.jpg)
.jpg)
|
Home
Opinion
Tutsch, Cindy
2011
|
Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 (Conclusion)
Submitted: Jan 18, 2011
By Cindy Tutsch
Adventism: A Unique Spirituality, but Can We Grow as a Movement?
In the Adventist sanctuary doctrine, which is unique to our movement, we find a visual merger of relationship (Christ our High Priest), ancient roots (the Judaic Sanctuary rituals) and a common history (unfolding dialogue between the people and God). Satan targets this highly symbolic yet relational motif because it is the very heart of God's will and instructions regarding redemption, mission, spirituality, and even worship. The artistic symbols and sanctuary services found within the Bible, particularly the books of Hebrews, Daniel, and Revelation, then become a conveyor of truth, providing us with a model or system correlating theology and liturgy. Based on the sanctuary model, our worship will begin with respect and awe of our Creator God, it will lead to grateful acknowledgment of His power and holiness through prayer and praise and preaching, remind us of our need of His redemptive grace, cause us to accept His loving atoning sacrifice, and motivate us for service. Adventists as a body have largely lost awareness of these relationally-driven sanctuary insights.Can we grow as a movement? Are there reminders within Emergent/Emerging thought of areas we could strengthen? Absolutely! Adventism as a movement, while modeling a christocentric approach to education, healing, publishing and religion, has been less successful at modeling sustained proactive opposition to ills that permeate and destroy society, such as media violence, gambling, human trafficking, and pornography. We could also hope that as a result of people being profoundly impacted by the gospel, an increasing number of Adventist churches would develop that are characterized by both strong biblical preaching and strong community outreach.
Ellen White promotes a healthy enthusiasm in the presence of God, coupled with reverent, expectant joy. Adventist worship services should be "intensely interesting," participatory, and not rigidly formal. (See Testimonies, Vol. 5, pages 317, 318, 609) Many Adventists could strengthen their faith by practicing more biblical spiritual disciplines, such as fasting and God-centered prayer. We need to grow toward these ideals.
Yet, I wonder if many Adventists, particularly those who seem most eager to support and promote emergent speakers and emergent innovation, have lost sight of the principles of the Reformation and the apocalyptic warnings of Revelation. Some seem to agree with Charles Coleson, the U.S. based visionary for many faith-based initiatives and the negotiator of much of today's Catholic-evangelical unity, when he states "European Catholics and Protestants have concluded that the condemnations of the Reformation were based on misconceptions, were aimed at extreme positions on the other side, and no longer apply to today's situation."
What would be Martin Luther's reaction to that statement and the reaction of Protestant reformers who gave their lives for the principles of the Reformation? Ecumenical unity and practice are being promoted on all sides, but at what cost? The Reformation is virtually being excised, declared a mistake.
If we could again become as eager to pursue the study of the Word of God as were the Reformers, coupled with a willingness to obey its principles at any cost to ourselves, we would discover the dynamic truth about the righteousness of Christ. We would be transformed, and transforming! In our own lives and character, we would reveal what the grace of God has done for us. We would have something worth saying, worth hearing, worth living and dying for, and the world would ask the question: "Who is this that looks forth like the dawn, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terrible as an army with banners?" (Song of Solomon 6:10)
Fellowship with Christ will always be accompanied by an inner work of the heart. Without a vibrant, living connection with The Vine, we will increasingly look to mysticism, ritual, mantras and personal opinion to fill the void. Christ reveals Himself, Truth, and spirituality most deeply in His Word (John 1, 1-4, 14). The Word is what builds in the Christian a believing faith that will stand the crucible of today's stressors and the greater challenges just before us.
Emergents are often reluctant to use the word "sin" or to make a clear distinction between right and wrong. "If I were the devil" (to plagiarize George Knight), I'd rejoice at this mind-set which minimizes or negates the need of a Savior. But a Christianity without a Savior becomes vapid, dead, superfluous. It is our Savior who makes us whole, not enlightenment or ritualistic externals. Our heart seeks after this Savior, whether or not we are cognizant of our need, and when we have found Him, our inner transformation will be total. Only Jesus provides the answer, the solution, to our heart's cry. In Him we are crucified, in Him we are alive, in Him alone do we find real spirituality. Jesus imparts His Spirit, and through this agency our heart becomes one with His.
