the emergent church: emergence or emergency? copyright by norman l. geisler 2008

The Emergent Church:Emergence or Emergency?The Emergent Church:

Emergence or Emergency?

Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2008Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2008

Emerging FiguresIn the Emergent ChurchEmerging FiguresIn the Emergent Church

Brian McClaren

Stanley Grenz

Some Other Names.… Doug Pagitt Tony Jones John Franke Donald Miller

Some Other Names.… Doug Pagitt Tony Jones John Franke Donald Miller

An Emergent ManifestoAn Emergent Manifesto

Doug

TonyTony

Donald MillerDonald Miller Brian McLaren said: “I can think of no

better book than Blue Like Jazz to introduce Christian spirituality (a way of life) to people for whom Christianity (a system of beliefs) seems like a bad math problem….”

Brian McLaren said: “I can think of no

better book than Blue Like Jazz to introduce Christian spirituality (a way of life) to people for whom Christianity (a system of beliefs) seems like a bad math problem….”

OutlineOutlineI. Background Stated

II. Basic Books Listed

III. Basic Beliefs Examined

I. Background Stated



OutlineOutlineI. Background of Emergence Stated A. Key Influence: Postmodernism 1. “Death of God”--Atheism 2. Death of objective truth--Relativism 3. Death of exclusive truth—Pluralism 4. Death of objective meaning--

Conventionalism 5. Death of thinking (logic)—Anti-

Foundationalism 6. Death of objective interpretation-- Deconstructionism

7. Death of objective values-- Subjectivism

I. Background of Emergence Stated A. Key Influence: Postmodernism 1. “Death of God”--Atheism 2. Death of objective truth--Relativism 3. Death of exclusive truth—Pluralism 4. Death of objective meaning--

Conventionalism 5. Death of thinking (logic)—Anti-

Foundationalism 6. Death of objective interpretation-- Deconstructionism

7. Death of objective values-- Subjectivism

I. Background of Emergence Stated A. Key Influence: Postmodernism B. Key Ideas: It is: Post-Protestant Post-Orthodox Post-Denominational Post-Doctrinal Post-Individual Post-Foundational Post-Creedal Post-Rational Post-Absolute Note: “Post” = “Anti”

I. Background of Emergence Stated A. Key Influence: Postmodernism B. Key Ideas: It is: Post-Protestant Post-Orthodox Post-Denominational Post-Doctrinal Post-Individual Post-Foundational Post-Creedal Post-Rational Post-Absolute Note: “Post” = “Anti”

Postmodernism “But for me…opposing it [Postmodernism] is as

futile as opposing the English language. It’s here. It’s reality. It’s the future…. It’s the way my generation processes every other fact on the event horizon” (McLaren, The Church on the Other Side, 70).

“Postmodernism is the intellectual boundary between the old world and the other side. Why is it so important? Because when your view of truth is changed, when your confidence in the human ability to know truth in any objective way is revolutionized, then everything changes. That includes theology…” (McLaren, COS, 69).

Postmodernism “But for me…opposing it [Postmodernism] is as

futile as opposing the English language. It’s here. It’s reality. It’s the future…. It’s the way my generation processes every other fact on the event horizon” (McLaren, The Church on the Other Side, 70).

“Postmodernism is the intellectual boundary between the old world and the other side. Why is it so important? Because when your view of truth is changed, when your confidence in the human ability to know truth in any objective way is revolutionized, then everything changes. That includes theology…” (McLaren, COS, 69).

Key Books by Emergent LeadersBrian McLaren, The Church on the Other Side A Generous Orthodoxy A New Kind of ChristianStanley Grenz, A Primer on Post-Modernism

Beyond Foundationalism Revising Evangelical Theology

Rob Bell, Velvet Elvis: Repainting the Christian FaithDoug Pagitt & Tony Jones, An Emergent Manifesto

of Hope Tony Jones, The New Christians: Dispatches from

the Emergent FrontierDonald Miller, Blue Like Jazz See also: www.emergentvillage.com

Key Books by Emergent LeadersBrian McLaren, The Church on the Other Side A Generous Orthodoxy A New Kind of ChristianStanley Grenz, A Primer on Post-Modernism

Beyond Foundationalism Revising Evangelical Theology

Rob Bell, Velvet Elvis: Repainting the Christian FaithDoug Pagitt & Tony Jones, An Emergent Manifesto

of Hope Tony Jones, The New Christians: Dispatches from

the Emergent FrontierDonald Miller, Blue Like Jazz See also: www.emergentvillage.com

It Has Self-Defeating Claims It Has Self-Defeating Claims

A Response to the Emergent ChurchA Response to the Emergent Church

It Has Self-Defeating Claims It Has Self-Defeating Claims

It aims at something else and shoots itself!It aims at something else and shoots itself!

A Response to the Emergent ChurchA Response to the Emergent Church

A Self-Defeating StatementA Self-Defeating Statement

“I can’t speak a word in English.”“I can’t speak a word in English.”

“Didn’t he say that in English?”“Didn’t he say that in English?”

