The emergent church

[fluffy]

You are speaking as if the traditional Church is standing by in jealousy and wonder over how they can become like the liberal churches and increase membership. The traditional Church is not perplexed with what is going on. The Bible prophesied of a great apostasy. The liberal churches are scorned in the traditional Church, considered heretical. So, obviously, the traditional Church isn't going to sell out merely to gain more members. Different priorities, as I mentioned in an earlier post.

That's not what I said at all. I asked a couple of times what the traditional chruches thought about the drop in their numbers and if they panned to do anything about it. Now I'm wondering about your reluctance to offer a straight answer to a straight question.

I don't have a problem with the Emergent Church as some New Age concept. I have a problem with it pretending to be Christian.

Honestly to me it sounds like you have a problem with anyone outside your church studying christian principles in any form other than what you preach, which brings me back to the folly of thinking you're the only ones who have it right. You have your way of doing things to be sure, that doesn't mean that all the other ways are wrong, they're just different than yours, and the fact that they are not meeting your standards is your problem, not God's.

[cliffy1]

[concernie]

That's not what I said at all. I asked a couple of times what the traditional chruches thought about the drop in their numbers and if they panned to do anything about it. Now I'm wondering about your reluctance to offer a straight answer to a straight question.

What can traditional Churches do about it? They have not caused the drop in membership. Society has forgotten God. What more do you want? I can't make it any more clear.

Honestly to me it sounds like you have a problem with anyone outside your church studying christian principles in any form other than what you preach, which brings me back to the folly of thinking you're the only ones who have it right. You have your way of doing things to be sure, that doesn't mean that all the other ways are wrong, they're just different than yours, and the fact that they are not meeting your standards is your problem, not God's.

For some reason, you think you are going to get an absolutist to think like a relativist. It's not going to happen. Fundies aren't going to stop thinking in absolutes just because there is a drop in membership. The Bible is clear that Christ is the only way to God. You cannot deny this if you are a Christian.

Please list some absolutes of your version of Christianity along with the "heretical" interpretations of the emergent church.

For starters, as I mentioned above, the concept of Christ being the exclusive way to God.

How can one argue the emergent church is not Christian when its attitude is more Jesus-like?

Are you implying that Christ was a liberal? How is the emergent church more Christ-like than others? Even better, how is it Christ-like at all?

cliffy, the answer to the question posed in your cartoon, "Where is he (the Pope) getting these ideas?" is the Second Vatican Council.

[cliffy1]

Are you implying that Christ was a liberal? How is the emergent church more Christ-like than others? Even better, how is it Christ-like at all?

Jesus was a bleeding heart, long haired, anti-establishment, anti-religious, liberal hippy freak; everything Conservatives hate.

cliffy, the answer to the question posed in your cartoon, "Where is he (the Pope) getting these ideas?" is the Second Vatican Council.

No, he got the idea from Jesus. Says so right in the bible: love thy neighbour, take care of the infirm, feed the poor, and forgive the sinner. It's all there.

Oh, and judge not lest ye shall be judged. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

[concernie]

Jesus was a bleeding heart, long haired, anti-establishment, anti-religious, liberal hippy freak; everything Conservatives hate.

Evidence?

No, he got the idea from Jesus. Says so right in the bible: love thy neighbour, take care of the infirm, feed the poor, and forgive the sinner. It's all there.

Oh, and judge not lest ye shall be judged. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Yes, Jesus did say "love thy neighbour." But you take it out of context and let those words trump the other things He said. You can't pick and choose from the Bible the things you like and discard the things you don't like. If you want to do that, I suggest you attend an emergent church, where picking and choosing is all they do.

[fluffy]

What can traditional Churches do about it? They have not caused the drop in membership. Society has forgotten God. What more do you want? I can't make it any more clear.

That's the way it looks from within the church, and it's completely understandable. The view from without is a little different, there are people who have left the traditional church for reasons far from society's decline.

What more do I want? Nothing, thanks. In a roundabout way you have answered my question. You paint the emerging churches as a "watered down" version of Christianity, and therefore inferior. I submit that the version of Christianity that the traditional churches offer was not meeting the needs of many of those who have left, in particular those who have moved to other churches more liberal in their theology. The tenacity with which the traditional churches hold on to their ways is in itself responsible for a significant percentage of departing members, members who view those ways as out of date. I doubt we will ever agree on the actual reasons, however having talked firsthand with many "expatriates" of the traditional church I am confident that my view is not inaccurate. I respect your choice to believe what you do, however your intonation that those who do not share your views are somehow getting it wrong serves quite well to illustrate a point that I have tried to make repeatedly in this discussion, that there really is no right and wrong when it comes to spiritual beliefs other than the choices we make for ourselves, and that to foist our ideas of right and wrong onto others is well, wrong.

[concernie]

I submit that the version of Christianity that the traditional churches offer was not meeting the needs of many of those who have left, in particular those who have moved to other churches more liberal in their theology.

Seems more likely that their "needs" changed first. In other words, people no longer wanted to hear the truth but instead desired to have their ears tickled, so they found a church that told them what they wanted to hear. Enter the apostate one-world church.

