CHAPTER 15: The Future of Faith
In referring to the Emergent movement, Cox says, “They strongly underline ‘living the message’ rather than simply proclaiming it” (219). How can Christians bring a proper balance to “living the gospel” while still attempting to “proclaim”?
What are your final thoughts after reading Cox’s work?
There are lots of good things to be said about the Emergent movement– social justice, the importance of community, a willingness to engage one’s brain, and passionate worship are all good. Of course, there is also the tendency to throw the baby out with the bath water–to build a home (a faith) on a fluid foundation is not the wisest move. To reject theology and embrace an inoffensive version of what Jesus claimed would always offend leaves a superficial faith that has little substance or depth. The movement’s adoption of liberation theology also focuses more on the life of Jesus than his birth, death and resurrection.
As the question above mentions–”balance” is important. While it might be good to reject the way traditional churches have done things, it might not be so good to reject the theology of those churches. At the same time, those in traditional churches need to move beyond a “warming a seat” mentality to having a meaningful faith that propels them into action– to do what we can to meet the physical AND spiritual needs of our community, and to be a real light in a dark place.
Final thoughts: It was interesting to ta
I think
the Emergent movement is also regarded as “Christianity Lite”–with a tendency to focus on the basics of the faith, balk at theology
There are definitely some positive things to say about the Emergent movement–social justice, the importance of community, a willingness to engage one’s brain, and passionate worship are all good things. And hey, we should celebrate the fact that people are taking their faith seriously enough to discuss it. At the same time, the Emergent movement is also regarded as “Christianity Lite”–it’s inoffensive and feel-good– the potato chips of the Christian world. While it’s cool to see church done in different ways that can relate to people who might feel disconnected from the traditional idea of church
any time people get together and have a discussion about Jesus and a d, it can’t be that bad, right?
, however, their brand of “Christianity Lite”, of presenting an inoffensive, safe version of Christianity coupled by adopting Liberation Theology
also tends to also has a tendency to pick and choose based on personal comfort
If there’s a post before this one– ignore it– I think I accidentally posted it when I was halfway through–and I couldn’t delete it for some reason.
There are lots of good things to be said about the Emergent movement– social justice, the importance of community and discussion, and passionate worship are all good. Of course, there is also the tendency to throw the baby out with the bath water–to build a home (a faith) on a fluid foundation is not the wisest move. To reject theology and embrace an inoffensive version of what Jesus claimed would always offend leaves a superficial faith that has little substance or depth. The movement’s adoption of liberation theology also focuses more on the life of Jesus than his birth, death and resurrection.
Incidentally, while I haven’t read it yet myself, I know a few people who read and enjoyed “Why We’re Not Emergent: By Two Guys Who Should Be”, written by Kevin Deyoung and Ted Kluck
As the question above mentions–”balance” is important. While it might be good to reject the way traditional churches have done things, it might not be so good to reject the doctrine of those churches. Cox seems to feel that doctrine is the villain, when, in fact, I think he hit the nail on the head in the previous chapter– creeds and rituals aren’t the culprit, but it’s “man-made” creeds and “lifeless” rituals (201) that we should reject.
Did I like this book? I liked some of it. I didn’t appreciate the shameless promotion of liberation theology throughout–after all, while the Jewish people expected a Messiah who would be a political ruler and would usher in a Utopian society, we all know that Jesus was NOT that Messiah, despite Cox’s belief to the contrary.
What I took from the book was that it pointed out that the Western Church is struggling because it has largely lost much of its passion–it has embraced religion rather than relationship. It has let materialism relegate God to an afterthought. We can’t be content warming a pew, nodding off during sermons, and having empty meet and greet times, but we need to have our faith reinvigorated– that it would be meaningful and deep– a true vibrant and flourishing relationship with God and others.