III. Basic BeliefsIII. Basic BeliefsA. Anti-AbsolutismA. Anti-Absolutism

Anti-AbsolutismAnti-Absolutism “Arguments that pit absolutism versus

relativism, and objectivism versus subjectivism, prove meaningless or absurd to postmodern people” (McClaren, “The Broadened Gospel,” in “Emergent Evangelism,” Christianity Today 48 [Nov., 2004], 43).

“Arguments that pit absolutism versus relativism, and objectivism versus subjectivism, prove meaningless or absurd to postmodern people” (McClaren, “The Broadened Gospel,” in “Emergent Evangelism,” Christianity Today 48 [Nov., 2004], 43).

Relativism Stated: “We cannot know absolute truth.”

Relativism Refuted: We know that we cannot know absolute truth.

Relativism Stated: “We cannot know absolute truth.”

Relativism Refuted: We know that we cannot know absolute truth.

http://www.spurgeon.org/images/pyromaniac/TeamPyro/e-s_058.jpg

III. Basic BeliefsIII. Basic BeliefsA. Anti-Absolutism

B. Anti-Exclusivism

A. Anti-Absolutism

B. Anti-Exclusivism

Anti-Exclusivism Anti-Exclusivism

“Missional Christian faith asserts that Jesus did not come to make some people saved and others condemned. Jesus did not come to help some people be right while leaving everyone else to be wrong. Jesus did not come to create another exclusive religion” (McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, 109).

“Missional Christian faith asserts that Jesus did not come to make some people saved and others condemned. Jesus did not come to help some people be right while leaving everyone else to be wrong. Jesus did not come to create another exclusive religion” (McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, 109).

PluralismPluralism

1. The Claim of Pluralism: “No view is exclusively true.”

2. The Self-Refutation: It claims that its view (that no view is exclusively true) is exclusively true.

1. The Claim of Pluralism: “No view is exclusively true.”

2. The Self-Refutation: It claims that its view (that no view is exclusively true) is exclusively true.


B. Anti-Exclusivism

C. Anti-Foundationalism

A. Anti-Absolutism

B. Anti-Exclusivism


Foundationalism Defined: There are self-evident principles at the basis of all thought such as: 1. The Law of Identity (A is A).

2. The Law of Non-Contradiction (A is not non-A).

3. The Law of Excluded Middle (Either A or non-A).

4. The Laws of rational inference.

Foundationalism Defined: There are self-evident principles at the basis of all thought such as: 1. The Law of Identity (A is A).

2. The Law of Non-Contradiction (A is not non-A).

3. The Law of Excluded Middle (Either A or non-A).

4. The Laws of rational inference.

1. All A is included in B.2. All B is included in C.3. Hence, All A is included in C.

1. All A is included in B.2. All B is included in C.3. Hence, All A is included in C.

C

B

1. A Categorical Form of Inference1. A Categorical Form of Inference

A

Three Kinds of Rational InferenceThree Kinds of Rational Inference1. Categorical (above)2. Hypothetical a) If all human beings are sinners, then

John is a sinner. b) All human beings are sinners. c) Therefore, John is a sinner.

1. Categorical (above)2. Hypothetical a) If all human beings are sinners, then

John is a sinner. b) All human beings are sinners. c) Therefore, John is a sinner.

Three Kinds of Rational InferenceThree Kinds of Rational Inference1. Categorical (above)2. Hypothetical a) If all human beings are sinners, then

John is a sinner. b) All human beings are sinners. c) Therefore, John is a sinner.3. Disjunctive a) Either John is saved or he is lost. b) John is not saved. c) Therefore, John is lost.

1. Categorical (above)2. Hypothetical a) If all human beings are sinners, then

John is a sinner. b) All human beings are sinners. c) Therefore, John is a sinner.3. Disjunctive a) Either John is saved or he is lost. b) John is not saved. c) Therefore, John is lost.

Anti-FoundationalismAnti-Foundationalism

Stanley Grenz wrote a

whole book against

Foundationalism titled:

Beyond Foundationalism.

Stanley Grenz wrote a

whole book against

Foundationalism titled:

Beyond Foundationalism.

Anti-FoundationalismAnti-Foundationalism “For modern Western Christians, words like

authority, inerrancy, infallibility, revelation, objective, absolute, and literal are crucial…. Hardly anyone knows …Rene Descartes, the Enlightenment, David Hume, and Foundationalism—which provides the context in which these words are so important. Hardly anyone notices the irony of resorting to the authority of extra-biblical words and concepts to justify one’s belief in the Bible’s ultimate authority” (McLaren, GO, 164).

“For modern Western Christians, words like authority, inerrancy, infallibility, revelation, objective, absolute, and literal are crucial…. Hardly anyone knows …Rene Descartes, the Enlightenment, David Hume, and Foundationalism—which provides the context in which these words are so important. Hardly anyone notices the irony of resorting to the authority of extra-biblical words and concepts to justify one’s belief in the Bible’s ultimate authority” (McLaren, GO, 164).

