About this title: From both a theological and an on-the-street perspective, DeYoung and Kluck diagnose the emerging church. They offer solid reasons why they are not a part of the Emergent Church's voice in today's Christian community.
Note: This is a general synopsis. Each listing is described below.
Binding: Paperback
Publisher: Moody Publishers
Date Published: 2008
ISBN-13:9780802458346ISBN:0802458343
Description: New. NEW and Unread but some copies may have slight wear and /or a publisher's remainder mark! Christian family owned business for over 15 years! read more
Binding: Softcover
Publisher: Moody Pub
Date Published: 2008-04-01
ISBN-13:9780802458346ISBN:0802458343
Description: NEW. Softcover. From an inventory that is 100% brand-new, 100% direct from the publishers' distribution channel. We carry NO pre-owned, NO remaindered. We pack in CARDBOARD to ensure the pristine quality is maintained. (Bubble-wrap alone is NOT sufficient to protect from USPS equipment. ) Guaranteed brand-NEW, protected with CARDBOARD, your satisfaction is guaranteed. BKLUVID: 9780802458346. read more
Edition: First edition.
Binding: Trade paperback
Publisher: Moody Publishers
Date Published: 2008
ISBN-13:9780802458346ISBN:0802458343
Description: New in very good dust jacket. Trade paperback (US). Glued binding. 256 p. Audience: General/trade. Justin Taylor, Project Director, ESV Study Bible, said about this book, "This is the first book I'd give someone who asks the question, 'What is the emerging church? '. This book is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED! read more
"It's funny reading some of the reviews from the emergents. They have barely any substance to their reviews and mostly engage in name-calling. One "reviewer" said the two authors of Why We're Not Emergent: By Two Guys Who Should Be seemed to lack "education and experience, judging from their arguments." Of course, any critical interaction with their arguments was, as you might expect, missing. Furthermore, I don't even know what that accusation amounts to. What doth experience hath to do with arguments? Arguments are good or bad if they are valid or invalid, sound or unsound, cogent or uncogent. It's not like you need to sleep around and snort coke like Scarface in order to put forth a good argument. Yeah, you'd be "experienced", but that doesn't mean you need to do that to have a good argument. Or is this the wrong way to take "experience"? I confess, I don't know how to take it, vague, ambiguous, and prima facie irrelevant as that word seems in this context.
Another reviewer critiqued Ted Kluck with some odd false dichotomy which implied that if the emerging church was just a gnat on the Christian landscape, then you wouldn't pay attention to it; or, you're just upset at losing some of the market share to Rob Bell. The reviewer topped this off by using a capital "T" for the word truth (how hip and po-mo, and just plain witty), as if that was a critique, and made some comments that total depravity and penal substitution made for a "bleak worldview." Well, there's always the Disney worldview. Not sure how true it is, but at least the oceans are made of chocolate milk. It may not be true, er, True, but at least it aint bleak.
I guess these examples serve as paradigm cases of how emergent-type people "engage" those they disagree with? I wouldn't know, I find it good for the soul to not "engage" with po-mo emergent types. It all reminds me of those parties where the stoned guy asks what is the sound of one hand clapping and all the rest of the partiers think he's deep.
I thought the book was good and the dynamic between the two authors, each authoring alternating chapters, made for a unique reading experience. DeYoung's chapters were more "scholarly" while Kluck's really fulfilled the aim of the title -- he's just a regular guy who "should be" emergent. Of course a seminary trained Reformed pastor wouldn't be emergent, he's been brain washed. But what about some dude? Some dude who seems to have a fair amount in common with emergent types? Why doesn't he dig your way of doing "church" (emergents don't really call it "church" anymore. That's kind of uncool. People want "love fests", or something)?
The authors succeeded in showing why they are not emergents, and they did so for reasons. Reasons that were argued for. They cited numerous statements by emergents, which should show any Bible believing Christian the dangers of the "movement" (but I guess they don't want to call it a movement. I think they like "discussion"). Of course, I have seen many reviewers claim that the authors attacked straw men. Well, I saw them interact with lengthy quotes, and none of the reviewers bothered to put the quotes into context and so demonstrate the charge of straw man burning.
The authors take time to point out some of the good concerns emergents have. They give them a nod when they see a valid complaint. But where the emergents are off, they're really off. One of the main complaints DeYoung and Kluck have is that emergents are too skeptical of doctrine and propositional truth. They point out that propositional truths are very important in the Bible. Salvation comes by believing in a historical person and what he did. Trusting and resting in actual things he accomplished in history. These truths matter, and so do stating the doctrines properly. Emergents never want to get pinned down it seems. They never want to affirm anything, other than "the church got it all wrong for two thousand years" and "holding to doctrines as the truth is dogmatic and arrogant." But like all po-mo and relativist types, these claims just seem self-defeating to me. Deyoung and Kluck point out that it's really not intellectually virtuous to throw out Christian doctrine and claim some kind of skepticism or ignorance in the name of "humility."
My only complaint is that I wish there had been more of a philosophical analysis of the emergent church. So far it seems to be mainly theologians interacting with the emergent church. Anyway, I would recommend this book if you are thinking about becoming emergent or have friends who are. I'm not sure it would do much good in the hands of an emergent Christian; after all, we got a glimpse of how they butchered it and treated it in my opening paragraphs. I could also be wrong about emergents, and wouldn't mind being corrected and shown that they are confessional, or at least hold to an identifiable set of positive doctrines, about the way things are. About how man is saved, and what happens to him when he dies. Stuff like that."
"This is a fantastic book dealing with the emergent church. The format of the book really helps. One author will take a chapter to give a very easy reading picture into the world of the emergent church or how we might interact with emergent views. They have a great sense of humor and really help give the emergent "aura". The other chapters get more academic and propositional. They explain very clearly critical arguments for emergent philosophy and positions.
They cover almost all of the main emergent discussion points Like: *Kindness vs. Evangelism *Unity/Tolerance vs. Doctrinal Propositions *Objective Truth vs. Humility *Kingdom Missional Living vs. Evangelizing for the Kingdom to Come
Having now read much of the emergent literature I believe they do this fairly, accurately and clearly.
If you are looking to learn "ABOUT" the emergent church - I think it would be better for someone to read "Blue Like Jazz", "Velvet Elvis" and possibly "Generous Orthodoxy" before reading this. I think you will have a better context to then relate their explanations to.
If you want a concise, clear biblical answer to the emergent church, then this book is great!"
"Balanced and enlightening discussion of the Emergent Church movement and the dangers of following this movement. Its imperative that we claim the truthfulness of God's word and have it shape culture rather than culture interpret God's word."
"DeYoung and Kluck seek to provide corrective boundaries for the theological exaggerations and abuses that they perceive within the emergent movement. While seeing some perspectives and emphases to be admired, DeYoung and Kluck identify a number of themes within the emergent church that seem contrary to historical orthodoxy, whether explicitly or by omission. Why We're Not Emergent is generally fair and accurate, if at times a bit uncharitable in its characterizations (Kluck's chapters seems especially quick to mock rather than engage emergent leaders). The book asks, appropriately, where are the theological boundaries of the emergent church, a movement which often spurns theological definitions and creeds. B+"
We guarantee every item's condition, as described on Alibris. If you are not satisfied that an item is as described, return your purchase for a refund.
Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures
rating