Today there are strong feelings of dissatisfaction with the superficiality of contemporary life. Members are leaving mainline and mega-churches in large numbers because the abandonment of sola scriptura underlies a failure to meet the need for authentic deep spirituality. Hence the door is open wide for religious phenomena such as the Emergent church. But as C. Raymond Holmes astutely observes, the door is also open wide for a church that holds uncompromisingly to the authority of the Bible as the Word of God, and unfailingly proclaims the message of salvation through Christ alone.
Comments:
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 19th, 2011 Seminary student says:
Excellent ! you made some really great points . We need to go back to "sola scriptura "and the writings of Ellen White are a safeguard against all this nonsense " emergent church message ". Some of the comments here make me realize that the main issue is about " biblical authority ".And submision to that authority but what I read here in some blogs is just the opposite . There are some who want to take the bible and modify it to fit their agenda . we need to let the message of the bible change us ..Thank you Cindy , for this great way of presenting this .
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 20th, 2011 Cindy Tutsch says:
Thanks, Seminary Student. To track the trajectory of emergent thinking, consider reading Brian McLaren's new book, A New Kind of Christianity. Once the camel has stuck his head in the tent, it's difficult to not have him as a bedfellow. Emergent may have seemed innocuous at the beginning, but the journey over time has developed ideas many persons cannot accept as Christianity.
Cindy Tutsch
Adventist Today blogger
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 20th, 2011 David C. Read says:
You make an excellent point about the Reformation coming undone. In most mainline "Protestant" denominations, three principles that negate the Reformation have already become well established.
The first of these is higher criticism, which makes man the authority over Scripture, not vice versa. This allows us to ignore or discount those portions of Scripture that condemn sin and make us uncomfortable.
The next is the idea that only the trained clergy can properly read and interpret Scripture, and the laity is practically discouraged from serious Bible study. This exalts the clergy and excuses laziness and ignorance among the laity. (Surprisingly, this is becoming a problem even in the Adventist Church, even though we know better than anyone that the Reformation was contested over this very issue.)
The third is the idea that doctrine simply is not important, and is actually worse than unimportant because it is divisive. Pastors are encouraged not to preach doctrinal sermons because doctrine divides; not all the listeners agree on doctrine, so better to avoid it altogether. This also is becoming a serious problem in the Adventist Church, where one more and more seldom hears doctrinal preaching.
Once these three principles are accepted, the Word of God no longer has any authority or power, and by extension the Bible-based church can no longer be a real check on whatever is going on in the larger culture. At which point, the authority of the church must come from its own augustness and universality, and from its ability to cause the civil authority to enforce its dictates, i.e., the Roman Catholic model of what a church is.
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 21st, 2011 wfnoel says:
Seminary Student,
Great points? Yes. But overlooking a more basic and essential truth than any of those listed: the path back to those doctrines requires the establishment of a growing, functional faith in God, first and foremost. Functional faith does not grow from the teaching of those doctrines. The doctrines gain meaning if they grow from the roots of a faith that works. Preach those doctrines all you want, but if you haven't been nurturing faith first and foremost you'll be preaching to a shrinking congregation.
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 22nd, 2011 Vastergotland says:
First, the advice Cindy gives to the church is good. We should, as a church, be more active in working against the ills of our society. Doing so we would follow in Jesus footsteps. We should also, as a church, promote "intensely interesting, participatory" worship, again following in Jesus footsteps. We would also have much to gain from a willingness to obey the principles of the Word, with an emphasis on the teaching of Jesus. (Gal 4:21-31) Of course, such a change requires the transforming power of the Spirit being active in each of our lives to last, as Cindy points out in the text.
Sin is a difficult topic. Some do regard it too lightly, but others regard it selectively. For instance, why does 1 Cor 6:9 which mentions fornication and homosexuality have a much higher quote frequency than 1 Cor 6:10 which mentions covetousness, despite the fact that the later is a much more widespread sin, and is the subject of the 10th commandment?