PluralismPluralism

1. The Claim of Anti-Foundationalism: “Opposites (e.g., A is non-A) can both be true.”

2. The Self-Refutation: They hold that the opposite of this statement (that opposites can both be true) cannot be true.

1. The Claim of Anti-Foundationalism: “Opposites (e.g., A is non-A) can both be true.”

2. The Self-Refutation: They hold that the opposite of this statement (that opposites can both be true) cannot be true.


B. Anti-Exlusivism


D. Anti-Objectivism

A. Anti-Absolutism

B. Anti-Exlusivism


D. Anti-Objectivism

Anti-Objectivism Anti-Objectivism

“We ought to commend the postmodern questioning of the Enlightenment assumption that knowledge is objective and hence dispassionate” (Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism, 166).

“We ought to commend the postmodern questioning of the Enlightenment assumption that knowledge is objective and hence dispassionate” (Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism, 166).

PluralismPluralism

1. The Claim of Anti-Objectivism: “There are no objectively true statements.”

2. The Self-Refutation: It is an objectively true statement that there are no objectively true statements.

1. The Claim of Anti-Objectivism: “There are no objectively true statements.”

2. The Self-Refutation: It is an objectively true statement that there are no objectively true statements.


B. Anti-Exclusivism


D. Anti-Objectivism

E. Anti-Rationalism

A. Anti-Absolutism

B. Anti-Exclusivism


D. Anti-Objectivism

E. Anti-Rationalism

Anti-Rationalism (Fideism)Anti-Rationalism (Fideism) Grenz chided “Twentieth-century

evangelicals [who] have devoted much energy to the task of demonstrating the credibility of the Christian faith…” (Grenz, Primer on Post-modernism, 160).

“Following the intellect can sometimes lead us away from the truth” (Grenz, PPM, 166).

Note: Not following basic rational thought will lead you there a lot faster!

Grenz chided “Twentieth-century evangelicals [who] have devoted much energy to the task of demonstrating the credibility of the Christian faith…” (Grenz, Primer on Post-modernism, 160).

“Following the intellect can sometimes lead us away from the truth” (Grenz, PPM, 166).

Note: Not following basic rational thought will lead you there a lot faster!

Anti-Rationalism (Fideism)Anti-Rationalism (Fideism) “Because knowledge is a luxury beyond our

means, faith is the best we can hope for. What an opportunity! Faith hasn’t encountered openness like this in several hundred years” (McLaren, The Church on the Other Side, 173).

“Drop any affair you may have with certainty, proof, argument—and replace it with dialogue, conversation, intrigue, and search” (McLaren, Adventures in Missing the Point, 78).

“Because knowledge is a luxury beyond our means, faith is the best we can hope for. What an opportunity! Faith hasn’t encountered openness like this in several hundred years” (McLaren, The Church on the Other Side, 173).

“Drop any affair you may have with certainty, proof, argument—and replace it with dialogue, conversation, intrigue, and search” (McLaren, Adventures in Missing the Point, 78).

Donald Miller, Blue Like JazzDonald Miller, Blue Like Jazz “My belief in Jesus did not seem rational or

scientific, and yet there was nothing I could do to separate myself from this belief” (54).

“My most recent faith struggle is not one of intellect…. I don’t believe I will ever walk away from God for intellectual reasons. Who knows anything anyway? If I walk away… I will walk away for social reasons, identity reasons, deep emotional reasons…” (103).

“There are many ideas within Christian spirituality that contradict the facts of reality as I understand them. A statement like this offends some Christians because they believe if aspects of their faith do not obey the facts of reality, they are not true” (201).

“My belief in Jesus did not seem rational or scientific, and yet there was nothing I could do to separate myself from this belief” (54).

“My most recent faith struggle is not one of intellect…. I don’t believe I will ever walk away from God for intellectual reasons. Who knows anything anyway? If I walk away… I will walk away for social reasons, identity reasons, deep emotional reasons…” (103).

“There are many ideas within Christian spirituality that contradict the facts of reality as I understand them. A statement like this offends some Christians because they believe if aspects of their faith do not obey the facts of reality, they are not true” (201).

PluralismPluralism

1. The Claim of Fideism: “There are no reasons for what we believe.”

2. The Self-Refutation: There are good reasons for believing there are no good reasons for what we believe.

1. The Claim of Fideism: “There are no reasons for what we believe.”

2. The Self-Refutation: There are good reasons for believing there are no good reasons for what we believe.

PluralismPluralism

1. The Claim of Fideism: “Knowledge is a luxury beyond our means.”

2. The Self-Refutation: We have the luxury of knowing that we can’t have the luxury of knowing.

1. The Claim of Fideism: “Knowledge is a luxury beyond our means.”

2. The Self-Refutation: We have the luxury of knowing that we can’t have the luxury of knowing.

“There is no rational support for what we believe!”

“There is no rational support for what we believe!”

An Emergent DifficultyAn Emergent Difficulty

“Is there any rational support for that belief?”

“Is there any rational support for that belief?”

Dr. Emergent-See

Mr. Orthodoxy


B. Anti-Exclusivism


D. Anti-Objectivism (of Truth)

E. Anti-Rationalism

F. Anti-Objectivism (of Meaning)

A. Anti-Absolutism

B. Anti-Exclusivism



E. Anti-Rationalism


Anti-Objectivism(Conventionalism)Anti-Objectivism(Conventionalism)

Defined: All meaning is culturally relative. There is no fixed meaning. Meaning is not objective.

Defined: All meaning is culturally relative. There is no fixed meaning. Meaning is not objective.

