An emerging waste of time?

Weblogs... they are kind of like local newspapers. You get news/stories quickly, but they are all with a slant (you can see the writer's agenda, worldview, and views on the issue without even trying), and they come at a sacrifice of confirmed facts (not always, but they aren't quite as solid as say, a magazine or a text book). So should we give time to this art of weblogging? Or should we give it up and turn to better mediums?

I've been reading the book, The Younger Evangelicals: Facing the Challenges of the New World, by Robert E. Webber. I've only made it through three or four chapters, and I have learned a few surprising things about this Emerging/Emergent Church (or, "the younger evangelicals").

One thing is that the younger evangelicals (the emerging twenty-first century evangelical movement) are very postmodernistic. In other words, evangelicalism is once again about 25 years behind the world. But evangelicalisms slow uptake is hardly my main concern. This turn of evangelicalism seems to be in light of the "'epistemological shift' from the reason-based theology of the fundamentalists to a more experience-based faith, 'grounded in the whole person, in both body and mind.' Spirituality, mocked by the secular humanists of the sixties, is now a common quest and a respectable topic of conversation." (Webber, 45) No doubt a shift from just logic to a whole-person, integrative faith is ideal--that is true Christianity. However, is this what is really occurring? Or is the reasonableness of Christianity being sacrificed for emotional/experience driven relgion--a mystical faith that rivals the neo-orthodoxy of Barth and Brunner?

The younger evangelicals are very community drivien. This is very good. Christianity is not merely about the personal relationship with God--though that is an essential element that is not to be downplayed. Rather, as the New Testament makes witness, Christianity is also much about the communal relationship of the New Covenant people (the Church) to one another and to God. This is needed after the twentieth century's me-centered/market-driven church attitude.

Now, younger evangelicals, according to Webber, unlike everybody I talk to when I go out sharing the gospel, "are attracted to absolutes." However, "they don't want to arrive at absolutes through evidence or logic." Rather, they want truth that is a matter of both heart and mind (52). Such truth is essential--but at the sacrifice of logic, such truth is unattainable. Relativistic truth, or the myth syndrome, as is true of all post-modernity, will be all that is attained. While the younger evangelicals are ready and willing to commit whole-heartedly to anything with purpose, without reason, such a committal will be blind obedience--a mere leap of faith. As Webber points out, they may even commit "to a Hitler-like leader" (52). They commit with passion and their whole life, but will a commitment based upon blind obedience truly last? Or when a logical argument comes along (even if it is not completely logical--such as naturalism), since the human mind has been programmed by the Creator to embrace and love logic, will their faith crumble and leave them distraught and without an understanding of life/Christianity?

There is also a return to tradition. I consider this a good thing. I think we ought to return to ways that are truly Christian, such as those of the Awakenings and the Reformation, as to "would you like to accept Jesus"ism, and the megachurch movement. However, maybe I'm just opposed to everything new (like the internet, and the telephone, and the breakfast cereal), but I think what Webber is calling a return to Christian orthodoxy (I think he should have used "orthopraxy") does not seem to be true/historic/apostolic Christianity. The Christianity being proposed is not one to be accepted because it is a rational worldview, but one that is based upon "an ontological change in the human heart" wrought by the Holy Spirit (55). While that is necessary, and I believe whole-heartedly in Unconditional Election and Irresistible Grace, the gospel is a rational message. The gospel, that through which the Holy Spirit works, is a logical, coherent worldview...it is just the wisdom of God, and not the works-based wisdom of mankind.

Christianity has always been upheld because of its reasonableness. The great apologists of the first/second centuries (such as Justin Martyr, Iranaeus, etc) all used Christianity's logical coherence as the reason that the Romans should not persecute them. If Christianity is not reasonable, then it should have been done away with, and Rome was right to persecute them. Also, Christianity is completely based upon eyewitness reports of the risen Lord, Jesus Christ.

Now, I am not saying that we should return to modernism. Far from it. Modernity put too much of an emphasis on the abilities of the human intellect. However, to join with postmodernity in rejecting the necessity of logical coherence is not the answer. Christianity must have a both/and attitude. We must seek to understand and show Christianity's reasonableness as a worldview and we must also allow our theology and understanding transform us and conform us to the image of Christ.

Now, I'm not saying that this movement among younger evangelicals is all bad (I've named a few positives above). This movement in and of itself is not heretical, but those involved need to be careful. A rejection of reason, if it becomes a radical rejection, will lead no where but to an embrace of relativism and a loss of anything that is truly meaningful to historic Christianity. This movement needs to be monitored closely and constantly conversed with (D.A. Carson has a book out now that I hope to read later this summer titled Conversing with the Emerging Church that I'm sure will prove a beneficial read to all who pick it up).

The younger evangelicals are marked by there willingness to live radical Christian lives as is set it in Scripture, according to Webber. They are missions-focused, geared toward innercity ministry, and willing to be "real" (that's one of the catch-words). They are the "twenty-something" generation--they grew up with mass media and technological break-throughs (such as television constantly, ipods, and the internet). This in itself could lead to a lot of problems, as this constant stream of noise, flashy pictures, and constant drama has been shown to lead to depression, hyperactivity, and an inability to live in quiet (that is probably why they enjoy simple group settings so much, as they never experience such a relaxing atmosphere anywhere else).

So, since the younger evangelicals are going online (if it hasn't occurred yet, I'm sure that a weblog explosion will soon take place among this techno-savvy group), it seems to me that this is probably the medium that may reach them the most. This is a people that direly needs good theology, a proper perspective on Christianity, and a return to the embrace of reason as a necessary component of life. We must also remember that nonbelievers are online too. Weblogs may be a useful tool in this fight of the faith. There needs to be truth online.