Emerging Africa

Sometimes, Deborah, the biggest challenge we face as Christians is not to judge.

Nic,
I remember reading your (now well published) trickster post almost a year and a half ago and finding it most fascinating and intriguing. It is most unfair to read this post in isolation to the rest of your journey. Your journey is reminder that we have a gracious and generous Father that allows his children to be adventurers and your creativity is an example of godliness. Thank you for continually opening yourself and sharing your quest for an authentic and Christ-like spirituality. In Mark 7 when Jesus says: “Ephphatha,” which means, “Be opened!” healing took place and your openness is bringing healing. Thank-you and praise be to God!!

Now on to your question...

As to dialogue between Fundies and us Pomo-mergies types, in my opinion, the answer is NO. We have to wait for individuals to be/feel rejected by the Fundamentalist churches and then patch their souls and show them the true nature of God’s love.

Dogma prevents an open dialogue with the fanatical fringe of the Christian faith. It is the same as talking to a person with a suicide bomb strapped her waist and if you don’t agree she will pull the trigger sending you to hell and her to heaven.

In my opinion Fundamentalism is a cult that claims to own the truth. I’m sick and tired of having to justify my faith in Jesus to freaky Fundies who live in an illusion of supremacist grandeur while condemning the rest of humanity to hell.

Who the hell do they think they are??!!!

One thing that is for sure, Fundamentalist churches are "closed".

I'd love to see a dialogue between The FUndies and the Emergents. I recently saw a post on a fundamentalist site where a woman vehemently insisted that Jesus wasn't a Jew. He was Jewish.

Apparently, there is a difference.

Man, oh man, there's nothing that gets me more upset than 'discerning ministries'.

Ok, maybe there are one or two things that do, but these are definately at the top of my list.

We all know the kind - those ministries whose sole purpose is to pick out what's wrong with everyone else's theology and publically lambaste their character, rather than engage with them on a theological level.

I would love to bridge the gap between emergings and fundies, in fact that's one of the things I try to do (although, since I'm not so controversial, I'm just not so popular ;) ) but I find myself getting lambasted at fundies sites as well - and I'm not even emergent!

I'll have you know, however, that some guys from the Baptist Theological College came to visit a couple of our churches and spoke a little about the Emerging church. Now, we should all know that the good ol' Baptists are usually quite solid in their theology. What did they say about the Emerging Church? Well, that it has its extremes and it has people who just want to find a more real way of what it means to follow Christ and be a Christian. Looks like the theological college can at least see the worth of the Emerging conversation without throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I mean, there are some extreme emerging people out there, but there are in absolutely every group.

Guess what they also warned against? Fundamentalism. Surprise! The theological college also sees the dangers of fundamentalism, while seeing the dangers of ultra post-modernism (extreme emerging people). I think balance is the key, as always.

www.ryanpeterwrites.com
"The Glory of God is man fully alive" - St Iraneaus

Wow - its been so long since I logged on here that I almost forgot my username. Trust all of you are well and good health.

Nic, are you using the term 'fundamentalist' to denote evangelicalism? Or perhaps conservative evangelicalism since the category is rather broad nowadays? I just ask since its common in my ciricles for us 'new calvinists' to distinguish ourselves from fundamentalism. I know some have labelled the new calvinist movement as neo-fundamentalist which I'm not convinced is entirely fair. For interest sake here are some of the differences:

Old-fundamentalism has a closed handed and retreatist approach to culture whilst new calvinism has a very open handed approach to engaging with and being agents of blessing within the culture.

Old-fundamentalism was largely dispensational and arminian (there were exceptions). New calvinism is, well calvinist, and normally covenantal(the presbys) or into new covenant theology (the ones with baptist leanings at least).

Old-fundamentalism majored on preaching grace for conversion but law for the converted. New calvinism preaches grace for conversion and grace for the converted.

Old-fundamentalism was largely cessationist in its view of the Spirit. New calvinism is fairly open handed towards the charismatic movement.

IMHO there are hardly any expressions of new calvinism in South Africa at the moment (maybe one or two of the New Frontiers Churches - i.e. GodFirst Church in Joburg). There is still a lot of old-fundamentalism in SA.

I don't think you have a hope in hell of dialouge with old-fundamentalism - they're not interested in dialogue. As far as mainstream evangelicalism in this country goes you might find some dialogue. With the new calvinists however you might find many points of contact but you'll also encounter great difficulty in dialogue. I think we experienced some of that when we dialogued a year or two ago.

