The following is a paper that I wrote for a class that I am taking in school. There will be at least three more papers to follow that relate to the Emergent Church. I did not know much about the Emergent Church going into this project, but now that I have learned a little, I would like to know more. I have delved into numerous books written by Brian McClaren and Rob Bell (two of the leading pastors in the Emergent Church). If you do not know much about the Emergent Church, please do not plan on learning all the ins and outs by reading my papers. They only scratch the surface regarding the errors and dangers present and on the horizon as the movement continues to gain momentum. I strongly suggest you familiarize yourself with the Emergent Church and their errors so that you know what direction the visible church in America might head possibly. As awful as what they proposes sounds, it is tickling a lot of ears in the church and many are flocking in droves into these "churches." Keep an open eye out!
The divine authority of Scripture as the Word of God has been under debate for several centuries. Throughout the history of the church, the debate over the authority of Scripture as the only infallible rule of faith and life has evidenced a great hostility and abhorrence of the doctrine of Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone). In the 16th century, the great reformer, John Calvin (1989), argued that, "Although learned men...should take the opposite side...if they are not possessed of the shameless effrontery, they will be compelled to confess that the Scripture exhibits clear evidence of its being spoken by God, and, consequently, of its containing his heavenly doctrine" (p. 71). Calvin argued against the Roman Catholic Church that the church does not establish the Word of God, but rather, that the Scriptures established the church (Eph. 2:20). Calvin (1989) clearly articulated this when he wrote in his Institutes of the Christian Religion, "Nothing...can be more absurd than the fiction, that the power of judging Scripture is in the Church, and that on her nod its certainty depends" (p. 69).
Five hundred years after Calvin, an emerging Christian movement is sparking the debate once again. Does Scripture have authority as the Word of God, or is its authority dependent upon the interpretation and acceptance of the church? Rob Bell (2005), the pastor of a large Emergent congregation and the author of several acclaimed books, argues that "when people say that all we need is the Bible, it is simply not true" (p. 68). This shocking statement follows a tirade against the 16th century reformers (like Calvin) who "claimed that we only need the authority of the Bible" (p. 67). The reasoning for Bell's controversial stance against the authority of the Bible is clearly articulated when he argues that the Bible cannot have the last say because the church voted on the canon of Scripture, and therefore, the church must have the last say on what the Bible says (Bell, 2005).
The crux of the modern rekindling of the debate is a postmodern approach to Christianity and a non-foundational approach to the Christian faith. Postmodernism is a rejection of the epistemology called foundationalism. Travis Barbour and Nicholas Toews (2010), graduate students from Columbia Bible College, define foundationalism as "the quest for certainty and [seeking] to provide an unassailable basis on which all other knowledge can be built" (p. 34). Postmodern philosophy rejects foundationalism, but does not reject the parts of foundationalism such as reason, experience, or Scripture (2010). Therefore, postmodern Christians do not deny an unassailable truth, but rather, they deny that anyone can believe or understand any truth as unassailable with any degree of certainty or assurance. To the postmodern Christian, truth is determined by a set of equal foundations rather than one, infallible and inerrant one. Brian McLaren (1999), another prominent leader of the Emergent Church, argues that "rationalists thought that cold reason, objective observation, and impersonal logic...were the best way to discover truth" (p. 27). The alternative he proposes is to allow, "experience-- feelings, intuitions, things that happen to us that move us toward faith" (p. 27) to help us determine what is really true and real.
As the Emerging Church seeks to form "church communities that fit the postmodern cultural context" (Barbour & Toews, 2010, p. 32), they have become "a powerful force in North American Christianity with the potential to bring radical changes to churches across the continent" (p. 33). Surely, changing what is "true" in Christianity contains great potential to completely change the face of Christianity in the world. Fanning the flames of the Emergent Church movement, is a church full of division, disunity, and controversy, and a culture that does not want to get involved with a faith that is seemingly unsure of itself. The Emergent Church appeals to a postmodern culture by suggesting that the church, "spend a minority of [its] time and energy on the controversies, and concentrate fully on the biblical teachings that are clear and compelling without debate" (McLaren, 1999, p. 118).
However, the problem with this approach is the subtle and unreferenced question left unanswered, What do we do with the biblical teachings that are enshrouded in debate? McLaren (1999) suggests that they "will fall into place over time" (pp. 118-119). This uncertain answer does not bode well with many critics of the Emergent Church and their postmodern approach to interpreting and understanding Christian doctrine. Barbour and Toews (2010) argue, "The conversation that defines the Emergent Church will be reduced to mere jabbering, and it will have rejected the monologue of modernity without being able to offer a viable alternative" (p. 38).
With no certain truth to proclaim, with no set goal to achieve, but only a mere postmodern experience of what the Christian faith has to offer, the Emergent Church's conversation seems like a poor mission-oriented replacement for the Holy Bible. The Emergent Church's desire to reach out to the postmodern world is not reforming the way the Christian faith is defined, lived, and explained but is rather reverting back to erroneous views held by Rome that sparked the 16th century Reformation's stance on Sola Scriptura. Bell (2005) recognizes that the Reformation's stance on Sola Scriptura was "in reaction to abuses by the church" (p. 67), but he does not recognize the irony that his proposal of abandoning the doctrine of "Scripture alone" will once again allow the church to abuse a self-avowed privilege of authority over biblical interpretation and truth. In the observation of John Calvin (1989), "Profane men, seeking...to introduce unbridled tyranny, care not in what absurdities they entangle themselves and others, provided they extort from the simple this one acknowledgement--viz. that there is nothing which the Church cannot do" (p. 69).
Working Bibliography:
Barbour, T. I., & Toews, N. E. (2010). The Emergent Church: A methodological critique. Direction , 32-40.
Bell, R. (2005). Velvet Elvis. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Calvin, J. (1989). Institutes of the Christian religion. Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Crouch, A. (2004). The Emergent mystique. Christianity Today , 36-41.
Hodge, A. (1999). Outlines of theology. Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust.
McLaren, B. (1999). Finding faith - A search for what is real. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America. (2004). The Westminster larger catechism. In The Constitution of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America (pp. B-1). Pittsburgh: Crown and Covenant.
No comments:
Post a Comment