Emerging churches don’t read scripture, offer up public prayers, etc.

A [LINK] to a Baptist Press article entitled, “FIRST-PERSON: Emergent evangelism: salvation by consensus?” by Douglas Baker who is a writer who lives and works in Washington, D.C.

In this article, Baker claims the following:

Never has the need been more critical for the Gospel to be powerfully preached by the church of the Lord Jesus Christ. How that is done is largely settled in Holy Scripture. The public reading of the Bible, the corporate prayer of the church, the singing of psalms, hymns and spiritual songs to one another, the ordinances of Christian baptism and the Lord’s Supper, the offering of confession and thanksgiving to God are all elements of public worship which are explicitly revealed in Scripture. Is it not strange that almost every modern theory of “emerging� churches disregard many of these direct commands in favor of more “evangelistic� and “relevant� methods? No amount of technology or innovation can ever eclipse or manipulate the clear biblical teaching that evangelism is not simply a matter of form, but of substance.

So anyone associated with “emerging” churches disregard the “public reading of the Bible, the corporate prayer of the church, the singing of psalms, hymns and spiritual songs to one another, the ordinances of Christian baptism and the Lord’s Supper, [and] the offering of confession and thanksgiving to God.”?

I guess I would again be naive to think that someone, somewhere who is part of an emerging congregation does none of these things, but I just think he’s way off base here. Emerging churches tend to read more scripture than most, pray more and in different ways corporately than most, sing a good bit, baptize people, and offer confession and thanksgiving. If we don’t do that, what do we do? Use drama to illustrate scripture, use art to help people visualize the gospel, all to the disregard of everything else? It saddens me that this stuff could be published.

He also intimates that we’re not concerned about theology. He says,

Various theological camps are competing to sell their wares in the Christian marketplace, and many churches are all too eager to buy their products. Yet if statistics are true, then the latest evangelistic strategies (whether new or old) are not working. This is because true saints are made by God through good and sound conversions as a result of the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. What transpires at the time of conversion is a matter of theology, and this is where “emerging� conversations usually cease. To believe many current Christian leaders, the seeming simplicity of the Gospel cannot abide the intricacies and ivory tower intellectual gymnastics of the theological academy. But thoughts such as these betray a lack of understanding of true evangelism and the purpose of biblical theology.

I would dare say that we are as much or more concerned about theology as the average pastor in a “non-emerging” church. We wrestle with that every day. We’re wrestling with that as we Emerging SBC Leaders read “Foolishness to the Greeks” by Newbigin. We deal with it as we consider Scot McKnight’s writings.

This will probably be the last post on stuff like this from BP, but it amazes me that on one side our SBC leaders present a “Welcome to the table” message, ie Jimmy Draper and Bob Record and Ed Stetzer, and yet every other message that seems to come out of Nashville is that “emerging people don’t…” and offer scathing critics of the conversation out of ignorance and fear. It seems we’re talking out of both sides of our mouths, but what the majority of people hear and read and gets picked up in the state papers is “Emerging” is bad. It just saddens me…

Popularity: 1% [?]

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts