The Splintering of Evangelicalism is Noisy
February 14th, 2008 § 12 Comments
Here are two blogs that offer help for those trying to understand current evangelical divisions, and another blog that offers . . . well . . .
Let’s accentuate the positive.
Kingdomgrace takes up the question What is ministry? here, here, and here. Her gift is for spotting the right question, inviting comment, and summarizing the results. In this case, she sees that many evangelicals view the concept of ministry differently — some as a profession, others as a way of life. She lays the differences on the table and lets people talk about them. When she infuses controversy into the discussion, she restores focus instead of inciting reaction. She is, in other words, a leader who helps a group get smarter.
I believe Spirit-led people will follow leaders like her.
Jollyblogger also offers help, commenting on the merchandising of Jesus here and here. Jollyblogger is onto the fact that marketing has worn out its welcome with the young. I think the division between generations of evangelicals is partly a result of older generations’ love for the extravaganzas and bombast of the TV aesthetic. The young aren’t buying.
The divisions are treated in a measured way at Jollyblogger, and he concludes that “the critics of the franchise church are spot on – this is an argument against the commodification of the faith and an argument to engage people as people, not prospects and to engage them as human beings, not as a part of an assembly line process.”
Again, I think Jollyblogger is the type of leader Spirit-led people will heed.
The clashes of perspective shown in these posts help us understand why evangelicals are splintering. Many no longer hold common definitions of such basic concepts as kingdom work, compromise with the world, and evangelism. What is considered credible among some evangelicals, like marketing, is considered pathetic among others. The disagreements are often grave.
Which is why following these discussions can put a knot in your gut. Can we rebuild an evangelical consensus on these issues? If we’re unclear on such basic matters, how can we form vibrant communities?
And then you read Josh Brown here.
Or rather, you read him if you can stomach his replacement of argumentation with scatology. Brown wants to deal with misconceptions about emergents, and deal with them he does. With flamethrowers. Brown not only blasts critics of emergents, but insults anyone who dares even pose questions in the comments.
The Lord has blessed evangelicals with an emergent conversation that is larger than Brown’s rhetoric. If he really did speak for emergents, the prospects for rebuilding an evangelical consensus would be nil. But, while I wonder whether he speaks for Emergent Village, I can’t believe emergents will listen too long to his rantings.
I believe evangelicals can become members of one another in Christ again — in a way that is not merely notional but practical. I believe they not only can, but they will. The leaders are out there.
This joining will not take place, however, as a result of blogs, books, or conferences. It will not be organized by yet another national movement. It will grow as individual Christians commit to each other in local churches — churches they recognize to be faulty. Their joining will come at the price of their complaints. Eventually, they will tire of nursing their wounds. They’ll ignore the abstractions of zealots and seek strength from emotions other than anger. They will establish bonds with those communities that teach the Bible, and strive to live in the power of the risen Christ.
They will do this because they have the Holy Spirit, who sovereignly nourishes the body of Christ (Ephesians 4.1-6). The splintering of evangelicalism may be noisy, but it will prove temporary.
thanks for the link. i always appreciate it when tucker carlson-eque people share their 2 cents.
btw . . . http://orlandefc.org/content/category/9/39/66/
it kind of makes you look pathetic and desperate to get noticed.
do you know josh outside of the single blog post you read? surely you wouldn’t go out of your way to blackball him if you didn’t. did you even take the time to read all the posts and all the comments on this subject? or did you just see that he was getting some hits and catching some attention that you thought you could piggyback off of?
i think i know the answer. . .but. . .just asking.
You spoke my heart! Thank you for sharing your incredibly wise words of encouragement in your last two paragraphs! They are my very prayer for Jesus’ church. Proverbs 11:30 “The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, And he who is wise wins souls.”
Blake,
“do you know [Matt] outside of the single blog post you read? surely you wouldn’t go out of your way to blackball him if you didn’t. did you even take the time to read all the posts and all the comments on this subject?”
@lisa. haha. i’m not sure what you’re trying to do there. maybe avoid my point? i wasn’t blackballing matt at all just posing some questions. i’ll humor you though. i did read the post and all the comments. i don’t know matt at all outside this blog. i was just asking a question. the manner in which he called josh out begged those questions and i took the liberty to ask them. what’s so wrong with that?
happy?
Blake,
Fair questions. I don’t know Josh outside his blog, and as you say I called him out in a pretty rough manner. But I did read several items on his blog, and I followed the comments on his post. I started out wanting to know what he thought of misconceptions about emergents. He’s brilliantly funny. But the shock jock thing won’t solve any problems.
I figure blogs are public spaces. If a guy’s cussing people out in public, he’s going to hear about it. Especially if he wants to talk about Christ.
As for attention, I’m all for it, or I wouldn’t be blogging. I want people to know that the emergent conversation is worth paying attention to, even if they don’t agree with all of it.
Thanks for stopping by.
@mraley. fair enough. but i think if you read all the posts and all the comments it’s easy to see where josh is coming from and how it just got put out with it all. the conversation was trucking along just fine until the pot shot people came along. i think that says something.
as for the profanity. i respect your position, but when i read jesus’ reaction to some of the pious gas bags of his day and i understand the greek and the context i can’t help but think that his use of language might be equivalent to our “cuss words.” i think we just need to lighten up. it’s not that big of a deal. we’ll likely disagree on this, but i definitely think the use of profanity doesn’t warrant such a scathing comment. i could think of a whole host of things that are actually affecting other people that we could get upset over–and it might actually be worth it (war, poverty, corporate irresponsibility, violence…, etc.)
see what i mean?
Blake, I do see what you mean. You’re right to isolate the profanity issue. I wouldn’t fault anyone for using profanity. I fault Josh for wasting it. As you say, the Bible has extreme vulgarity in it because there are such ugly things in this world. But the contents of Josh’s email inbox don’t rise to that level.
The category of “pot shot people” is tricky in this regard. I saw some fair questions in the comments to Josh’s post that got flamed. That aggression was offensive to me. I could’ve assumed you were a pot shot person, for instance, and would’ve been a poorer man for missing this dialogue.
Jesus probably had more freedom to use invective because he knew people’s hearts. When we use it too freely, we do harm. For what it’s worth, I’m certain Josh wants good things. But no one gets a pass on aggression like that. Especially not someone with as much intelligence and heart as Josh.
i still disagree about jesus and profanity, but that’s really not a big deal. it should never be.
as far as people getting flamed or whatever i can see how someone might get that impression. but again, if you read all the posts and all the comments it’s hard to not to understand where josh is coming from. i guess it helps that i know josh somewhat, but regardless, we’re all human and i know if i got cornered on my own blog and ganged up on i’d probably get a little but off….that’s all i’m saying.
sorry about calling you tucker carlson.
Forgiven. But next time, could I at least be Hannity?
I’ll be a regular reader of yours, and not to take shots either.