As one who is “in” the emerging conversation here is what i believe…
Please feel free to comment.

iggy

Have you read the theological statements from an “emerging church” I linked to? I would like to get your take on them.

Neil

The Mormon?
The divorced ones?

Even Rush Limbaugh is have trouble picking a person to back!

I also am looking at a Dem for pres…

iggy

Ditto what MG said on the pro life democrat.

I have been told to my face that you can’t be a democrat and s Christian. Fortunately, for that person, I believe in non-violence

In my former life I was as far to the right as you could get. My parents were in the John Birch Society…..if that tells you anything

Bruce

I am not saying it is wrong. You must decide that for yourself. It is not my right nor my perogative to convince people how to vote, that is up to their conscience.

I only encourage my congregation to do the same.

About politics…what would you recommend for me? I disagree with the Republican national platform on every issue except for abortion (immigration, comprehensive healthcare, supply-side economics, preemptive war, etc.)

Should I be an independent? And how on earth is this connected to distancing myself from emergents?

I suspect, in the end, you have a hard time conceiving of Christians not sharing your political views…

I agree. IN fact if one is penal substitutional “only” then we should toss out the Gospel of mark that teaches Christus Victor… which historically has deeper roots than substitutional atonement (which the idea of “atonement” in the New Testament is a bit out of place contrasted to the idea that IS taught being “propitiation”)

So I wonder why some limit what happened on the cross to a modernist view of “law and justice’ as opposed to the historic view of the suffering Servant..(again the theme of Mark).

Also, McLaren does not deny the substitutionary atonement nor hell… as his views parallel N.T. Wright and G. K. Chesterton which neither of them denied these things.

Now, I guess it is that IF some ask questions, a fundamentalist hates it… in that I see many fundamentalist border on being more “cultic” than Christian as God is big enough to take our toughest questions… and to ask a question is not a sin… and to ask questions that make us go back and really look to see if what we believe is biblical or not should be commended not attacked and taken as denial or a lack of faith.

iggy

In essence, I think that’s what a lot Fundamentalism is saying. They’re not looking for fundamentals that bring unity. They’re looking for fundamentals that divide.

About fundamentalism, MG, Thanks for the answer. I think that what scares me about the emergent conversation is that it seems many (not all) are departing from one of the five ‘fundamentals’ or ‘non negotiables’ as they deconstruct what Jesus really came here for (see Brian McLaren’s view of the cross).

And to be fair, as Bruce intimated, people are individuals, responsible for their own views. So Brian McLaren and others in the emergent hierarchy may hold different views than Eddie Emergent. I get that.

I find a disturbing corelation between the politics of I can be pro life and a democrat and distancing ones self from the leaders of the ‘conversation’ to say we are emergent, but we do believe in a literal heaven and a literal hell. Thats why I think that Driscoll is moving away from or being pushed out of (depending on how you see it) the Emergent conversation.

Good comment.

For the most part I see that 2 has morphed into 3. MY wife and I were talking about this and we only knew one pastor who would have considered fundamentalist, yet not a legalist.

Let me know where you land. I too am a pro life, orthodox democrat. I believe I am the only one in NW Ohio I am sure there are more but I have not met them yet.

Bruce