I’ve just finished a book called Why We’re Not Emergent (By Two Guys Who Should Be). Having read a few books recently by authors in the emergent movement, I felt like I wanted a different perspective on some of the things I was reading. (This book is more about emergent than emerging.) I think this book tried to give an honest critique of key issues - while commenting on many positives they are honest about some problems they see. Some things they discuss include: the idea of a journey without a destination, if doubt and uncertainty should really be seen as humility, the emergent view of modernism, the need for propositions, boundaries, and recognition of theological error, problems with “give me Jesus, not doctrine” perspective, an over-realised eschatology, the emergent view of scripture, the place of preaching, penal substitution, God’s wrath and much more. But I think they manage to join the ‘conversation’ in an often humorous, but humble way. You can check out part of the book on their website here. And here are a few reviews from various sides: Tim Challies, Dan Kimball and theooze.com.In the last chapter (the best I think), one of the authors reflects on the churches in Revelation and highlights the need for emergent and non-emergent churches to be careful not to be lopsided churches; learning the beauty of AND, not just either / or:
“...my hope is that [the church] could be marked by grace and truth, logical precision and warmhearted passion, careful thinking and compassionate feeling, strong theology and tender love, Christian liberty and spiritual discipline, congregational care and committed outreach, diversity without doctrinal infidelity, ambition without arrogance, and contentment without complacency...I believe this is God’s vision for the church.” p257