Protestanism emerged with the printing press and today we have the media: radio, television, most recently the internet, and the advent of the global village that cannot but have an effect on religion. Actually I began coming to theooze after reading the book: "The Fall of the Evangelical Nation" I have also been reading some of the New Atheists and the conclusion that I have drawn from these events are troubling to me. The crux of the problem facing Christianity today is dealing with the fact/value dichotomy. Anything other than science is assigned to it's position in the value realm. There is an lose of what Nancy Pearcey calls the unity of truth. The attempts to bridge that gap without looking foolish is becoming increasingly difficult. I am not sure of what is going to happen in the future, but I see it as a struggle between what is called the emerging church and the emerging "Brave New World" with it's hedonistic and nihilistic frames of orientation. I don't believe the brave new world is going to be a very happy place.

I think that it is the natural evolution of all systems to become something more, and in the case of Christianity, it means new denominations all the time, coming from each new generation's experience of the divine. it's the way things grow. not good or bad in and of itself ... it just is.

Tammy said:

I think that it is the natural evolution of all systems to become something more, and in the case of Christianity, it means new denominations all the time, coming from each new generation's experience of the divine. it's the way things grow. not good or bad in and of itself ... it just is.

I find this topic funny.
I know of some/many Christians who will claim that the First Century Church was a single "denomination" (therefore this is what we should strive to return to, is the logic), and as the years and centuries went by, the church divided, and split, and divided and split; constantly splintering.

The fact of the matter is, even this "original" first century church was by no means a unified whole. Even at that point in time there were numerous 'factions'. I mean, Gnosticism was alive and well at that time. It was the whole reason why (that demon!) St. Ireneus attempted to unify the various factions - attempted to create a 'universal' church (a catholic church).... and ultimately attempted to eradicate the Gnostics.

Ultimately, I believe it is human nature to want to own something; to want to have their own spin on it.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean, Tammy, when you say "...it is the natural evolution of all systems to become something more..." (and I'm not sure if I agree or disagree).

If by 'systems' you mean Christianity as a whole, I don't see this is a evolution, but a devolution.

I think with the internet, not only is information readily available instantly at our fingertips, often times we're misinformed and the info. is simply wrong.

Ultimately where I believe this is all leading is an individual denomination for each and every Christian out there.

I know personally, I cannot clearly define what being a Christian is anymore.
I've long since stopped identifying myself as Christian, but that doesn't mean I am not one. I simply don't care for the title. I'll allow each and every Christian out there who's interested to define the term for me, and either accept me as one, or not accept me as one.

I don't attribute a positive spin to the word evolution. so I don't care if it's called evolution or devolution. it's just the inevitable change that comes with human systems.

does that make more sense?

Tammy said:

I don't attribute a positive spin to the word evolution. so I don't care if it's called evolution or devolution. it's just the inevitable change that comes with human systems.

does that make more sense?

Got ya!

I view Emerging as a movement which pulls very hard on pendulum to get it move back towards a center position, though I think the movement will eventually be dispersed by a number of different factions.

Galadriel said:

will this all boil down to another denomination?

Emergent is already a denomination... and it's run by this guy:

Heh, great video! I've always thought that Emergent and emerging are two separate streams of thought, though? Have they merged into the same thing now?

@MJG791 Do you think there's anything that would keep that from happening?

I don't think emergent was ever a stream of thought, but more like a realization that something else was going on. The way churches were constantly worried about reaching Gen X, and Gen Y and Z [in order to ensure their longevity] was misreading a more profound shift... beyond merely dressing up the old evangelical language in new, hip generational clothing. The world was going through a fundamental change... as it had when the features of the Enlightenment ran up against the Medieval world, or when the Industrial Age revolutionized an agrarian reality. There would naturally be a reciprocal change in theology and practice.

If my friends had wanted to create a trend, they would have organized in such a way so as to capitalize on some semblance of a "New Movement". Believe me, they had seen all of that before and knew how to do it. Instead they created a grassroots theological conversation and a generative friendship. How subversive! A conversation and a friendship... that is still what emergent is. Conversations and friendships are powerful forces, moreso than books and conferences and the accoutrements of modernist christianity.

I don't think one can blame people for only being able to understand any of what is going on through the framework of old, outdated understandings. We see something unusual and we try to file it in an old mental category. But the world is already full-on in change from the trappings of post-Enlightenment modernism. And we are watching it unfold everyday in our lives, on the ooze, and in your favorite information outlets. The old institutions are failing, running down, collapsing even. Time to rethink.

@Galadriel I don't know.

I think the emerging movement grew too big too fast and unless something happens, I think it'll continue to change drastically.

I am reminded of a recent Colbert Report (or maybe Daily Show) segment they did about the gayest cities in America and how there are major differences between the older homosexual community and the newer homosexual community.

Its just changing so fast, and as noted by Toy, a lot of what made the movement different has already been integrated by others... to be fair, because there was a lot of good stuff that needed correction. But it needs a lot more to continue as a movement over the long term.