On people leaving main-line (including Adventist) churches and Mega-churches, my personal theory is that the reason is that the church lacks a will to actually be more than a building people gather in one morning a week and commit money towards. If the church was something more like Jesus, people might still leave it (Jesus yoke might be light to carry, but it costs much to lift up), but it would no longer be irrelevant to anyone.
Second, Seminary Student, I assume you are aware that the "sola" part of "sola scriptura" means "alone". Scripture alone. Not Scripture + my favourite interpreter of scripture. It is quite fine to take Scripture + your favourite interpreter of scripture (i.e. your tradition of choice), but please do not kid yourself that you are then abiding by "sola scriptura".
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 23rd, 2011 wfnoel says:
Vastergotland,
It is good to see that you recognize the need for the church to become more actively involved in ministries that address the ills of society. Areyou ready to get involved in such ministry? Are you ready to start working under the direct guidance and empowerment of the Holy Spirit?
I hope that you are not looking for ministries to arise from either the leadership of the corporate church, or from some effort organized by the local church because, if you are, you will be sorely disappointed. In more than a half-century I have NEVER seen where such ministries have arisen from anything other than individuals seeing a need, then making themselves available to God and moving forward in the empowerment of the Holy Spirit. All successful ministries begin this way. The ones that endure continue that way. Unfortunately, I've also seen a very long series of such ministries die when they were brought under the control of a local church board or the corporate church structure. As the former leader of a major church media ministry told me one day, "The quickest way to kill a ministry is to let it be controlled by the church."
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 25th, 2011 Cindy Tutsch says:
A young adult with many progressive ideas who has been dialoging with me on Fb about my AT blogs stated the following (I cut and paste her comments with her permission):
"The Emergents in Adventism, whether they consider themselves to be or not, are definitely on the rise. Ironically, I wasn't aware that this loose group of people of like-minds actually had a name before reading your blogs. However, many names of individuals whose theology from the pulpit fits your descriptors, quickly came to my mind. When I walk away from one of those sermons, I have an empty feeling. My thought is, 'Really? That's all you're going to preach or say today? Where was the Bible in that?' There is always a token scripture or two, but it's not a message. It generally feels like the speaker thinks that I must need entertaining and/or cannot comprehend a more in-depth sermon of substance. I must say as well, due to no fault of our Adventist colleges in any specific way, that because of demographics and other factors, colleges (in general) have more Emergent/Emerging theology."
Thought provoking comments from someone less than half my age.
Cindy Tutsch
Adventist Today blogger
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 25th, 2011 Vastergotland says:
wfnoel,
The church is a group of people doing the same ministry, or different ministries, together. The church is the body of Christ because all members, together, work towards the goal of being the hands and feet of Jesus. This is different from a church being the location where a crowd of individual hands and feet gather together, i.e. one body of Christ rather than 2 billion bodies of Christ.
Cindy,
I too know the sermons that leave me wondering if there was a point, and whether the point was in some sense based on the bible. I also know the sermon which opens my understanding of well known or not so well known biblical passages, pointing to things I have not noticed and/or introducing a different side to the topic.
I have heard the first kind of sermon preached by both the conservative adventist and the non-denominational emergent preacher. I have also heard the second kind of sermon preached by both the conservative adventist and the non-denominational emergent preacher. The point is that identifying yourself or being identified by others as emergent does not say anything concerning the meat vs low-fat milk content of the sermons preached. There are even pastors who have an uneven track record, sometimes giving a diluted milk sermon, and at other times giving a solid meat and beans sermon.
Implying that emergent is a fancy way of writing "those who prefer teaching after their own desire" is just as much an unsupportable generalisation as it would be to say that conservative adventist stands for "those who only endure sound doctrine". Both are true sometimes but both are also not true sometimes.
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 25th, 2011 wfnoel says:
Cindy,
Sermons leave me empty, too. Not just a few. All sermons. That's because they so often are theoretical presentations where the speaker has a huge lack of experience so they have no testimony about how their subject actually works in their walk with God. I've heard a lot of "great" preachers over the years but couldn't tell you one thing any of them said. But I can tell you a lot of things from personal testimonies that have brought me closer to God.
