I was a young adult when the classic movie “The Karate Kid” came out. It was great fun watching the underdog succeed. I appreciate it more, however, for the funny yet wise sayings of Mr. Miyagi.
One came to mind while I was reading chapter 2 and 3 of TNC. “You walk down the street. Right side, safe. Left side safe. You walk in middle; squish like grape.” The moral of the story? The third way that Tony speaks about regularly in this book is stinking dangerous!
Tony tries desperately to compare this third way with the Protestant Reformation, and he is left wanting. During this reformation, he forgets that the true church, that had existed for 1500 years (much of it underground) was the lava that burst forth through the crust which was the Apostate Roman Catholic System.
Martin Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Tyndale, and others, for all their foibles, were men who were not seeking a third way, rather, they were seeking God’s way in coming out of the prison system of the false Church of Rome.
During this ’soul searching’ comparison, a few things come out about Tony and Emergent. First, and one that really calls into question whether these people are really Christians at all is the attack on the truth of the scripture. Tony will say that these are people having a conversation, but on page 19, like Rob Bell does in his book Velvet Elvis, Tony slyly calls into question whether the Bible can be trusted.
Tony argues that emergents desire to question the foundations, even the Bible. In doing so, He calls God a liar. He also opens the door to deconstruct the Bible like it is some normal book of literature. In fact, Tony does not see the Bible as a Holy Book, rather, He sees it as propaganda. Page 45 is very telling, where Tony compares the Bible to Mao’s little red book. Is the Bible really to be reduced to this type of propaganda?
Back to the third way. On page 45, he sets the stage, calling into question reading the Bible in a healthy way, saying that most evangelicals read the Bible to prove their views to be right concerning homosexuals and women in leadership. These would be those on the right, both politically and religiously, those rotten fundamentalists. Then those on the left, both religiously and politically, those mainliners, who view the Bible with skepticism. These groups fight a continual tug of war. They fight between church polity, political parties, right interpretation of scriptures, social issues, and cultures. These wars between right and left have turned off these emergents, causing them to want to drop out. Then there is the third way.
The third way is to not be beholden to any one church- the church is organic, and as we cultivate our way through life we find different places in our culture that we can see God, and therefore those things are right and good. There is no sacred and secular- everything is sacred! We do not want to impact culture, nor do we want culture to impact us. Really, there is no culture. We want to do things in the way of Jesus, how he loved and accepted anybody.
The thought of wrath and judgement does not align with their view of Christ, so they leave that part out. Those in the third way do not hold to any political parties, rather, they pick and choose which planks are important to them. They don’t like the parties, (but they will vote for Obama because of a sense that he is anti-establishment, and brings a subjective feel of hope) Of course the Bible is a sacred text, but the third way stays away from terms like inerrant and sufficient, they do not believe that it is sufficient for doctrine.
They believe that it is living, not in the way that it says, but in the way that culture (which does not exist) can help us understand that Paul did not really mean that women shouldn’t be leaders in Church, or that homosexuality is a sin that will separate from God. No, homosexuality is to be honored and understood, and we should be accepting. After all, Jesus is a welcoming guy. He is our good buddy in the sky. He is not going to judge us, because we are joining with him to bring our picture of his kingdom here to earth.
Mr. Miayagi had it right. The emergents Third way is unsafe (just the way they like it) Unfortunately, they will wind up being squished like the proverbial grape when that truck of judgement and wrath that they do not believe in runs them over.
~ Pastorboy
Doug
pastorboy
And here’s one rather interesting way that what they think may lead to.
http://relevantchristian.wordpress.com/2008/03/16/because-the-bible-says-sostupid-things-christians-say/
“Take all that energy and try to live these things out. Love the gay person who wants the legal right to get married. I dare you. Be kind to the Lesbian who wants to adopt. Be patient with all the liberals. I know, “I’m just spewing social gospel now.” But I’m telling you, you’re not going to impact me all that much without these things in your life. You won’t impact anyone. God won’t be impressed.”
So, is this “Christ-likeness; Emergent Style”? That they only ways they will acknowledge a fellow-Christian’s Christianity is if they will follow the liberal party line?
Dude…..ever heard of ‘love your neighbor as yourself’?
That’s a paraphrase by the way….but it has the same meaning as the KJV.
And another side not…I was speaking in response to Jazzact.
I do not agree with Tony Jones either….although I don’t know much about what he is teaching.
Peace
–Dude…..ever heard of ‘love your neighbor as yourself’?–
Yes, I have, thanks for asking.
Now, last I checked, one part of “loving my neighbor” has to with NOT encouraging them to live in sin.
Also, I find it a bit disingenuous, Jimmy, that your name should link to a blog that in a recent entry made a big to-do about “stupid things Christians say” while pretty much belittling any attempt to find something true in scripture, but you feel free to open up your first comment here with a biblical passage.
So, which is it? Should I love my neighbor as myself “Because the Bible says so”, or is that one of those “stupid things Christians say”?