PluralismPluralism

1. The Claim of Conventionalism: “There is no objective meaning.”

2. The Self-Refutation: It is objectively meaningful to assert that there is no objective meaning.

1. The Claim of Conventionalism: “There is no objective meaning.”

2. The Self-Refutation: It is objectively meaningful to assert that there is no objective meaning.


B. Anti-Pluralism



E. Anti-Rationalism


G. Anti-Realism

A. Anti-Absolutism

B. Anti-Pluralism



E. Anti-Rationalism


G. Anti-Realism

Anti-RealismAnti-Realism There is no objective world that

can be known. Rather, “the only ultimately valid ‘objectivity of the world’ is that of a future, eschatological world, and the ‘actual’ universe is the universe as it one day will be” (Grenz, Renewing the Center, 246).

There is no objective world that can be known. Rather, “the only ultimately valid ‘objectivity of the world’ is that of a future, eschatological world, and the ‘actual’ universe is the universe as it one day will be” (Grenz, Renewing the Center, 246).

PluralismPluralism

1. The Claim of Anti-Realism “There is no real world now that can be known.”

2. The Self-Refutation: We know it is really true now (i.e., true in the real world now) that there is no real world now that can be known.

1. The Claim of Anti-Realism “There is no real world now that can be known.”

2. The Self-Refutation: We know it is really true now (i.e., true in the real world now) that there is no real world now that can be known.


B. Anti-Exclusivism



E. Anti-Rationalism

F. Anti-Objectivism (in Meaning)

G. Anti-Realism

H. Anti-Infallibilism

A. Anti-Absolutism

B. Anti-Exclusivism



E. Anti-Rationalism


G. Anti-Realism


Anti-InfallibilismAnti-Infallibilism “Well, I’m wondering, if you have an

infallible text, but all your interpretations of it are admittedly fallible, then you at least have to always be open to being corrected about your interpretation, right?... So the authoritative text is never what I say about the text or even what I understand the text to say but rather what God means the text to say, right?” (McLaren, NKC, 50).

“Well, I’m wondering, if you have an infallible text, but all your interpretations of it are admittedly fallible, then you at least have to always be open to being corrected about your interpretation, right?... So the authoritative text is never what I say about the text or even what I understand the text to say but rather what God means the text to say, right?” (McLaren, NKC, 50).

PluralismPluralism

1. The Claim of Anti-Infallibilism: “My understanding of the text is never the correct one.”

2. The Self-Refutation: My understanding of the text is correct in saying that my understanding of the text is never correct.

1. The Claim of Anti-Infallibilism: “My understanding of the text is never the correct one.”

2. The Self-Refutation: My understanding of the text is correct in saying that my understanding of the text is never correct.

“No one knows what the text means!”

“No one knows what the text means!”


“How does he knowthat, if he doesn’t know what

the text means?”

“How does he knowthat, if he doesn’t know what

the text means?”

Dr. Emergent-See

Mr. Orthodoxy


B. Anti-Exclusivism



E. Anti-Rationalism


G. Anti-Realism


I. Anti-Propositionalism

A. Anti-Absolutism

B. Anti-Exclusivism



E. Anti-Rationalism


G. Anti-Realism



Anti-PropositionalismAnti-Propositionalism

“Our understanding of the Christian faith must not remain fixated on the propositional approach that views Christian truth as nothing more than correct doctrine or doctrinal truth” (Grenz, PPM, 170).

“Transformed in this manner into a book of doctrine, the Bible is easily robbed of its dynamic character” (Grenz, Revisioning Evangelical Theology, 114-115).

“Our understanding of the Christian faith must not remain fixated on the propositional approach that views Christian truth as nothing more than correct doctrine or doctrinal truth” (Grenz, PPM, 170).

“Transformed in this manner into a book of doctrine, the Bible is easily robbed of its dynamic character” (Grenz, Revisioning Evangelical Theology, 114-115).

PluralismPluralism

The Claim of Anti-Propositionalism: “Our view of the Christian faith must not be fixed on propositional truth (doctrine).”

The Self-Refutation: We must be fixed on the propositional truth that we should not be fixed on propositional truth.

The Claim of Anti-Propositionalism: “Our view of the Christian faith must not be fixed on propositional truth (doctrine).”

The Self-Refutation: We must be fixed on the propositional truth that we should not be fixed on propositional truth.

PluralismPluralism

The Claim of Anti-Propositionalism: “Doctrinal truth is not dynamic.”

The Self-Refutation: It is a dynamic doctrinal truth (of the Emergent Church) that doctrinal truth is not dynamic.

The Claim of Anti-Propositionalism: “Doctrinal truth is not dynamic.”

The Self-Refutation: It is a dynamic doctrinal truth (of the Emergent Church) that doctrinal truth is not dynamic.

But Doctrine is Dynamic!Ideas Have Consequences!But Doctrine is Dynamic!

Ideas Have Consequences!

E = MCE = MC 22

Dynamic Ones!Dynamic Ones!

Ideas Have Consequences!Ideas Have Consequences!

Ideas Have Consequences!Ideas Have Consequences!

Tragic Ones!Tragic Ones!