This highlights the essential contrast between traditional Adventism and Emergent Adventism. Theory isn't good enough for us. Just talking about doctrines leaves us cold. But testify about how how the Gospel actually works in your life and we will see how to make it work in our lives. I am proud to be an Emergent because I've moved beyond the doctrinal theorism into the practical and it has made such a difference in my life that I cannot imagine ever returning to the old traditionalism that destroyed my son's faith and nearly destroyed mine.
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 26th, 2011 Cindy Tutsch says:
wfnoel
You may be surprised to find me largely agreeing with your assessment of many sermons, and even more surprised to find EGW also agrees with your concerns about sermons. Check this out:
“Let the overseers of the church devise plans whereby young men and women may be trained to put to use their entrusted talents. Let the older members of the church seek to do earnest, compassionate work for the children and youth. Let ministers put to use all their ingenuity in devising plans whereby the younger members of the church may be led to co-operate with them in missionary work. But do not imagine that you can arouse their interest merely by preaching a long sermon at the missionary meeting. Plan ways whereby a live interest may be kindled. Let all have a part to act. Train the young to do what is appointed them, and from week to week let them bring their reports to the missionary meeting, telling what they have experienced and through the grace of Christ what success has been theirs. If such reports were brought in by consecrated workers, the missionary meetings would not dull and tedious. They would be full of interest, and there would be no lack in attendance.” The Adventist Home, 487
“ A great and solemn truth has been entrusted to us, for which we are responsible. Too often this truth is presented in cold theory. Sermon after sermon upon doctrinal points is delivered to people who come and go, some of whom will never have another as favorable opportunity of being convicted and converted to Christ. Golden opportunities are lost by delivering elaborate discourses, which display self, but do not magnify Christ. A theory of the truth without vital godliness cannot remove the moral darkness which envelops the soul. “ Gospel Workers, 92 , 39
Do not imagine that you can arouse the interest of the young by . . . preaching a long sermon. Plan ways whereby a live interest may be aroused. From week to week the youth should bring in their reports, telling what they have tried to do for the Saviour, and what success has been theirs. If the missionary meeting were made an occasion for bringing in such reports, it would not be dull, tedious, and uninteresting. It would be full of interest, and there would be no lack of attendance.” Gospel Workers, 210
“There are times when it is fitting for our ministers to give on the Sabbath, in our churches, short discourses, full of the life and love of Christ. But the church members are not to expect a sermon every Sabbath.”
Testimonies, Vol . 7, 19
“Let church members, during the week, act their part faithfully, and on the Sabbath relate their experience. The meeting will then be as meat in due season, bringing to all present new life and fresh vigor. When God's people see the great need of working as Christ worked for the conversion of sinners, the testimonies borne by them in the Sabbath service will be filled with power. With joy they will tell of the precious experience they have gained in working for others. “ Testimonies Vol. 7, 19
Too Many Sermons—“The sermons should come, not from a mechanical heart, but from a heart that is filled with the love of God, and is subdued and softened by His grace; that when you speak the angels of God are enlisted on your side, and Christ is on your side, and it is Christ that makes the impression. . . The idea seems to be woven into the minds of some that all they have to do is to sermonize, sermonize. While sermons are good in their place, there is sermon after sermon given to the people that they cannot retain in their minds--it is an impossibility for them to do it-- and they are just wearied out with sermons.”--Ms 19b, 1890.
“There is too much formality in our religious services. The Lord would have His ministers who preach the Word energized by His Holy Spirit; and the people who hear should not sit in drowsy indifference, or stare vacantly about, making no responses to what is said. . .Where the church is walking in the light, there will ever be cheerful , hearty responses and words of joyful praise.” Ye Shall Receive Power, 334
My problems with emergent/emerging worship is not that they are engaging, personal, energetic, vibrant, enthusiastic. My concerns can be summarized in two statements: 1. Most Emergent thought minimizes Scripture and maximizes personal interpretation. (I don't trust my own opinions and i certainly don't trust someone else's--apart from basing convictions and interpretations on Scripture.) 2. Emergent/Emerging trends are toward ecumenism and ancient ritual. I believe that anytime we lose invigorating Bible study and obedience to the principles of the Word, we look for ritual to supply the lack. After all, the Spirit comes --the authentic Spirit, that is--in response to our willing obedience in response to God's grace. (Acts 5:32)
Testimonies of personal experience working for God, learning to trust and obey His Word, and joy in His love are great sermon fodder! In my years as youth pastor/conference youth director, I often worked together with the local church to feature kids telling about their Bible studies, Revelation Seminars, and outreach community activities as part of the Divine Service.
