Apologetics and the Emerging Church
As part of my studies with the Arrow Leadership Program, I am doing some reading on the emerging church, specifically the book, Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures by Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K. Bolger.
The emerging church is a movement (some would say a conversation) that embraces the postmodern worldview and often rejects most traditional forms of church. Many emerging churches offer services in the form of a dance club, cafe, pub or whatever other format is relevant to their unchurched community. They focus on the Bible as more as story (not that they deny the historicity of it) than a set of propositions.
Some Christians consider the emerging church movement as a dangerous heresy, while others consider it to be the great hope for the church. I am not ready to make a judgment. There is much in their goals and in their view of evangelism that I like, but I am uncomfortable with their use of the Bible and their tendency to reject traditional forms of church as a neccessary step to being relevant.
I think there is a place for emerging churches to reach those who have given up on the traditional church, but I think it would be dangerous if every church embraced their methods.
The reason I bring this up here is that in my reading, I came across a section dealing with apologetics and I thought I would share it. Some of what is said makes me feel uncomfortable.
“Emerging church leaders are under no compulsion to stand up and fight for truth. Those outside the faith are more interested in the ethics of Christians than their doctrines.” (p. 124)
While it is likely true that non-Christians are more interested in our ethics, our ethics are founded on doctrine. At some point the world needs to see that our ethics are not divorced from a strong foundation of truth.
I was more comfortable with the following quote:
“Perhaps emerging churches’ reaction against apologetics is based on the premise that it is of necessity based on the rationalistic assumptions typical of modernity. But this is not always the case. Apologetics can mean simply being prepared to give a reason for the hope that is within with meekness and humility. It can demonstrate that people have thought through the assumptions behind their beliefs and have honestly faced the challenges to belief. It can be more concerned with establishing plausibility than with proof.” (p. 125)
This is closer to my own view of apologetics. It is correct that we need to acknowledge a change in our society and that we need to communicate with those outside the church in a way they can understand. But that does not contradict our role in shining the light of truth. Apologetics will continue to play an important role in the postmodern world and beyond.