Greetings from the other side of the pond, everyone. Nic, thank you for the invite to this fabulous place.

My heart has been deeply troubled and saddened by the spirit of so-called "discerners" online, most recently this site discerningtheworld2. It breaks my heart to watch people use Jesus as a battering ram and God's holy Word as a weapon. I had been commenting there for a few days until most recently when everything I write is deleted. If I get a chance I will post here some of what I wrote that the author of that blog would not allow on her site.

The phrase "fear mongering" became popular here in the US with the recent presidential election. The right wing conservatives, trying to grasp any ray of hope as they watched their chances of being elected slip away, resorted to fear tactics. Everything about their campaign was negative. The reason to vote Republican, it seemed, was because if you didn't you would die (or democracy would die, which in some people's eyes are one and the same as physical death). The contrast was vivid between their message and that of the Democrats who were speaking words that were filled with hope and presenting an actual plan for the future of the nation (lest you think I'm a nationalist please check out my blog and a recent essay I wrote about pledging allegiance to the flag). The lesson I think I learned from our recent election is that when you are a dying breed and know it, when you sense the life has left and there is no longer anything to be for, you naturally resort to fear tactics. Scare the hell out of 'em, so the saying goes.

Discernment sites like this one and others remind me of the gasping, rasping, exhausted and impotent Republican party who have nothing to offer any longer but fear. The message is not one of hope and promise but fear and dread. Evangelism is about scaring the hell out of 'em.

Emergents do not believe we have to scare the hell out of anyone. Rather, we believe that God has already done that in Jesus Christ. Because of Jesus, hell has already been delivered a fatal blow. Satan is defeated. Christ is victorious. Emergents believe that it is the task of the church to be evangelical in the truest sense of the word, meaning, we are evangelical because we have GOOD NEWS to proclaim! It is not a fear mongering gospel but one that liberates. We announce to the world and all that is in it the truth about them, whether they realize it or not. What is this truth? That you are reconciled to God. Therefore, BE reconciled! You are saved and you no longer have to continue living the lie that a limping, dying Satan is feeding you. In a sense, emergents are fundamentalists in that we believe strongly in THIS story - it is the truest story ever told.

The difference between the two types of fundamentalists, in my opinion, is one is exclusive and the other inclusive. I can have deep, meaningful disagreements with others and yet I stop far short of calling them an anti-Christ, false prophet, liar, sinner, pagan or any of the many names myself and our friends have been called by so-called "discerners." Fundamentalists of the conservative stripe must paint anyone who is not like them, who does not think like them, as the enemy or else they feel that they will lose control, lose power and lose the "election." Emergent fundies have no such worries because we know that Jesus holds all authority on earth and in heaven and Jesus is big enough to gather ALL things into himself and is "all in all" (see Eph. 1).

Nic, blessings and peace on you and your friends. Continue to proclaim that hope that is found in Christ alone because of what Christ has done. Fear and hate will not have the last word, but the good news of the gospel will live forever.

grace and peace.

Chad - thank you for your enormously graceful and insightful words.

So true - fear is a symptom of an already sinking system. If the gospel means ANYTHING at all, it means being saved from fear. Perfect Love as it says , drives out fear. And yet these sociopaths and self appointed "elect" are awash with it, and keep on denying it. Its quite ludicrous.

Many of us have got all hot under our collars. I think thats right. But its now the time for sane reflection; I'm writing on it on my blog. We will not change their minds, but we can learn from the experience.

I'd love to know what your deleted comments are. If the exchange on satan the trickster embracing the emerging-snake (in which I come out as Dr Evils Big Brother) is anything to go by, the closer you got to the truth, the more lightly your comments would be deleted by the presiding megalomanical control freak there.

Nic, that might be a slight exaggeration :-)
"A megalomaniac is a dictatorial individual who is a control freak, and also has grandiose, over-ambitious plans of enormous proportions. Hitler, Saddam Hussein and Nicolai Ceaucescu were prime examples, as is Robert Mugabe. "

Deborah, surely it's not unloving to point out a condition? After all, isn't it the loving thing to do to point out the grave sin of the emergents??

By the way, if you're not scared of such a label, why don't you take the test and see for yourself if it's true:
http://teenadvice.about.com/library/teenquiz/40/blcontrolfreak.htm