B. Anti-Exclusivism



E. Anti-Rationalism


G. Anti-Realism



J. Anti-Orthodoxy

A. Anti-Absolutism

B. Anti-Exclusivism



E. Anti-Rationalism


G. Anti-Realism



J. Anti-Orthodoxy

Post-OrthodoxyPost-Orthodoxy Dwight J. Friesen’s Orthoparadoxy “‘A thing is alive only when it contains

contradictions in itself ….’ Just as he [Moltmann] highlights the necessity of contradictions for life, so I declare that embracing the complexities of contradictions, antinomies, and paradoxes of the human life is walking the way of Jesus” (in Pagitt ed., An Emergent Manifesto of Hope, 203).

Dwight J. Friesen’s Orthoparadoxy “‘A thing is alive only when it contains

contradictions in itself ….’ Just as he [Moltmann] highlights the necessity of contradictions for life, so I declare that embracing the complexities of contradictions, antinomies, and paradoxes of the human life is walking the way of Jesus” (in Pagitt ed., An Emergent Manifesto of Hope, 203).

“Jesus did not announce ideas or call people to certain beliefs as much as he invited people to follow him into a way of being in the world…. The theological method of orthoparadoxy surrenders the right to be right for the sake of movement toward being reconciled one with another, while simultaneously seeking to bring the fullness of conviction and belief to the other…. Current theological methods that often stress… orthodoxy/heresy, and the like set people up for constant battles to convince and convert the other to their way of believing and being in the world” (Friesen, in EMH, 205).

“Jesus did not announce ideas or call people to certain beliefs as much as he invited people to follow him into a way of being in the world…. The theological method of orthoparadoxy surrenders the right to be right for the sake of movement toward being reconciled one with another, while simultaneously seeking to bring the fullness of conviction and belief to the other…. Current theological methods that often stress… orthodoxy/heresy, and the like set people up for constant battles to convince and convert the other to their way of believing and being in the world” (Friesen, in EMH, 205).

Post-Orthodoxy: Unity Over OrthodoxyPost-Orthodoxy: Unity Over Orthodoxy

1. The Claim of Post-Orthodoxy: “We should not insist on being right about doctrine.”

2. The Self-refutation: We insist on being right in our doctrine that we should not insist on being right in our doctrine.

1. The Claim of Post-Orthodoxy: “We should not insist on being right about doctrine.”

2. The Self-refutation: We insist on being right in our doctrine that we should not insist on being right in our doctrine.

“We must avoid making anycreedal pronouncements ”

“We must avoid making anycreedal pronouncements ”


“Isn’t that a creedal pronouncement?”

“Isn’t that a creedal pronouncement?”

Dr. Emergent-See

Mr. Orthodoxy

MysticismMysticism

III. Basic BeliefsIII. Basic BeliefsB. Anti-Exclusivism



E. Anti-Rationalism


G. Anti-Realism



J. Anti-Orthodoxy

K. Anti-Condemnationism (Universalism)

B. Anti-Exclusivism



E. Anti-Rationalism


G. Anti-Realism



J. Anti-Orthodoxy

K. Anti-Condemnationism (Universalism)

UniversalismUniversalism• “More important to me than the hell question, then,

is the mission [in this world] question." (McLaren, Generous Orthodoxy, 114)

• Jesus reconciled “all things, everywhere.”• “Hell is full of forgiven people.” • “Our choice is to live in this new reality or cling to a

reality of our own making” (Bell, Velvet Elvis, 146).• “So it is a giant thing that God is doing here and not

just the forgiveness of individuals. It is the reconciliation of all things” (Bell in “Find the Big Jesus: An Interview with Rob Bell” in Beliefnet.com).

• “More important to me than the hell question, then, is the mission [in this world] question." (McLaren, Generous Orthodoxy, 114)

• Jesus reconciled “all things, everywhere.”• “Hell is full of forgiven people.” • “Our choice is to live in this new reality or cling to a

reality of our own making” (Bell, Velvet Elvis, 146).• “So it is a giant thing that God is doing here and not

just the forgiveness of individuals. It is the reconciliation of all things” (Bell in “Find the Big Jesus: An Interview with Rob Bell” in Beliefnet.com).

1. The Claim of Universalism: “All persons (free agents) will be saved.”

2. The Self-refutation: All persons (free agents) will be saved, even those who do not freely choose to be saved.

1. The Claim of Universalism: “All persons (free agents) will be saved.”

2. The Self-refutation: All persons (free agents) will be saved, even those who do not freely choose to be saved.

The Problem With UniversalismThe Problem With Universalism “When one says, ‘All will

be saved,’ my reason retorts, ‘Without their will, or with it?’ If I say, ‘Without their will,’ I at once perceive a contradiction; how can the supreme voluntary act of self-surrender be involuntary? If I say, ‘With their will,’ my reason replies, ‘How, if they will not give in?’” (The Problem of Pain, 106-107).

“When one says, ‘All will be saved,’ my reason retorts, ‘Without their will, or with it?’ If I say, ‘Without their will,’ I at once perceive a contradiction; how can the supreme voluntary act of self-surrender be involuntary? If I say, ‘With their will,’ my reason replies, ‘How, if they will not give in?’” (The Problem of Pain, 106-107).

