Another conservative evangelical discussion about Emerging/Emergent--this time Moody Open Line [mp3].
I wish they--actually "we," being a conservative evangelical myself--would talk to more people, read more blogs and books, and consider our words more carefully before putting them out there in the public in books and on the air. I would say more, but I'm not sure I could follow my own advice. This discussion deserves another listen or two, but I have no time right now, but I do have two questions:
- The differentiation between "emerging" and "emergent" (emerging is more radical--did I get that right?) is new to me. Is this really out there? If so, how have I missed it?
- How is it possible that thinking people--and the detractors are thinking people--can continue to paint such a diverse movement (sorry:-) with such a broad brush? Yes, there are commonalities (this is how we know there is such a thing as Emerging/Emergent), but the range of theology and practice is rather astounding. To probably misquote Shakespeare, me thinks the lady doth protest too much.
Tag(s):
emerging church 
moody bible institute 
emergent churchSee CC License
“Unless otherwise noted Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.” http://www.esv.org/
theologically speaking, i'd say that emergent is the more liberal of the two. i tend to align with driscoll, who would describe the tension of being theologically conservative and culturally liberal.
ReplyDeletehttp://revolutionfl.blogspot.com
i think they got teh emerging and emergent thing totally wrong.
ReplyDeleteRevolution, I tend to agree. Though even this might be too broad, for there may well be churches and people who belong to emergent cohorts and yet are theologically conservative. It's just not as clear cut as many of the detractors seem to think.
ReplyDeleteAndrew, agreed.