A Fad Within a Movement: What is the Emergent Conversation and Where is it Going?

There has been a lot of interesting developments within the Emerging Church movement lately. It seems that as the days go by, more and more Emergents drop the label and move on to something else. Some are more influential, others less, but many are abandoning ship. The farther left the Emergent movement goes, the smaller the influence and power they have. This was all predictable of course as it is the same story throughout history. The more liberal, the smaller numbers.

But this has raised a question for some: is the Emergent Church Movement a fad or a movement? Its a good question and some have offered their opinions. Here is mine: the Emerging Church is a fad within a movement. Here's my explanation:

From the beginning, the Emerging Church cracked a door that lead to liberalism. Anytime people begin to talk about keeping up with the culture, contextualization, and relevancy, it is inevitable that liberalism will appear down the road. It began whenever Mark Driscoll officially left the movement as he, from early on, saw the dangerous direction of the "conversation." Likewise, others were quick to make a clear distinction between "Emerging" and "Emergent." "Emerging" traditionally meaning the more conservative side while "Emergent" meaning more liberal. The Emerging Church included persons like Dan Kimball while Emergents included Tony Jones, Brian McLaren, Doug Pagitt, and Rob Bell.

The door that was cracked has been opened and Emergents have entered the realm of liberalism. As the time goes on, it becomes more and more clear the liberal mindset of Emergent leaders. They have redefined the doctrine of hell, God, the cross, the resurrection, Scripture, sin, the church, preaching, missions, original sin, the gospel, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, Creation, Substitutionary Atonement, the Trinity, and a host of foundational issues. Increasingly, the masks are coming off and instead of postmodern leaders, we see Arius, Pelagius, Marcion, Rome, Barth, Schleiermacher, and Rauschenbusch.

If you don't see it in the leaders, one can easily see it in those who have joined the conversation. The "common folk" are clearly jumping headlong into theological liberalism. They are increasingly embracing universalism, promoting homosexuality as healthy and moral, and denigrating the gospel to environmentalism and social activism. Read the blogs, watch the videos, hear the stories and the beliefs of the real Emerging Church. The influence of Emergent leaders is clearly towards liberalism.

The reason I say that the Emergent conversation is a fad within a movement is because liberalism has been with us for some time. When Emerging was born, there was a real desire to change the culture with the undiluted gospel. The problem wasn't with the goal, but the starting point. They began with the culture to find the gospel, rather than beginning with the gospel. As a result, they let the culture define their gospel. That is the trend of liberalism. The Emergent Church has simply been grafted into the broader theological liberal movement.

This means that before long there will be nothing distinct with Emergents. They will look exactly like postmodern liberals. Even now it is difficult to tell the difference between postmodern theological liberalism and the Emergent Church. Though none of its major leaders are as far left as John Shelby Spong, many of its followers are getting close. I predict that this fad within a movement will only continue to sink deeper into theological liberalism.

This was all inevitable. Whenever one rejects the transcendence of the gospel, liberalism will result. By seeking to make friends of the culture rather than seeking repentant hearts, the Emergent conversation became nothing more than quicksand for liberalism. In fact, the very concept of having just a conversation was a major first step towards liberalism. Liberalism is all too often too bent-wristed to say anything less someone be offended; ergo it is better to have a conversation than a debate.

Before long, the Emergent conversation will move from Christian pop magazines to history books. However, the movement in which it is increasingly being grafted into will continue to live on. What is at stake between the classic theological conservative and liberal debate is the gospel and it has always been that way. Theological conservatism holds firmly to the gospel's transcendence, man's depravity, and God's immutability. Theological liberalism, on the other hand, continues to drift in the wind, changing their message and their theology with the ever passing moment.

Emergents will be a thing of tomorrow. Liberalism is here to stay.

For More:

Out of Ur - A Movement or a Fad?

Jim Wallis and Open Theism

The Emergent Gospel In 140 Characters or Less