III. Basic BeliefsIII. Basic BeliefsC. Anti-Foundationalism


E. Anti-Rationalism


G. Anti-Realism



J. Anti-Orthodoxy

K. Anti-Condemnationalism

L. Anti-Inerrantism



E. Anti-Rationalism


G. Anti-Realism



J. Anti-Orthodoxy

K. Anti-Condemnationalism

L. Anti-Inerrantism

Anti-Inerrantism “Incompleteness and error are part of the reality of

human beings” (McLaren, COS, 173). “Our listening to God’s voice [in Scripture] does not

need to be threatened by scientific research into Holy Scripture” (Grenz, Revisioning Evangelical Theology, 116).

“The Bible is revelation because it is the [errant] witness to and the [errant] record of the historical revelation of God” (Grenz, 133).

Anti-Inerrantism “Incompleteness and error are part of the reality of

human beings” (McLaren, COS, 173). “Our listening to God’s voice [in Scripture] does not

need to be threatened by scientific research into Holy Scripture” (Grenz, Revisioning Evangelical Theology, 116).

“The Bible is revelation because it is the [errant] witness to and the [errant] record of the historical revelation of God” (Grenz, 133).

Biblical ErrantismBiblical Errantism McClaren rejects the view that: “The Bible is

the ultimate authority…. There are no contradictions in it, and it is absolutely true and without errors in all it says. Give up these assertions, and you’re on a slippery slope to losing your whole faith” (McLaren, GO, 133-134).

“Hardly anyone notices the irony of resorting to the authority of extra-biblical words and concepts to justify one’s belief in the Bible’s ultimate authority” (GO, 164).

McClaren rejects the view that: “The Bible is the ultimate authority…. There are no contradictions in it, and it is absolutely true and without errors in all it says. Give up these assertions, and you’re on a slippery slope to losing your whole faith” (McLaren, GO, 133-134).

“Hardly anyone notices the irony of resorting to the authority of extra-biblical words and concepts to justify one’s belief in the Bible’s ultimate authority” (GO, 164).

1. The Claim of Errantists: “No extra-biblical words or ideas should be used to support the Bible.”

2. The Self-refutation: It is a truth (of Post-Modernism) that no extra-biblical words or ideas (like Post-Modernism) should be used to support the Bible.

1. The Claim of Errantists: “No extra-biblical words or ideas should be used to support the Bible.”

2. The Self-refutation: It is a truth (of Post-Modernism) that no extra-biblical words or ideas (like Post-Modernism) should be used to support the Bible.

1. The Claim of Errantists: “No human writing is without error.”

2. The Self-refutation: Emergent human writing is without error when it claims that no human writing is without error.

1. The Claim of Errantists: “No human writing is without error.”

2. The Self-refutation: Emergent human writing is without error when it claims that no human writing is without error.

The Foundation of Inerrantism 1. God cannot err.

2. The Bible is the Word of God.

3. Therefore, the Bible cannot error.

The Foundation of Inerrantism 1. God cannot err.

2. The Bible is the Word of God.

3. Therefore, the Bible cannot error.

The Thesis:The Thesis: The Thesis:The Thesis:

The Bible Which isThe Bible Which is

the Word ofthe Word ofGod Cannot Err.God Cannot Err.

The Bible Which isThe Bible Which is

the Word ofthe Word ofGod Cannot Err.God Cannot Err.

The Logic:The Logic:The Logic:The Logic:The Bible Which isThe Bible Which isThe Bible Which isThe Bible Which is

God Cannot Err.God Cannot Err. God Cannot Err.God Cannot Err.

the Word ofthe Word ofthe Word ofthe Word of

To deny this, one must either--To deny this, one must either--

A. Deny “God cannot error,” or-

B. Deny “The Bible is the Word of God,” or-

C. Deny both A and B.

A. Deny “God cannot error,” or-

B. Deny “The Bible is the Word of God,” or-

C. Deny both A and B.

But God Cannot But God Cannot Err:Err:

Jesus declared:Jesus declared: "Your Word is "Your Word is truth." (Jn. 17:17)truth." (Jn. 17:17)Jesus declared:Jesus declared: "Your Word is "Your Word is truth." (Jn. 17:17)truth." (Jn. 17:17)

Hebrews affirmedHebrews affirmed:: "It is impossible "It is impossible for God to lie." (6:18)for God to lie." (6:18)Hebrews affirmedHebrews affirmed:: "It is impossible "It is impossible for God to lie." (6:18)for God to lie." (6:18)

The psalmist affirmed:The psalmist affirmed: "The "The sum of your word is truth.” sum of your word is truth.” (119:160)(119:160)

The psalmist affirmed:The psalmist affirmed: "The "The sum of your word is truth.” sum of your word is truth.” (119:160)(119:160)Paul proclaimed:Paul proclaimed: "Let God be "Let God be true…." (Rom. 3:4) "The God who true…." (Rom. 3:4) "The God who cannot lie." (Titus 1:2)cannot lie." (Titus 1:2)

Paul proclaimed:Paul proclaimed: "Let God be "Let God be true…." (Rom. 3:4) "The God who true…." (Rom. 3:4) "The God who cannot lie." (Titus 1:2)cannot lie." (Titus 1:2)

