|
hellohellohi -> RE: Emerging/Emergent Church Movement. (6/5/2008 3:36:33 PM)
|
I'm only passingly aware of what this thread is about, but... It sounds like the emerging church is on the wrong side of (what some would call) a fine line between "speaking somebody's language" and not telling the truth. There is something to be said for coming into a culture with which one does not identify (even if it is in one's homeland) and figuring out what they care about so that dialogue can be started. It IS analagous to going to another country and first learning their language and figuring out a TRANSLATION of the Bible. How do we know how accurately the Bible has been translated into uh, [insert obscure language here]? The inerrancy of the Bible is reliant on the inerrancy of the translator! I'm not saying translations are therefore rife with error... BECAUSE, on the other hand, the concepts of sin; father and son; truth and a lie; forgiveness and reconciliation are surely universal and easily intelligible to any HUMAN BEING, regardless of language. Postmodernism may have some good points about treating everything as a text and encouraging "close reading" in all things, but its dismissal of the universal is, well, silly. However, this topic is interesting to me because I feel like I was helped (by the Holy Spirit, of course) while I was reading and considering ideas that are the progenitors of postmodernism, the existenalists. What I have taken away from my experience is that the best way to evangelize may not always be the breathless "WillyouaccepttodayJesusChristasyourLordandSaviour!?" (even though, it might be good too!!) but that one can spend time letting others talk and listen to what they have to say to find that perhaps they do have a kind of relationship with Jesus, though they don't yet know how to articulate it and have plenty of rebelliousness, etc. I am NOT saying that there are OTHER paths to Jesus, as if "the way of Jesus" is not the "narrow way" that He said but rather a road more-or-less travelled by all religions. Simply that it should be obvious that the Holy Spirit could be reaching for anyone before WE as evangelists struck up a conversation. Thus, I really don't believe it there is "a fine line" between truth and untruth (either something is a lie or it isn't). It can just vaguely sound like it when one, like me, is not dead-set on a METHOD. The Holy Spirit --I think someone was saying in a post -- is the method, of course. Not ONLY for the OTHER, so to speak, but for us, I mean the one in the role of evangelist. That's my two cents! Thanks
|
|
|
|