Thursday, September 11, 2008

Reflections on the Emergent Church: Is Propositional Truth Outdated?

I have yet to post anything in regards to the Emergent Church and so I'll humbly admit that any assessments or feedback that are given in regards to this post and those in the future are welcome. I will begin this post by saying that I am in no way claiming to hold all of the answers in regards to the Emergent Church or even it's relation to what Scripture says. But, I believe I know that logically and propositionally the Bible speaks very well that all things of which it says are true should therefore be held in higher esteem than which the Emergent Church deems. The main problems I have with the Emergent Church after reading a few books by some of its leading figures such as, Rob Bell, Doug Pagitt, Tony Jones, Brian McLaren, and Dave Tomlinson is that there seems to be a major shift from objective propositional truth built on the Scriptures to subjective experience built on the existential feelings of man. You might be asking what propositional biblical truth actually is. Propositional biblical truth is that which is specific and true about Jesus Christ's life and work throughout the Bible. From the beginning of the Old Testament all the way to through the end of the New Testament; Christ's life, works, death, and resurrection are the centerpiece of which salvation is built and sustained. So what is the problem here? Would not everyone in the Emergent Church confess to these truths? You would think, but the problem does not rest with their admittance to the biblical truth of Christ. Relevance of the truth in today's culture is what makes it difficult for those in this movement to accept biblical truth as propositional rather than what they believe as subjective diversity. Propositional truth to the Emergent communities divides, raises walls, closes conversation, and leaves people out of the discussion. When I think about their reasoning for wanting to re-translate all of the biblical language used in Scripture so that others will not be offended in order to be thought of more highly, it just appears cowardly. The emphasis is not on the foundational facts of the Gospel, but in being in relationship with Jesus. Making a propositional statement and not having propositional truth to back it up does not make logical sense. How can you believe in something and deny objective facts upholding the statement by which you claim to be true. The Emergent Church I believe is now more than ever about orthopraxy rather than orthodoxy. Instead of filtering the methods the local church would use to reach people with the Gospel through the Word of God first, God's Word is filtered through pragmatic exercises. I believe the thinking of the "modern" Emergent church can be summarized this way: The preference for ethics over doctrine, the reservations about God's wrath and judgment, the perceived need to re-translate the Christian faith for a new time, the devaluing of propositional truths, the chastisement of firm doctrinal boundaries, the understanding of missions as social compassion and not conversion (I will reflect on all of these six issues over the next few weeks) - these happen to all be impulses of the modern world. Any spokesman or leading figure in the Emergent movement has the capability to grab anyone's attention in regards to opening up conversation about the propositional truths of God and His Word. They are believed to be outdated and outweighed by the current culture and the times that are ever-changing. Propositional truth to the Emergent Church is just that, subjective according to the subjected felt needs of the conversation. Why does this matter for our life in Christ? If the Bible's meaning is open for discussion, then how I treat my wife and those around me all depends on how I selfishly feel in that moment rather than what the objective truth of Scripture says. Propositional truth is not outdated nor will it ever change as it reflects the character of God in that He is immutable and does not change either in His promises that He has made. If Scripture's truth is not definite, there are more issues at stake than just how we translate the message of Jesus Christ to those around us.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Steven, what do you mean by subjectivity/objectivity? How are we to distinguish these terms? Are they independent from each other, or dependent? They have different meanings throughout the history of ideas. We must not conflate their meanings by assuming the terms have a single meaning. If we do, we run the risk of equivocation.

The Gillums said...

Unless it was too vague Joey, I am pretty clear that subjectivity in regards to the Emergent Church in what I posted is taking the objective or unchanging truth of God and viewing it as subjective or changing. They are different terms from each other in regards to what I just stated. I don't think I confused the terms. I mean come on, let's not make this harder than it is. I think you know exactly what I mean unless you are getting at something else; which if you are I would like you to please state it clearer than you have ( I know you are a Phil. major. That's why I said that :-) ). Throughout the history of ideas we understand re-defining things is not a oversimplification for those who seem to get "rubbed" wrong by unchanging truth.