The Bible is the Word of The Bible is the Word of GodGod

The Bible is the Word of The Bible is the Word of GodGod

"If he called them gods, unto whom "If he called them gods, unto whom the word of the word of God God came, and the came, and the scripturescripture cannot be broken." cannot be broken." (Jn.10:34-35) (Jn.10:34-35)

““Laying aside the commandment of God, you hold Laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the traditions of men…, making the traditions of men…, making the word of Godthe word of God of no effect through your traditions.” (Mk. 7:8, 13) of no effect through your traditions.” (Mk. 7:8, 13)

""All scripture All scripture is givenis given by inspiration of God…." by inspiration of God…."(2 (2 Tim. 3:16) Tim. 3:16)

““Not as though Not as though the word of Godthe word of God hath taken none hath taken none effect.” (Rom. 9:6) effect.” (Rom. 9:6)

“’“’It isIt is written written’…by ’…by every word that proceeds out of every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.”the mouth of God.” (Mt. 4:4) (Mt. 4:4)

"If he called them gods, unto whom "If he called them gods, unto whom the word of the word of God God came, and the came, and the scripturescripture cannot be broken." cannot be broken." (Jn.10:34-35) (Jn.10:34-35)

““Laying aside the commandment of God, you hold Laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the traditions of men…, making the traditions of men…, making the word of Godthe word of God of no effect through your traditions.” (Mk. 7:8, 13) of no effect through your traditions.” (Mk. 7:8, 13)

""All scripture All scripture is givenis given by inspiration of God…." by inspiration of God…."(2 (2 Tim. 3:16) Tim. 3:16)

““Not as though Not as though the word of Godthe word of God hath taken none hath taken none effect.” (Rom. 9:6) effect.” (Rom. 9:6)

“’“’It isIt is written written’…by ’…by every word that proceeds out of every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.”the mouth of God.” (Mt. 4:4) (Mt. 4:4)

The Logic of The Logic of InerrantismInerrantismThe Logic of The Logic of InerrantismInerrantism

1.1.The Bible is the Word The Bible is the Word of God.of God.

2.2.God cannot err.God cannot err.

3.3.Hence, the Bible Hence, the Bible cannot err.cannot err.

1.1.The Bible is the Word The Bible is the Word of God.of God.

2.2.God cannot err.God cannot err.

3.3.Hence, the Bible Hence, the Bible cannot err.cannot err.

St. Augustine's St. Augustine's Dictum:Dictum:

St. Augustine's St. Augustine's Dictum:Dictum:

““If we are perplexed by If we are perplexed by any apparent any apparent contradiction in contradiction in Scripture, it is not Scripture, it is not allowable to say, The allowable to say, The author of this book is author of this book is mistaken; but either [1] mistaken; but either [1] the manuscript is faulty, the manuscript is faulty, or [2] the translation is or [2] the translation is wrong, or [3] you have wrong, or [3] you have not understood.”not understood.” (Augustine(Augustine, Reply to , Reply to Faustus 11.5Faustus 11.5))

““If we are perplexed by If we are perplexed by any apparent any apparent contradiction in contradiction in Scripture, it is not Scripture, it is not allowable to say, The allowable to say, The author of this book is author of this book is mistaken; but either [1] mistaken; but either [1] the manuscript is faulty, the manuscript is faulty, or [2] the translation is or [2] the translation is wrong, or [3] you have wrong, or [3] you have not understood.”not understood.” (Augustine(Augustine, Reply to , Reply to Faustus 11.5Faustus 11.5))

Emerging Problems with the Emergent Church

Emerging Problems with the Emergent Church

1. Its central claims are all self-defeating.2. It stands on the pinnacle of its own absolute and

relativizes everything else.3. It is an unorthodox creedal attack on orthodox creeds.4. It attacks modernism in the culture but is an example

of postmodernism in the church.5. In an attempt to reach the culture it capitulates to the

culture.7. In trying to be geared to the times, it is no longer

anchored to the Rock. 8. It is not an emerging church; it is really a submerging

church.

1. Its central claims are all self-defeating.2. It stands on the pinnacle of its own absolute and

relativizes everything else.3. It is an unorthodox creedal attack on orthodox creeds.4. It attacks modernism in the culture but is an example

of postmodernism in the church.5. In an attempt to reach the culture it capitulates to the

culture.7. In trying to be geared to the times, it is no longer

anchored to the Rock. 8. It is not an emerging church; it is really a submerging

church.

Answering an ObjectionAnswering an ObjectionEmergent Objection: No self-defeating

truth claims are being made.

Response: Either they are making such truth claims or they are not.

If they are, then they are self-defeating. If they are not, then why are they

writing books and attempting to convince people of the truth of their views?

Emergent Objection: No self-defeating truth claims are being made.

Response: Either they are making such truth claims or they are not.

If they are, then they are self-defeating. If they are not, then why are they

writing books and attempting to convince people of the truth of their views?

“You can argue with a man who says, ‘Rice is

unwholesome’: but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, ‘Rice is unwholesome, but I’m not saying

this is true.’ I feel that this surrender of the claim to truth has all

the air of an expedient adopted at the last moment. If [they]…do not claim to know any truths, ought they not to have warned us rather earlier of the fact? For really from all the books they have written…one would have got the idea that they were claiming to give a true account of things. The fact surely is that they nearly always are claiming to do so. The claim is surrendered only when the question discussed…is pressed; and when the crisis is over the claim is tacitly resumed” (Lewis, Miracles, 24).