The tenacity with which the traditional churches hold on to their ways is in itself responsible for a significant percentage of departing members, members who view those ways as out of date.

Unlikely considering a massive drop in clergy membership following the liberalizing effect of the Second Vatican Council (1965). The Catholic Church lost a huge number of parishioners due to the Second Vatican Council as well. If your theory were true, the opposite would have happened. Between 1965 and 2002, the number of seminarians dropped from 49,000 to 4,700, a decline of over 90 per cent.

[fluffy]

Seems more likely that their "needs" changed first. In other words, people no longer wanted to hear the truth but instead desired to have their ears tickled, so they found a church that told them what they wanted to hear. Enter the apostate one-world church.

That most certainly is a possibility, but the way you bandy about with absolutes such as "truth" just indicates the inflexibility of which I speak. People these days are much more aware of the numerous "truths" available to them.

Unlikely considering a massive drop in clergy membership following the liberalizing effect of the Second Vatican Council (1965). The Catholic Church lost a huge number of parishioners due to the Second Vatican Council as well. If your theory were true, the opposite would have happened. Between 1965 and 2002, the number of seminarians dropped from 49,000 to 4,700, a decline of over 90 per cent.

There is still a lot of dispute as to just why this exodus of clergy occurred. There were as many saying the Second Council changed too little as there were saying it changed too much, so one theory is as good as the next in this case. While the intent behind them leaving is still open for determination, a major effect of that departure was that its outward appearance instilled great doubt in the public eye as to the stability of the inner workings of the Catholic church. Add to that some gross miscalculations like the Papal condemnation of birth control even within the sanctity of marriage and you've got the makings of a PR disaster.

[Glacier]

I see some good points on all sides here, but some weaker arguments as well.

The claim has been made that Emergent Churches are increasing in numbers while other Christian denominations are decreasing, but is this really true? According to an atheist-feminist discussion I saw a few weeks back, the atheists were decrying the "fact" that the liberal churches were declining faster than the more conservative denominations. Most other sources espouse this same "fact." Clearly you both can't be right, but if I were a betting man, I'd bet against you guys on this one.

Either way, Islam has been the world's fastest growing religion since its inception. Clearly they are the only ones doing it right, while Christians, humanists, Hindus, etc. are doing it wrong.

It's interesting that in the Bible:

18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.
19"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."

If Christianity is declining in the west (as I think we can all agree that it is doing in general), then why is this the case? I would submit that it's because Christians are not obeying the words of Jesus.

Why aren't people obeying the Jesus' teachings even though they claim to be following him? Because they they have become lukewarm and have forgotten that love is more important than pomp and circumstance.

John 15:10 - If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commands and remain in his love.

John 14:15 - Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them."

Matt. 23:36-40 - 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... rsion=NKJV

[cliffy1]

Yes, Jesus did say "love thy neighbour." But you take it out of context and let those words trump the other things He said. You can't pick and choose from the Bible the things you like and discard the things you don't like. If you want to do that, I suggest you attend an emergent church, where picking and choosing is all they do.

Yes I can because I think the bible is a work of fiction with some very useful bits to live life by. Being a former catholic, I also have no use for religion or the church which I found insulted my intelligence and there doctrines were detrimental to humanity. I hate being pigeon holed but sometimes, when it suits the situation, I tell people I'm a born again pagan. I find native spirituality much more rewarding intellectually and spiritually than Paulianity.

[cliffy1]

If Christianity is declining in the west (as I think we can all agree that it is doing in general), then why is this the case? I would submit that it's because Christians are not obeying the words of Jesus.

So called Christians ignore what Jesus said and prefer to focus on what Paul said.Which is why I call that religion Paulianity. As far as I'm concerned, Paul screwed the pooch. He was too busy building a church built on the deification of Jesus and not on his teachings. Jesus was about The Father, not about worshiping Jesus. He came to bring a new covenant with god, not put himself before god. He chastised the self righteous, a lesson most so call Christians seem hell bent on ignoring. He was not concerned so much with personal salvation as he was with the greater good of all people (as in "love thy neighbour as thyself"). Paul was an opportunist and control freak. His great revelation on the road to Damascus was that for every Christian he persecuted 10 more would pop up, so he decided it would be better to control the Christians and change it from a spiritual movement based on the teachings of Jesus to a religion about Jesus.

[Nebula]

Born again pagan, eh? I've been looking at Druid Fundamentalism.

[cliffy1]

Born again pagan, eh? I've been looking at Druid Fundamentalism.

Actually, I'm the high priest of spiritual anarchism. I have a following of one - me.

I saw a bumper sticker once that said "Jesus was the first anarchist". It struck me as being rather profound. After looking into some of the stuff he supposedly said and did, I came to the conclusion that the bumper sticker was right. If you have an open mind, you never know where the truth will show up.

[Nebula]

Best way to be, cliffy.

[cliffy1]

Best way to be, cliffy.

At the core of our reality, life is a solo journey. We may occasionally share our journey, but it is, in the end, only ours to make sense of.... or not. What others think about it is completely irrelevant.