OH Jazz,
That post that you disparage had Scripture all through it. That “liberal” list is called the Fruit of the Spirit from Galatians 5 vs. 22. Nothing in there about encouraging anyone to sin. Perhaps, you missed it by accident, perhaps you lied on purpose I don’t know. Either way, I feel badly for you. Just please don’t lie about me again to support some agenda that you have against me.
BTW, Jazz,
I’m sorry you don’t think we should love the gay person or the person more conservative than us. I’m sorry you don’t believe that faith without works (the right kind of works) is dead. Someone else who knew Jesus said that.
–That post that you disparage had Scripture all through it.–
Really.
http://www.relevantchristian.com/
I ask any reading these comments to read the article in dispute, which I have tried to provide a link to above, and see where how it has “Scripture all through it”. There is a list of the fruits of the Spirit, which is good, but outside of that I see no other scripture used.
–Nothing in there about encouraging anyone to sin. Perhaps, you missed it by accident, perhaps you lied on purpose I don’t know. Either way, I feel badly for you. Just please don’t lie about me again to support some agenda that you have against me.–
If you think I have misunderstood and misrepresented you, here is your chance to clarify. Tell us, please, what you meant by your comments, what in your mind would be consider loving behavior to gay people wanting to legalize their ideas of marriage, and lesbians wanting to adopt children.
–I’m sorry you don’t think we should love the gay person or the person more conservative than us.–
I’ve already responded to this accusation, and will not give it any more credence.
I had brother Joe Martino visit my blog the other day. He has very interesting way of demonstrating that fruit of the Spirit.
http://bemidbar.org/2008/03/19/pragmatism-as-the-new-test-of-truth/
Joe is all about luv, and he says the smartest things too.
Perhaps, reburris, but in regards to this particular discussion here, if I have misunderstood him, I’d like to know what he really is intending to say. I hope he does clarify it.
By all means, clarity is hard to beat!
Jazz,
Can you not love a person without encouraging them to sin? I’m pretty sure Jesus loved people without encouraging them to sin. You are the one who has brought an accusation, now back it up. Where do I say encourage someone to sin? I say love them. Love the person who is more liberal than you and the person who is more conservative than you. Can you love an acoholic without encouraging them to sin? Of course you can. Can you love a self righteous jerk with a blog? Of course you can.
Loving someone doesn’t mean you have to encourage them to sin, I’m sorry you equate the two. Obviously, definitions matter, and I guess you and I are defining love differently.
BTW Jazz,
I’ll not be coming back here, but if you want me you know where to find me.
So, in other words, Joe, when you say “Love the gay person who wants the legal right to get married”, you’re not saying help them make their lifestyle a legal right? What you say “Be kind to the Lesbian who wants to adopt”, you don’t mean helping them adopt?
Because, Joe, when you go on like you did, saying things like that, without giving any clarity to what you mean, it really seems like you’re saying “The only kind of love you can show them is to support them in what they’re doing”.
Because when you start out lambasting people who say “It’s in the Bible”, claiming the Bible can be used to defend any position anyone wants it to, and that “At the end of the day the only thing that really matters is what kind of fruit your doctrine and theology produces” (as you define such fruit, of course), then I tend to smell something going on that just ain’t right.
http://christianresearchnetwork.info/2008/02/19/the-sexuality-obcession/
Since there are no numbers on the comments, they may be difficult to find, especially since that was a discission with lots of comments. But here are some things you said there, Joe. These are taken from comments pretty early in the discussion.
“Here’s something to consider; I don’t care if they make homosexual marriage legal. How much of the sex police do we want to be”
“I believe that laws are necessary. I believe that laws should stop us from hurting other people. So if two gay people wish to engage in a relationship, that is (constitutionally speaking) their business…There are many things that I believe are Biblically wrong but I don’t want to see a law passed about them.”
Shall we take this further? Sure.
http://christianresearchnetwork.info/2008/02/19/the-sexuality-obcession
There’re no numbers on the comments, so I can’t say something like “look at comment 42″, but the comments that I’m taking from are under you name, Joe, and are pretty early in the rather heated debate.
“Here’s something to consider; I don’t care if they make homosexual marriage legal. How much of the sex police do we want to be.”
“I believe that laws are necessary. I believe that laws should stop us from hurting other people. So if two gay people wish to engage in a relationship, that is (constitutionally speaking) their business…It’s pretty simple, if you are hurting someone else it should be illegal. I think that is very practical and compassionate. There are many things that I believe are Biblically wrong but I don’t want to see a law passed about them.”
btw I find it ironic that you refer to the Constitution, when earlier you said this…
” As far as you having “rights” in a democratic society. Go back and re-read your Bible, you’re not called to live in your rights. Just my 2 cents.”
Since Joe and I have been discussin things at his blog, I should say here what I said there, that I do concede that I misunderstood him, and I apologize for having done so.
Thanks Jazz,
I appreciate that.
Peace