Here is the heart of the problem with much of Christianity today is that most Christians only know how to live and talk with other Christians.

I just want to say thanks for responding.I appreciate the fact that we can talk about these issues and not be unkind.

Eddie

Paul also said, “To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law.”

If the gospel is simply one form of communication that is to be understood by all, then why would Paul have to “become a Jew” or “become like one not having the law” to win them to Christ. Why does he adjust his approach? Why is your Bible in English instead of Hebrew? Why do our churches use American music styles instead of Indian styles?

I agree the law is that which reveals a person’s sin, but if you tell someone the story of the gospel in English, when they only speak Spanish, you can feel you have done your duty but they didn’t understand a thing you said.

The Emerging discussion is a deconstruction of an American Church system that has been communicating the gospel in Christianese language to people who don’t speak Christian. America is a mission field, as local missionaries our duty is to understand our culture, and communicate the gospel affectively.

Didn’t Paul say that “it was the law that was the schoolmaster that brought him to Christ? ” That’s how you “break down the flaws in their philosophy in order to bring them to Christ.
“For I had not known sin but by the law” ,
“The law of the Lord is perfect converting the soul.”

Second, you got confused on your movements at times. Much of what you described as Emerging was 90’s seeker sensitive which is exactly what Emerging churches have reacted to and are against. You give the impression that most Emerging churches are trying hard to cater to what they think people in the audience will want. That is seeker sensitive philosophy. Emerging church guys usually don’t care what the people overall want. Rick Warren did surveys, we tend to be more individualistic and radical. We are seeker-insensitive. This democratic cater-truth to the masses approach is exactly what many of us reacted against. We start with what we believe, how we want to communicate it, then do it. You would be shocked to see how much more church discipline and accountability goes on in Emerging churches simply because we are fed up with pretending. Many Emerging guys hate CCM music, Christian cheese marketing, or anything that is fake about the 90’s megachurch movement. We do see value in redeeming neutral things in our culture such as art, film, or music as a communication medium for the gospel. We are not slaves to any particular methods or art forms. Neither to we create and anti-cultural church as some churches often do.

Finally, postmodernity as an overall philosophy is over. It was a quick phase, that started going out by the time it began. However, the Emerging church is growing and getting stronger. It is not based on an attempt to be postmodern. It is an attempt to communicate the gospel to those whose biases, philosophies, or presuppositions inherantly blind them to truth. It starts with the premise we do not live in a Christian nation. We are as godless as any other nation, only we play religion. Sometimes people’s eyes are blinded by their postmodern philosophy, and sometimes they are blinded by their extreme modernistic fundamentalist world view. Both are philosophies and neither are correct. The method to reach both is the same. Understand where the person is coming from and attempt to break down the flaws in their philosophy in order to bring them to the truth of Jesus Christ.

If, on the other hand, we realize that our successful multi-age choirs, wonderful soloists, and our doctrinally sound, well-illustrated expository sermons are just as professionally polished as the mega-church services from which we would like to comfortably distance ourselves, then you may be onto something.

Question: Is God calling YOU to be in a house church?

I have just a few comments about this section, especially that word, “professionalism.” Look at the root, “profession,” and you see an indicator that the professional status of doctors, lawyers, and the like is actually modeled after the “professionalism” of the early priests of Christendom.

Look at careers which have truly “professional” status. First, each profession is self-governing in that it regulates the training of its members without outside interference. Second, and most important, only members certified by the profession are allowed to practice. Groups of not-yet-professional specialists struggle to achieve the legal sanctions necessary to have truly professional status.

These legal sanctions mean that you can go to jail for practicing medicine without a license, practicing law without a license, impersonating a police officer. A school district is in noncompliance if they hire non-certificated teachers. When true professional status exists, then ONLY THE PROFESSIONAL CAN SUPPLY THE SERVICES. Providing professional services is the EXCLUSIVE domain of the professional.

If your church reserves any ministry to ordained clergy, then your professional ministers have the exclusive right to perform those services. The most universal right claimed by most denominations is officiating at communion. When the sacrament of communion was virtually essential for salvation, then a lot of ecclesiastical power was concentrated in the parish priest.

Can you invoke the rule of law for the enforcement of your denominational professionalism? You may not be able to call the police. But what would you do if a group of laypeople had communion in a home Bible study? You can invoke your Rule of Discipline or whatever you call it, but where in the Bible does it say that only an ordained minister can serve communion? Nowhere. So much your claim to follow the Bible in everything.

I mean, if reserving the exclusive right to administer the sacraments worked in the early Catholic church to bolster the church’s authority over people, then it’ll work for us, too.

Similar arguments could be made regarding the requirement for “professional training” for ordination. Remember the impression that “ordinary, unlearned men” made on the authorities. But God forbid we should be embarrassed by some green kid fresh out of Bible college.

What charicatures did Phil present? Was Phil not careful to present EM?

Hayden