Comments on: Introducing the ECM (Part 2) http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/ A Ministry of Shepherds' Fellowship Tue, 07 Oct 2008 09:57:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: I’m Going to Pick a Fight » Strangers and Exiles http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-4584 Fri, 22 Dec 2006 01:42:55 +0000 http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-4584 [...] Introducing the ECM (Part 2) [...] […] Introducing the ECM (Part 2) […]

]]> by: sixsteps | 2 Samuel 6:13 » Emerging Emergent http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3815 Wed, 06 Dec 2006 08:44:38 +0000 http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3815 [...] They are currently upto part 7, and MacArthur’s posts can be currently found in part 1 and part 2, while Phil Johnson is the author of the other posts.  I’m sure MacArthur has lots more to say about the ECM, so be sure to check it out! Tags [...] […] They are currently upto part 7, and MacArthur’s posts can be currently found in part 1 and part 2, while Phil Johnson is the author of the other posts.  I’m sure MacArthur has lots more to say about the ECM, so be sure to check it out! Tags […]

]]> by: Caleb Kolstad http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3637 Thu, 30 Nov 2006 18:40:31 +0000 http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3637 Thanks for this! Caleb Thanks for this!

Caleb

]]> by: Shelley http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3608 Wed, 29 Nov 2006 21:34:40 +0000 http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3608 Does anyone remember Paul Tillich, author of "The Eternal Now"? (full text here) - http://www.religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=1630 Here's an excellent summary of his life and beliefs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Tillich I think you'll find him a precursor to the Emergent Conversation. Does anyone remember Paul Tillich, author of “The Eternal Now”? (full text here) -

http://www.religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=1630

Here’s an excellent summary of his life and beliefs:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Tillich

I think you’ll find him a precursor to the Emergent Conversation.

]]> by: Seth McBee http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3605 Wed, 29 Nov 2006 21:01:54 +0000 http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3605 This should be very enlightening to help us understand more clearly. What I hope is that the posts will be "current" so that we will be able to better understand how this movement is currently being ran. I know for one tht it seems that Driscoll is starting to separate himself more from this movement because of the theological differences between him and McClaren. Although, Driscoll's (Mars Hill) services are very much "contemporary" in a 21st century way, instead of a "seeker contemporary" which was really wrought in the 90's. And one would find their services to be very different than a conservative service is done. The worship music is one of the ways that really made me leave Mars Hill when I was attending, very much like secular rock. Felt like I should have bought a ticket before I came. This should be very enlightening to help us understand more clearly.

What I hope is that the posts will be “current” so that we will be able to better understand how this movement is currently being ran. I know for one tht it seems that Driscoll is starting to separate himself more from this movement because of the theological differences between him and McClaren.

Although, Driscoll’s (Mars Hill) services are very much “contemporary” in a 21st century way, instead of a “seeker contemporary” which was really wrought in the 90’s. And one would find their services to be very different than a conservative service is done. The worship music is one of the ways that really made me leave Mars Hill when I was attending, very much like secular rock. Felt like I should have bought a ticket before I came.

]]> by: The Emerging Church « From the Study http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3601 Wed, 29 Nov 2006 18:23:27 +0000 http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3601 [...] 2) Introducing the Emerging Church, Part II [...] […] 2) Introducing the Emerging Church, Part II […]

]]> by: Derek Brown http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3600 Wed, 29 Nov 2006 18:21:30 +0000 http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3600 Jacob: You are not the only one who believes that about McLaren. D.A. Carson, in his "Becoming Conversant..." says, "I have to say, as kindly but as forcefully as I can, that to my mind, if words mean anything, both McLaren and Chalke have largely abandoned the Gospel...I cannot see how their own words constitute anything less than a drift toward abandoning the gospel itself" (pages 186-187). Serious business to say the least! From what I know about McLaren, I would agree that he is very dangerous. Scott: I tend to agree with your comment. Perpetual conversations are of little help. I appreciate David Wells comment in No Place for Truth, "It is not theology alone that I am interested in, but theology driven by a passion for the truth" (12). If the conversations are not driven by a passion for truth, they are likely to continue indefinitely because they have no ultimate goal! Reaching conclusions about truth will cause a person to disagree with others-something that, McLaren (at least), tries to avoid at all costs. Derek Jacob: You are not the only one who believes that about McLaren. D.A. Carson, in his “Becoming Conversant…” says, “I have to say, as kindly but as forcefully as I can, that to my mind, if words mean anything, both McLaren and Chalke have largely abandoned the Gospel…I cannot see how their own words constitute anything less than a drift toward abandoning the gospel itself” (pages 186-187). Serious business to say the least! From what I know about McLaren, I would agree that he is very dangerous.

Scott: I tend to agree with your comment. Perpetual conversations are of little help. I appreciate David Wells comment in No Place for Truth, “It is not theology alone that I am interested in, but theology driven by a passion for the truth” (12). If the conversations are not driven by a passion for truth, they are likely to continue indefinitely because they have no ultimate goal! Reaching conclusions about truth will cause a person to disagree with others-something that, McLaren (at least), tries to avoid at all costs.

Derek

]]> by: The Emerging Church « Unbound http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3599 Wed, 29 Nov 2006 18:08:26 +0000 http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3599 [...] From Pulpit Magazine Introducing the Emerging Church part 1 and part 2 more to follow. If you’re concerned at all about this issue this is an excellent series so far and the comments are good too. [...] […] From Pulpit Magazine Introducing the Emerging Church part 1 and part 2 more to follow. If you’re concerned at all about this issue this is an excellent series so far and the comments are good too. […]

]]> by: Scott http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3598 Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:32:27 +0000 http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3598 I still struggle with the Emergent idea of having a "conversation." It seems, and I may be wrong, that many in the movement are not interested in reaching a conclusion, rather simply having a pertpetual conversation. If this is true, then conversation is not a good description. This is rambling. I still struggle with the Emergent idea of having a “conversation.” It seems, and I may be wrong, that many in the movement are not interested in reaching a conclusion, rather simply having a pertpetual conversation. If this is true, then conversation is not a good description. This is rambling.

]]> by: Keith Crosby http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3597 Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:03:58 +0000 http://www.sfpulpit.com/2006/11/29/introducing-the-emerging-church-part-2/#comment-3597 In reading through their "literature" it's almost as if 60's radicalism as repackaged itself and anything "old" is bad and everything new is subject to acceptance. It seems the so-called emergent movement doesn't know much besides the "fact" that anyone who does not agree with them is wrong. Their postmodern addiction is indeed conducive to tossing (and open in many cases) to the tossing out of the Scriptures and replacing it with an ecclectic mix of whim dejour. This must be done "carefully" so that they can take in as many of the unsuspecting as possible. Thank you for standing on truth, eternal and unchanging... The word of the Lord abides forever (1 Peter 1:25). When one reads their material it indeed harkens back to the "Indeed hath God said..?" in Genesis 3. In reading through their “literature” it’s almost as if 60’s radicalism as repackaged itself and anything “old” is bad and everything new is subject to acceptance. It seems the so-called emergent movement doesn’t know much besides the “fact” that anyone who does not agree with them is wrong. Their postmodern addiction is indeed conducive to tossing (and open in many cases) to the tossing out of the Scriptures and replacing it with an ecclectic mix of whim dejour.

This must be done “carefully” so that they can take in as many of the unsuspecting as possible. Thank you for standing on truth, eternal and unchanging… The word of the Lord abides forever (1 Peter 1:25).

When one reads their material it indeed harkens back to the “Indeed hath God said..?” in Genesis 3.

]]>