McKnight on The Emerging Church

I finally got around to reading Scot McKnight's 30 page paper on the Emerging Church, "What is the Emerging Church?," that he presented at WTS.  It once again proves that McKnight is one of the most important voices speaking about (and within) the Emerging Church.  I highly recommend you read it if you any interest in understanding the EC.

Comments

[Scott Eaton]

After reading this paper last week, I made great strides forward in my understanding of the emerging movement. McKnight's paper is one of the best things I have read on the emerging movement. Simple, clear, and short.

His challenge to emerging folk to keep the gospel central and out front was a breath of fresh air. He certainly does want to keep Jesus in Christianity, something some emerging folk need to hear.

But it also challenged me to take more seriously the culture in which I live and minister. His emphasis on justice was good too.

I agree with you, Scot McKnight is an important voice in the emerging conversation and this is an excellent paper.

[Anthony Adams]

I really must listen to/read this. And have you seen the Rick Phillips post on Ref21's blog. Comments? Fair? Patronising? Got wrong end of stick?

[Scott Eaton]

JMV,

Dude, this isn't my blog, but you are way out of line for making these comments. It is off topic and inappropriate to make comments like that here. Definitely strikes me as divisive and slanderous.

If any repenting needs to be done it seems it should come from you.

[Theisens]

It's such the PCA way--to totally reject something because there are some divergences that one is not comfortable with. While I don't agree with the Emergent Movement as a whole, I believe the Reformed community can learn some things from it on how to reach a post-modern culture. All in all, I thought McKnight's paper was good, but he seemed to spend a lot of time making the argument, "Let us define ourselves..." and then never really defined the movement by what it IS; only by what it ISN'T. I also thought that he spent a lot of time arguing linguistics--questioning the definition of terms, rather than defining the movement.

Those were just my observations, but I know more about it now than I did before. Thanks for posting this!

[Theisens]

JMV--Not the place man. Go through the right channels. What good does it do your case to publicly smear someone? Doesn't that make you just as bad?

[Joe Kennedy]

Steve, it's always vacation time when the guys come out swinging. Sorry it had to happen this time too. I wish they had a button so you could turn ALL comments off when you leave, and then turn them back on when you get back. Maybe they do.

[Ryan DeBarr]

I'm not a big fan of emerging church stuff, but I'd be unhappy if someone came on my blog with a long comment, that alleging personal sins by people I don't know.

Wordpress, which I use, does have the ability to turn comments on and off, or to defer comments to a moderation queue. I can only imagine that Steve's software allows him to do it to.

[Scot McKnight]

Theisens, I really have to ask what you were reading or listening to. I chart out the four rivers that flow into "lake emerging." Postmodernity, praxis, postevangelical, and politics. Now that is what the emerging movement "IS" (as you spell it). In the process, some corrections of perception had to be addressed, but the paper (as I see it) has to do with describing the emerging movement in its major themes.

I'm afraid none of us can do anything about Steve's blog; but we can ignore the person and that is probably the best way to deal with his insinuation of his issues on Steve's blog.

[Theisens]

Scot--

Please don't take my observations as trying to pick a fight. That's not what I was trying to do at all. Thanks for clarifying. Again, I think your paper was well written. Thanks for submitting it.