Wednesday, October 21, 2009

I thought it was all about conversation

Here is a video from one of the "emergent" malcontents. Notice what he claims will breathe new life into the church. The Gospel? Oh goodness no! The only chance the church has is for traditional church folk to "shut up" and for emergents to "stand up and speak the truth as they see it" (sadly, those last 4 italicized words are original--forget about God's truth, all that matters is what emergents happen to think at the moment).

Oddly, I thought the mantra of the emergent movement was "dialogue" and "conversation". Hmmm.

After all, all this talk for centuries about salvation, Jesus, and doctrine has been burning "a hole in God's head"--or so says our young malcontent. BTW, there is a bad word (a synonym of donkey) in the middle. I guess cussing is part of the truth as they see it.

Update on Oct 22, 2009: You can watch the rest of the "Spark House" videos here. In each video they ask the individual "how can we spark new life into the church?" I just watched about 75% of the videos (including the ones by Tony Jones and Doug Pagitt), and have yet to see one where someone references the Gospel. Think about that for a minute. The discussion is about how to spark new life, and the Lord of Life isn't even mentioned.


  1. Yeah, if that guy will stand up and talk a lot, then the heathens will rage and imagine vain things.

  2. I would ask what truth this feller is going to speak, since I happen to think that the Truth has already spoken. He goes by the name of Jesus Christ. I wish the emergent folks would channel some of that energy into digging deeper into God's Word instead of rejecting it.

  3. What the?!?!?!, to borrow a phrase....

    Gets off to a bad start with "Here's what I think..." Doesn't matter what he or you or I think - what has God said? Then, as you say, "the truth as we see it." I just wonder what those who replace the emergents 25 years down the road will say about emergent thought (is that an oxymoron)? Where does all this lead if taken to its logical conclusion? Universalism? Most likely, eh?

    I wonder if you and I are allowed to express the truth as we see it (which is truth we submit to as having been revealed in the Word of God). Are we allowed to "deconstruct" them? Or are we not Gnostic enough to gain membership in their "club?"

  4. Was it ever about "the conversation"? Seems like it's always been about only listening to what they have to say, and then assimilating or "shutting up."