This movement expresses what I call "progressive evangelicalism," because it emphasizes traditional evangelical beliefs - affirming the doctrines of the Apostle's Creed, a high view of Scripture and the importance of a personal transforming relationship with a resurrected Christ - yet rejects the structures and styles of institutionalized Christianity. The Emergent Church
Actually, if this description of this growing movement is truthful and factual, this church sounds a lot like the first Christian churches described in Acts of the Apostles.
One encouraging idea, if true, is that these folks actually believe in hands on Christianity, inc. charity, rather than relying on the "gubmint". That's why I don't get the description as progressive. Progressive in these times is actually a code word for socialist.
The Emergent Church is often somewhat indifferent to theological and social issues that seem urgent to mainstream evangelicalism. These church members tend to think that the crusade against homosexual marriage is a waste of time and energy, and they tend to reject the exclusivistic claims that many evangelicals make about salvation. They are not about to damn the likes of Gandhi or the Dali Lama to hell simply because they have not embraced Christianity.
No, not really, not while I still have Acts 4:12 in my Bible.
In fact, news flash to the reporter: this is nothing new. Been there, done that, still paying the bills. It was called Modernism, it was called Social Gospel, it was called Liberalism. It comes in varying shades and colors, but it hasn't much changed. New package, old poison.
Dan
Biblical Christianity web site
Biblical Christianity message board
Biblical Christianity BLOG
The article actually paints emerging churches with a very broad brush. I'm familiar with several that would fall into the "emerging church" category. They are quite sound theologically and would certainly not say all beliefs are valid or true.
I think the big difference is for these types of churches, the gospel isn't about sin management but about the invitation to the kingdom.
Unfortunately many conservative evangelicals preach nothing but a brand of faith that produces "converts" who seek a "get out of hell free card" and a lifeless intellectual assent to some facts.
- Kevin
You can claim anything you want, but that does mean diddly when it comes right down to it.
And it certainly does not conform to the last 7 paragraphs of the article? They're pickin', chosin', and putting God in their box!
If they do not follow the precepts of Jesus to their fullest, there just another sheep in wolves clothing.
Satan told Eve that she surely wouldn't die if she ate the fruit, (A ridiculous LIE insinuated as truth) and she bought it! I don't know what Adams problem was?
They are not about to damn the likes of Gandhi or the Dali Lama to hell simply because they have not embraced Christianity.
In many ways, these Christians express a postmodern mindset that may come across as being somewhat "new age."
The people teaching that nonsense are not ministers of Jesus Christ, and their "churches" are not a part of the body of Christ on earth.
Peter was speaking of Jesus Christ when he said in Acts 4:12, "Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved".
Anyone who does not believe in Jesus Christ and accept the salvation he offers by grace through faith will not escape eternal damnation. Gandhi and the Dali Lama are no exceptions.
And any "church" which preaches any other gospel than salvation by grace though faith in the resurrected Christ as preached by Peter, Paul, John, and the other apostles is a false church which is deceiving people and sending them to hell.