“You can argue with a man who says, ‘Rice is

unwholesome’: but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, ‘Rice is unwholesome, but I’m not saying

this is true.’ I feel that this surrender of the claim to truth has all

the air of an expedient adopted at the last moment. If [they]…do not claim to know any truths, ought they not to have warned us rather earlier of the fact? For really from all the books they have written…one would have got the idea that they were claiming to give a true account of things. The fact surely is that they nearly always are claiming to do so. The claim is surrendered only when the question discussed…is pressed; and when the crisis is over the claim is tacitly resumed” (Lewis, Miracles, 24).

The Claim to Make no Truth ClaimThe Claim to Make no Truth Claim

To Re-title the Emergent Movement, It is not-- The Emergent Church but the Submergent ChurchA Manifesto of Hope but is a Declaration of DisasterRefocusing the Faith but Distorting the Faith Renewing the Center but Rejecting the CoreRepainting the Faith but Repudiating the FaithA Generous Orthodoxy but a Dangerous UnorthodoxyThe Church on the Other Side but is on the Other Side of the

ChurchA Primer on Post-Modernism but a Primer on the New ModernismGoing to Produce a New Kind of Christian by a New Kind of Non-

Christian

To Re-title the Emergent Movement, It is not-- The Emergent Church but the Submergent ChurchA Manifesto of Hope but is a Declaration of DisasterRefocusing the Faith but Distorting the Faith Renewing the Center but Rejecting the CoreRepainting the Faith but Repudiating the FaithA Generous Orthodoxy but a Dangerous UnorthodoxyThe Church on the Other Side but is on the Other Side of the

ChurchA Primer on Post-Modernism but a Primer on the New ModernismGoing to Produce a New Kind of Christian by a New Kind of Non-

Christian

Emergent Church: New LiberalismEmergent Church: New Liberalism

“The emergent church is the latest version of liberalism. The only difference is that the old liberalism accommodated modernity and the new liberalism accommodates postmodernity” (Mark Driscoll, Confessions of a Reformation REV, 21).

“The emergent church is the latest version of liberalism. The only difference is that the old liberalism accommodated modernity and the new liberalism accommodates postmodernity” (Mark Driscoll, Confessions of a Reformation REV, 21).

The Emergent Church is the Submergent ChurchThe Emergent Church is the Submergent Church

The Emergent Church is built on sand

and will not stand.Christ’s Church is build

on Stone, And it can not be

overthrown. (Matt. 16:16-18)

The Emergent Church is built on sand

and will not stand.Christ’s Church is build

on Stone, And it can not be

overthrown. (Matt. 16:16-18)

Works Evaluating EmergentsWorks Evaluating EmergentsAdler, Mortimer. Truth in Religion.Carson, D. A. Becoming Conversant with the

Emerging Church.Carlson, Jason. “My Journey Into and Out Of the

Emergent Church.” Driscoll, Mark. Confessions of a Reformation REV.Howe, Thomas ed., Christian Apologetics Kimball, Dan. The Emerging Church.Rofle, Kevin, Here We Stand.Smith, R. Scott Truth and The New Kind of Christian.Geisler, Norman. DVD’s (InternationalLegacy.org).

Adler, Mortimer. Truth in Religion.Carson, D. A. Becoming Conversant with the

Emerging Church.Carlson, Jason. “My Journey Into and Out Of the

Emergent Church.” Driscoll, Mark. Confessions of a Reformation REV.Howe, Thomas ed., Christian Apologetics Kimball, Dan. The Emerging Church.Rofle, Kevin, Here We Stand.Smith, R. Scott Truth and The New Kind of Christian.Geisler, Norman. DVD’s (InternationalLegacy.org).

International LEGACY Institute

The Essential

ChristianTrainer with Emergent

Church Bonus Lecture

The Essential

ChristianTrainer with Emergent

Church Bonus Lecture

By:

Dr. Norman L. GeislerBy:

Dr. Norman L. Geisler

$10.

00Conference

Special!

$10.

00Conference

Special!

5 LECTURE SERIES!5 LECTURE SERIES!

1. Exposing the Emergent Church2. Moral Absolutes3. Absolute Truth4. The Pillars of the Faith5. The Essential Doctrines of the Faith

1. Exposing the Emergent Church2. Moral Absolutes3. Absolute Truth4. The Pillars of the Faith5. The Essential Doctrines of the Faith

$ 50.00 Value

Free online courses from our “Scholars Alliance”

@ www.InternationalLegacy.org

Free online courses from our “Scholars Alliance”

@ www.InternationalLegacy.org

Donald Miller, Blue Like JazzDonald Miller, Blue Like Jazz

Tritheism heresy: “I asked him if he believed that the Trinity represented three separate persons who are also one” (202).

Tritheism heresy: “I asked him if he believed that the Trinity represented three separate persons who are also one” (202).

the emergent church: emergence or emergency? copyright by norman l. geisler 2008

Documents