IMonk on Johnny Mac

The IMonk has posted a good interaction with John MacArthur's new book on the emerging church.
An excerpt:

"When he is expounding scripture, Dr. Macarthur is at his strongest. This book contains an excellent study of portions of the book of Jude. Those familiar with Dr. Macarthur’s skill as an expositor and his strong commitment to stay close to the message of scripture will be pleased with this book. Dr. Macarthur does mention that he has covered the Biblical material elsewhere, but this book is more pointed towards the issues of postmodernism, relativism and the emerging church.

When Dr. Macarthur leaves his specialty of exposition, he is a different writer, one far less commendable...

The emerging church is the main target of Macarthur’s polemic. Throughout the book, Macarthur returns to examples of the extreme truth-rejecting, certainty-denying tendencies of the emerging church. Of course, for Macarthur, the emerging church is an entity much like a denomination. Brian Mclaren- the major recipient of critical condemnation in this book- is the epitome of the emerging church, but it is just as well defined by a reference to Rob Bell, a second hand description of Mark “the Cussing Preacher” Driscoll and the outrageous definiton of preaching cited from Doug Padgett (sic).

Anyone who knows the emergent church knows that none of these four persons represents anything close to the entirety of “the emerging church.” While Mclaren is an easy- and deserving- target, it appears that almost nothing is known of Driscoll except Don Miller’s description of him, a description Driscoll has commented on at length in an interview with Michael Horton, and if anything is known of Padgett (sic) or Bell beyond what one could read at Ken Silva’s website, it’s not obvious here. The research level in the book seems deficient for a serious study...

I am not in any way writing to defend what Dr. Macarthur condemns. I am not a spokesperson for the emerging church, though apparently that perception is why I received a copy of the book. Many of those persons he mentions deserve to be criticized and questioned. But many also deserve to be heard more carefully and understood better. The research here is not up to the levels of even modest academic examination of the influence of postmodernism or the truth about the emerging, missional conversation in all its expressions."

As I watch the whole thing from well-within the emerging church I become more and more disappointed with this kind of critique, of which MacArthur's book is only the latest... because at a certain point I begin to wonder when "research [that is] is not up to the levels of even modest academic examination" becomes "bearing false witness." I've seen a lot of people less influential and respected than MacArthur do just that, and now?

But the broad brush is easiest, and labeling someone "outside the truth" guarantees book sales. I mean, who's going to buy the "I generally like them but have a few concerns" potboiler? But plenty of people will line up to hear about the next group that's driving evangelicalism into the ditch- mostly because they seem to like hearing about people driving evangelicalism into a ditch. It's a genre now, with it's own built-in constintuency and that pretty much guarantees more of the same from the publishers.

Only problem is when you feed people a consistent diet of that kind of red meat, eventually they start looking at you with hungry eyes as well. Train people to look for, point out, and divide over every doctrinal difference and eventually you'll say something that will have them turning on you.

It's sad that there are now people who will refuse to buy John MacArthur's book on postmodernism/the emerging church and who seem to be ready to throw him under the bus because of his views/comments on eschatology. Sad... and appropriate (in a Gal 5:15 kind of way...)

Comments

[david]

bob,

i share your frustration. as someone who is not "within" the emerging church (is that even possible), i am growing weary of those who have been given great privilege (read: a very visible platform from which to speak) only to squander it.

what if men like macarthur and carson would spend the time to really understand this "thing" that is the church emerging? what if they were to say to their people, "i don't agree with all of this, and some of the things are a little dangerous... but let's listen because some of these voices are prophetic."

wouldn't that be refreshing?

the more i see people choosing up sides, the more determined i am to sit this one out...

[Chris Sowers]

I wanted to comment on this but it turned into a little more than a comment so I just put a response on my blog. But, I share both your view (Bob) and David's.

[Steve]

John MacArthur's expository skills fall off the track with his cessationistic views. The man needs a hug!

[Aaron Smith]

I think Jesus left out, "Blessed are the heresy sniffers" for a reason.

[Geoff Surratt]

Standing deep within my own camp and hurling rocks at your camp almost never leads to better understanding and productive dialog regardless of the name on my flag (emerging, attractional, missional, multi-site, conservative, liberal or a host of others) While we'll probably never all get along, we could at least spend some time in each other's tents before we launch missles.

[Ken]

The sad thing is that I picture Satan sitting back giggling gleefully as he watches christians bickering among themselves instead of showing love to one another. Nothing nullifies the effectiveness of a unit (family, military, etc.) more efficiently than dissention and bickering.

How can we expect the secular world to take us seriously if we act no better than they?

(Disclaimer:This isn't a condemnation/attack on this post, it is simply venting of my frustration with people of either side who feel the need to pick sides and throw their own poop at eachother.)

[Greg Laughery]

Bob
Scot at Jesus Creed has an extremely helpful response to the MacArthur types that's well worth reading. As more and more of this friction-tension arises, following the crucified and risen One is essential. Mediation was often the way of Jesus, and while this is sometimes the most difficult path for us to take, it may give greater credibility to emerging.
Greg

[david]

ironically...

i'm preparing for my small group meeting tonight. we're using macarthur's study of romans (and you didn't think i really was "middle of the road").

macarthur writes:

"We are quick to exclude from our group those we deem undesirable -- those who fail to flatter us, support our opinions, reinforce our prejudices, boost our pride, feed our egos, or whose style of life is significantly different...Such intolerant exclusivism grieves the heart of the Lord Jesus Christ, whose purpose and prayer was that believers 'may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You...'"

great words! particularly for this discussion!

[bob]

Whoa! Hoisted on his own petard as it were.

Thanks all of you who are commenting on this-

And thanks for stopping in Geoff Surratt! Most commonly known as the brother of the pastor to former American Idol contestant Chris Sligh!

Also known as a pioneer in the Video Venue style of church, someone I've had some friendly interactions with here over that particular philosophy.

For the record, I'm not saying MacArthur shouldn't critique the emerging church... it's more an issue of how it's done.

I want to be careful that in a number of ways- 1. That I don't come across as trying to stifle dissent or say that the emerging church is somehow above or beyond critique- may it never be!

2. I also want to be careful that as I critque other forms of church, mostly on a philosophical and theological basis, that I give them what I want from MacArthur- a generosity of spirit and a listening ear- and eyes to see what God is doing in all our forms of church through what we're doing or in spite of what we're doing.

[Geoff Surratt]

Hey Bob,

Thanks for the welcome, I'm always hanging around your neighborhood even if I don't always comment. I always appreciate your honesty and humility.

I certainly don't think that you try to stifle disent or lack a generosity of spirit, and my comment was not aimed at you. My frustration is with both "sides" of many of the disagreements in the church world. Often there is a spirit of "we're right so you must be wrong" rather than the idea that there are many ways to arrive at the same place. And often those arguing the loudest are the ones who have little or no experience outside of their own camp.

I'm trying to get as much experience as I can in as many camps as I can to find what God is saying to me. That's why I hang around places like the bob.blog as well as several huge attractional churches and many places in between. Right now I'm working on the model of an attractional organic church with a missional mindset. I think everyone will be able to throw rocks at that.

Now onto the bigger question; what kind of country keeps Sinjaya and votes off Chris Sligh?