I directed ten summers of a youth-in-evangelism and outreach program called Youth Challenge. Every summer we had between 35-75 youth involved pretty much 24/7 in evangelism for eight weeks. Each Sabbath we divided our team up into small groups and fanned out to different churches to "Put on" the church service. Our students did the whole shebang. Our services included 5-8 testimonies from students about their sharing activities during the week, a 10 minutes "sermon," music, the reading of the Word, and a call to the church to get up, get out, and get active for God. Don't remember anyone sleeping through our services. Time and again, congregations would speak of the energy and enthusiasm for Jesus and His work that the students brought.
Certainly, there is nothing to condemn in ritual per se. We as Adventists engage in ritual when we participate in the Lord's supper. It's ritual apart from elevating the Word as our supreme authority that makes me wary.
We hear a lot about doctrines vs Jesus. Huh? Doctrines just means "teachings" and who is the author of the teachings? Doctrines/Jesus--it should all be one. Now, if we separate Jesus from His doctrines, or doctrines for Jesus, then we have reason for legitimate concern. My burden is that we preach from the Word--making the sermon short, energetic, joyful, and yet that we not be afraid to call us all to transformation! Holy living is not really a hot topic in a lot of emergent preaching. But the Word of God calls us to holy living from Genesis to Revelation. We just don't find in that Word the trends toward universalism that's prevalent in some of emergent literature and preaching.
Cindy Tutsch
Adventist Today blogger
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 27th, 2011 klriley says:
I think part of the problem is indicated by the fact that someone can quote lots of EGW material saying we shouldn't expect a sermon each week, and that sermons will not motivate the youth, and then go on to say that what we really need is short interesting sermons. We seem unable to conceive of worship that is not primarily, or at least focused upon, preaching. When we get to the point - as I have witnesed more than once - that we have to leave out reading the Bible so the preacher can have as much time as he "needs", I wonder if we really do want to focus on the word of God being heard, or on the preacher being heard.
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 27th, 2011 Vastergotland says:
"Holy living is not really a hot topic in a lot of emergent preaching."
But this all depends on how you view "holy living". If your definition of "holy living" is one based on Matt 5-7 and 25, where Jesus emphasises unselfish acts and attitude, the topic is certainly much "hotter" than if you define it as the opposite of sin. Just because someone does not chose to frame a topic in its negative, does not mean that they do not take it seriously.
When the topic of "universalism" comes up, assuming we are then talking about a united Christendom, I wonder why we think that the present divisions is the ideal condition and any movement towards less disunity is a step in the wrong direction. Why do we not take the state of disunity as the unnatural and any movement towards less disunity as steps towards healing wounds that keep bleeding the whole body?
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 29th, 2011 Here_it_comes says:
Thank you Cindy, for posting on this unpopular subject. A person who follows after the emergent church movement is only following after their own heart, and our hearts are decietfully wicked. A person who wants to follow the emergent church movement can focus on certain scriptures and ignore the rest. The emergent church movement in the SDA church has the gall to downplay or ignore SOP with the presumption that it would scare the young or newcomers, when they should only speak for themselves. Who are they to say that newcomeres and youth would not embrace the gift of SOP which God has given the church. The emergent church movement does not have true love in it, or no more than the world does. They will grip on to their coffee, alcohol and other unhealthy or inconsiderate lifestyles and attitudes as they call you a hypocrite, a pharisee and other terms of which they don't really understand as they turn to others of like mind for assurance and validation of their feelings. When they pride themselves for being like the world, they neglect to use their gifts to do uniquely creative things for God's kingdom. How can God use people who are stuck in a mode that is not willing to be innovative, creative, and spontaneous as He wills it for His kingdom? Yet being innovative, creative and spontaneous is what the emergent church claims to do. They think that they are different, special and not like the fuddy duddy church of the past. They 'know' things. The works of the emergent church do not result in genuine conversion of the heart or true growth and it certainly does not lead others to realize the value of other people in Jesus Christ, it only leads to an inflated sense of self. The emergent church movement does not call people to deny self. It encourages people to do what feels good, to follow the congregation and that outward expressions of joy are indicative of healthy spiritual health and a close connection with God. We need to pray for the people who are hooked in by this movement and that God will work in our midst to show which leadings are His and which ones aren't.
