Divergently Emerging Church

I remember checking my myspace a couple months ago and the small blurb that attempted to advertise a new website ceased my attention for a quick second. This is the advertisements in the homepage which are usually directed towards topics match interests expressed in your profile, my page tends to get controversial religious based websites, Christian singles, or something relating to my military service. The one which caught my eye and focus for a couple seconds had a phrase on it claimed, if one wants to be a born again Christian one does not need to know doctrine. I wish I could quote it now because it was so absurd, but it was more than claiming personal relationship with Christ was the focus, it denied any rational consideration of orthodox Christian theology.

Fast forward to two weeks ago, I can’t remember what the occasion was, if I am not gaming or watching a movie I have music going. Most of you know my music collection consists mostly of the family radio Christian favorites. I was jamming to MercyMe’s Everything Impossible. I paid slightly more attention to the lyrics for some reason and was rather unsettled by them. Namely a selection of the chorus’ lyrics, “I know it all seems so illogical, but that’s okay”. Whether I can continue to listen to the song in good conscience, I don’t think I can. As with most situations I would like to give them the benefit of the doubt, the theme of the song is how we ought to rely on faith and surrendering ourselves to God; however, with such a phrase to which praises one’s ignorance of theology as an act of faith, I cannot accept such a thing.

I question the kind of faith are we living when praise songs and catchy advertisements see irrationality as virtuous? The truly dangerous factor about those two, unless they are secretly heretics, they don’t realize the implications of their claims. If Christianity is illogical I would hope it would be investigated or abandoned.

Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the people of the old received their condemnation. By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.-Hebrews 11:1-3

A frequently referenced verse as it biblically defines faith and its virtue. Faith believes when God created all that exists it was created out of nothing. This particular topic of origins remains unknowable with any form of science. Any claim to such a thing is faith, while many scientific theories will claim a scientific answer it cannot be observed, tested or repeated; therefore, the empirical science’s limit is exposed. When God created the world, the natural law, the laws of science, and our souls, logic and reason were included. The foundational doctrine of God’s immutable character led Christians to discover scientific doctrine ranging from the laws of gravity, periodic table, genetic traits and more. The reasoning behind the claim; if we live in a world in which God does not arbitrarily intervene, in which nature will behave in a predictable manner then it can be tested to discover natural science. Remember it was not atheist scientists who laid the foundation of modern science.

I needed these two examples to lay foundation for where I really wanted to go. I believe we are on the edge of a Christian cultural renaissance, whether it be positive or negative we have yet to see as time and the products of the rebirth. Hopefully, you have guessed that I am speaking about the Emergent Church movement, if it can be called a movement. To pinpoint the definition is like trying to define it is like defining an absolute relativist; perhaps it is just as oxymoronic. I cannot do better than annotate similar behaviors/beliefs expressed from those who claim to be emergent, they have: lost faith/hope/respect in organized religion, emphasized individual faith, referred to undeclared form of organization or non-existent organization, nor set forth doctrine. To me it seems to be a cross between Christian anarchy and relativism.

It occurred to me I did not explain why I think those traits are harmful to the Church. Denying the importance of organized religion is in the words of one unabashed friend, “Calling the bride of Christ a whore”. I point to the model of the Trinity to follow we ought to be in community with other believers. I especially like the Acts 4-5 model in which it almost sounds like the early Christians made a communistic community until it was abruptly ended with a corpses of Ananias and Sapphira. At the same time I think the organization of church, many churches have lost the focus of what pure religion is. I do not believe the best solution is to turn our back on the organized church as a whole, simply reform and refocus where necessary. The increased focus on individual faith I do support. While at times it seems to practice our faith means we must congregate together frequently as an expression of our faith, I see that as our collaboration time, we ought to spend the rest of our time growing with our personal relationship with Christ.

I am hard pressed to find a non-churchese way of describing the “personal relationship with Christ”. An analogy I favor is being a good friend to Christ. Think of it in terms of how we become good friends with other people, I think those bonding characteristics translate well with Christ. A group of people that refuses to be called a group of people is more like being a nonconforming nonconformist. In an effort to not follow status quo, the rebel becomes the status quo and thus a living cliché, church culture is no different. The lack of organization within the emergent movement is beneficial because it requires more active thinking before everyone looks at each other and figures out the irrationality of it all. Namely because the foundation of theology which is common to all protestant Christians, even some emergents have abandoned. Try to sit down and have a conversation about faith in which everyone starts from square one and the shared doctrines have been discarded. The blind man is given the driver seat and thinks he’s ready for NASCAR. The only problem is he’s driving a minivan. I started to point out the dangers of leaving orthodox Christian doctrine in Necessary Beliefs.

Based on the aforementioned aspects of the emergent movement how do I find any positive value? For one, it is a faith much easier to spread; it has growing popularity with my generation especially. It prompts many people to reexamine their own faith and where they ought to go with it. It stirs the waters to say the least. While I find it to be a hazardous direction of theological faith I also believe it is potentially the next Great Awakening. I suggested in Losing Our Minds, that we have ourselves to blame and our culturally relevant forms of evangelism to credit for spreading a theologically weak faith. Perhaps this is the next level, both the Second Great Awakening and the Emergent church have; brought people back to faith, reached out to those who would not consider Christianity, and applied to the masses. I probably should not reference the emergent church as a past tense occurrence; I think we are still in the middle of it. Therefore, we can take the renewed interest in faith; the emphasis on an authentic relationship with Christ, reform the aspects of the Christian church which are un-Christian, then perhaps we revolt against the established church could be a growing experience instead of a dark moment of church history.