Because of it, weekly, our members study, pray, work together, talk together, and (even though it is an attractive model as opposed to an outreaching model), win souls and see many baptized.
Just thought I'd add this. If you already covered it, I'm sorry.
I don't think I specifically mentioned that... there is an attitude of disdain that most emergents hold toward the institutional church and its members. Thanks for your input.
Post a Comment