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 29th, 2011 Elaine Nelson says:
At one time, the Adventist church was an "emergent church." When did it cease being an "emergent church"? How is "emergent defined:
"Emergent: Arising unexpectedly, calling for prompt action; arising as a natural or logical consequence; newly formed."
This is the origin of Adventism. Why is it now suddenly demeaned? When did Adventism no longer become an emergent movent and enter the mainstream of religion and is no longer in need of new impetus? The status quo is death; only new blood gives life to a dying patient. By all indications, the NAD and European Adeventism is slowly dying. Why not seek to invigorate it?
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 29th, 2011 Here_it_comes says:
Elaine: "The status quo is death; only new blood gives life to a dying patient. By all indications, the NAD and European Adeventism is slowly dying. Why not seek to invigorate it?"
I wouldn't call the emergent church movement new blood. Actually, it seems more of an invader. You know, if a patient recieves a blood type that is not their own, they can die. I will attempt to explain my point. God created animals and plants to produce after their kind. Through generations, a plant or an animal can change by adaptation, but it is still the same animal. Of course, people can create hybrids, but they are often sterile. With modern science, people can mix all kinds of genes in the labratory, but do people really know what they are doing? People cannot improve on what God has made. In that line of thought, it seems that the church can change to adapt through the years, but it is still the same church. It is supposed to be pure, not hybridized with other religions and doctrines. It is the remnant church-the same message and substance as the beginning.
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 30th, 2011 wfnoel says:
Cindy,
Wow! Did you catch her focus on missions? That's what we need to recapture. But our concept of "missions" and "ministry" have become so limited that we allow no possibility for the guidance and empowerment of the Holy Spirit, or the possibility that God might want us to do something outside the boundaries of our current conceptual model. My ministry is well outside those traditional lines. God is blessing it. The church is being strengthened by it and people are being brought into the church because of it. My greatest wish is that others would allow God to take away their traditionalism and replace it with such empowered ministry.
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 30th, 2011 wfnoel says:
It may be timely for us to clarify a difference in our discussion. If we typify the "emergent church" by the discussions and descriptions in the wider religious press with it's doctrinal difference as compared to the Adventist church, then it can be viewed as an invader. The Emergent Adventists I know have no desire to cast aside any key doctrine, only the traditions and formalism that prevent the Holy Spirit from working and the church from growing.
I have both witnessed and experienced the transformation that the Holy Spirit can bring when Adventists embrace the empowerment and guidance He offers us. I have a ministry that is empowered by the Holy Spirit. But embracing that empowerment and following that guidance required that we abandon many of the traditions that a large number of Adventists view as view as making them distinctive from the rest of Christians. While that appears threatening, the reality is quite the contrary. Casting off traditionalism has become the most renewing and invigorating experience of my entire spiritual experience. It has been such a powerful transformation that the thought of going back to those old ways is so repulsive that it is unimaginable.
The church faces a choice: cling to traditionalism and continue dying, or embrace the Holy Spirit so we can be renewed and grow. I vote for renewal and growth.
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 30th, 2011 wfnoel says:
Elaine,
The Adventist church ceased being "emergent" when it adopted tradition, including clergy as authoritative, over the guidance and empowerment of the Holy Spirit.
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 30th, 2011 Vastergotland says:
wfnoel,
Would you mind being a bit more specific. Which traditions exactly are you talking about?
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 31st, 2011 wfnoel says:
OK, here are a few traditions to chew on.
-The role of the pastor as separate from the members and the role of pastor having authority over the church.
-People must accept our list of doctrines before they can be welcomed into the fellowship of the church or considered a believer.
-Ministries are only those activities that directly teach from the Bible and produce baptisms in a short period of time.
-Limiting our music in worship to approved hymns played only on "worshipful" instruments.
-Evangelistic crusades are the only way to bring people into the church.
-The Holy Spirit will be poured-out at some future "latter rain" date, so it is not available today to empower every member of the church.
-A dedicated "sanctuary" is required for us to worship God and using it for any other purpose defiles the place.
-A sermon is the most essential element of worship and without one your meeting cannot be considered a worship service.
-You have to wear your best clothes when you go to church.
None of these items has any basis in scripture and each of them limits or even prohibits us from becoming effective ministers of God's love who are empowered by the Holy Spirit.
How many of your toes have I stepped on?
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On January 31st, 2011 Vastergotland says:
Why do you think this above list would step on my toes? You could easily have said something with much higher "toe stepping" probability such as: Ellen Whites collected publications is a foundational part of the Adventist tradition.
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On February 6th, 2011 Trevor Hammond says:
"A Unique Spirituality, but Can We Grow as a Movement?"
- Yes, a unique spirituality indeed! However, our growth can only be inversely proportional to the rate of response in heeding the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness who speaks to the Church of Laodicea [Rev 3:14-21]. It is against this significant counsel or yardstick if you may, that we can truly measure our extent of growth. This 'lukewarm' state is often overlooked when considering Adventism Today. But unless this hurdle is overcome, we'll still be asking the same question.
- We cannot as Adventists assume that by default, we bypass this conditional counsel that God offers. From my perspective, I see it as a major stumbling block to progressing as a movement of destiny. It is a true condition and we should accept God's counsel regarding accepting His remedy.
- Sorry to be a kill-joy to all those eccentric modernists but this process of accepting the remedy offered to the lukewarm church can only be done the old fashioned way: the cross!
Two statements of EGW regarding this:
I asked the meaning of the shaking I had seen, and was shown that it would be caused by the straight testimony called forth by the counsel of the True Witness to the Laodiceans. This will have its effect upon the heart of the receiver, and will lead him to exalt the standard and pour forth the straight truth. Some will not bear this straight testimony. They will rise up against it, and this is what will cause a shaking among God’s people. {CET 176.1} [Christian Experience and Teachings of Ellen G. White]
I saw that the testimony of the True Witness has not been half heeded. The solemn testimony upon which the destiny of the church hangs has been lightly esteemed, if not entirely disregarded. This testimony must work deep repentance; all who truly receive it will obey it, and be purified. {CET 176.2} [Christian Experience and Teachings of Ellen G. White]
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On February 6th, 2011 Trevor Hammond says:
wfnoel
Your posts have been interesting.
A few points to consider. If traditional Adventism is also the workings of the Holy Spirit, then surely He, as the Administrator of God's church, should be fully capable of offering some solution? Surely the 'coining' of the term 'traditional Adventist' is purely a label or brand name rather than another type of Adventism. Is there a difference in 'brand name' or is there a difference in 'heart', keeping well in mind that they both are in the same lukewarm state. That is their true condition. There's no other position they can take. There is only one way out! I see no different emergent stance that can be taken without disregarding God's counsel.
Those that receive the counsel of God and repent [Rev 3:14-21], will really be Emergents, in its truest sense, in terms of repentance, with traditional label or not, a ready church, which will finish the work that God has organized her for and ready for Jesus to come. [Jer 6:16] - refers to one place or position in this regard too.
This familiar EGW quote puts what I say in perspective:
In reviewing our past history, having traveled over every step of advance to our present standing, I can say, Praise God! As I see what God has wrought, I am filled with astonishment, and with confidence in Christ as leader. We have nothing to fear for the future, except as we shall forget the way the Lord has led us, and His teaching in our past history. {CET 204.1} Christian Experience and Teachings of Ellen G. White
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On February 15th, 2011 Doctorf says:
Elaine,
Can Mormonism also be considered, "emergent"?
Re: Continuing the Emergent Conversation, Part 4 ...
On February 15th, 2011 Elaine Nelson says:
""Emergent: Arising unexpectedly, "calling for prompt action; arising as a natural or logical consequence; newly formed."
Doesn't Mormonism meet all those definitions? In fact, what new church that has begun in the last 200 years not also meet those?
Log In to Post a Comment. Log In | Register
There are no comments.