|
Why We're Not Emergent: By Two Guys Who Should Be | 
 enlarge | Authors: Kevin Deyoung, Ted Kluck
Creator: David F. Wells
Publisher: Moody Publishers
Category: Book
List Price: $14.99
Buy New: $9.02
You Save: $5.97 (40%)
New (28) Used (8) from $8.99
Avg. Customer Rating:  23 reviews
Sales Rank: 1516
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 256
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.8
Dimensions (in): 8.9 x 5.9 x 0.6
ISBN: 0802458343
Dewey Decimal Number: 270.83
EAN: 9780802458346
ASIN: 0802458343
Publication Date: April 1, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: Brand New, Perfect Condition, Please allow 4-14 business days for delivery. 100% Money Back Guarantee, Over 1,000,000 customers served.
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
“You can be young, passionate about Jesus Christ, surrounded by diversity, engaged in a postmodern world, reared in evangelicalism and not be an emergent Christian. In fact, I want to argue that it would be better if you weren’t.” The Emergent Church is a strong voice in today’s Christian community. And they’re talking about good things: caring for the poor, peace for all men, loving Jesus. They’re doing church a new way, not content to fit the mold. Again, all good. But there’s more to the movement than that. Much more. Kevin and Ted are two guys who, demographically, should be all over this movement. But they’re not. And Why We’re Not Emergent gives you the solid reasons why. From both a theological and an on-the-street perspective, Kevin and Ted diagnose the emerging church. They pull apart interviews, articles, books, and blogs, helping you see for yourself what it’s all about.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 18 more reviews...
 worthwhile read July 3, 2008
This is a good book to read if you don't know anything about the "emergent" church. It attempts to give a broad overview of the movement and criticizes what it perceives as gaps in its beliefs and teachings while at the same time admitting that there could be exceptions to its criticisms. The one question I did not find answered by the authors is whether the members of the "emergent" church are enjoying the love of God in their daily walk with it's life changing benefits. In other words, is there fruit from this work? It is not unusual for the Holy Spirit to move among us in a "new" way before those blessed develop a theology, but changed lives is an immediate sign that God is part of any movement.
 The Literary Lesson of Lovelessness June 29, 2008
2 out of 6 found this review helpful
I requested this book for review from Moody Publishers and they were kind enough to comply.
As I flipped to the first page inside the cover, there's an endorsement at the top of the page by D.A. Carson. Carson's book, published in 2005 entitled, "Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church" was hardly a fair handed treatment of the topic the title purportedly represents. Furthermore, Carson's claims that Brian McLaren has "largely abandoned the gospel" (pp. 186-187) was evidence to me that Mr. Carson neither knows Brian or has any legitimate grasp of what McLaren is all about in terms of his literary contributions over the past several years and the way McLaren has lived and currently lives his life. Carson captures the essence of why I developed the motivation and went through the effort to read "Why We're Not Emergent - By Two Guys Who Should Be" by Ted Kluck and Kevin DeYoung when he writes: "If emerging church leaders wish to become a long-term prophetic voice that produces enduring fruit and that does not drift off toward progressive sectarianism and even, in the worst instances, outright heresy, they must listen at least as carefully to the criticisms of their movement as they transparently want others to listen to them." (p.234 - Carson, D.A. "Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church" Zondervan, 2005). Well, D.A., transparently, that's why I read Ted and Kevin's book that has your endorsement as numero uno inside the front cover.
From purely a literary and style standpoint, this book is extremely well written and easy to read. The author's intentions for writing the book are quite clear: "We write this book because the more we learn about the emerging church, the harder it is to swallow (p.23). DeYoung and Kluck even spell out what success might mean to them in writing it when they state: "In fact, if our book makes emergent folks indignant enough to stand up and tell us more definitively what they believe, we will consider this book a success."(pp.23-24). The authors also confess what they suspect may be one of the outcomes of their book: "It reminds me of how sad this all is --- this us/them mentality --- and how writing a book titled Why We're Not Emergent probably won't help at all in the "further alienating friends and acquaintances" department." (p.99). Well, when you take 256 pages to attempt to discredit and seemingly dismember a whole group of folks (none of whom you indicated you had an actual face-to-face conversation with) who were created by the same loving God you profess has created you...well...you get the picture.
The overall effect this book had on me was to ponder the existence of lovelessness within the so-called Christian community. Using an excerpt from this book, DeYoung and Kluck succinctly characterize the essence of this impact when they write:
"Ephesus' lovelessness manifested itself in another kind of sin, not just a lack of life-giving fellowship but a lack of life-giving witness. The followers of Christ were so busy battling and protecting and defending that they had turned inward to self-protection and suspicion. They were navel-gazers, with no vision or purpose outside themselves. They were great at keeping the world out of the church, but they were terrible at taking the church out into the world...It is sad but true. Theologically astute churches and theologically minded pastors sometimes die of dead orthodoxy. Some grow sterile and cold, petrified as the frozen chosen, not compromising with the world, but not engaging it either. We may think right, live right, and do right, but if we do it off in a corner, shining our lights at one another to probe our brothers sins instead of pointing our lights into the world, we will, as a church, grow dim, and eventually our light will be extinguished." (p. 244).
The book by Kluck and DeYoung is filled with the theme described in the paragraph above --- lovelessness. It is clearly a bush league sucker-punch from a methodological standpoint in terms of what might be characterized as a form of legitimate social research. It is essentially a review of the published emergent literature (books and blogs) where excerpts are used to validate the points being made by the authors, without sufficient (in some cases any) impartial, substantive reference to the context of the material excerpted. Furthermore, there are no interviews with the likes of those duly dismembered like Brian McLaren, Tony Jones, Rob Bell, Donald Miller, Dave Tomlinson, Steve Chalke, Spencer Burke, Doug Pagitt, Barry Taylor, Erwin McManus, Dwight Friesen...sorry if I might have missed you. The authors really missed an opportunity to write a vastly more valuable and legitimate literary work had they taken the opportunity to sit down, engage in face-to-face interaction, and discuss their points of inquiry beyond the sole sources they relied upon.
This book is an intentional, unfortunate approach to protecting and defending what Kluck and DeYoung claim to know as truth. The lovelessness inherent throughout the text (save for numerous places where they clearly attempt to exhibit graciousness - they do) by shining the light on their brother's perceived sins caused my light to grow dim. Kluck and DeYoung are convinced that they think right, do right and live right. Yet, they've done it off in a corner, behind the backs of their brothers, sucking the oxygen out of the room that prevented the life giving witness this project had the distinct potential to become to be snuffed out before the ink was dry on the pages.
The vast distinction between these two authors and the people they take 256 pages to attempt to discredit is summarized in the following quote from Kluck and DeYoung: "One of the things that keeps me grounded as a pastor is to ask myself, "Will this help me and my people die well?" (p.252). Well, that's one of the fundamental reasons why I'm not enamored with your book, or the life you script for those who claim the name of Christ, who still live and breathe as I do on this planet. As Neil Cole wrote in his book, Organic Church - Growing Faith Where Life Happens: "Christianity is always just one generation away from extinction. If we fail to reproduce ourselves and pass the torch of life into the hands of the next generation, Christianity will be over within just one generation. Yet, because of the power of multiplication, we are also one generation away from worldwide fulfillment of the great commission. The choice is ours." (p.105).
I would refer you to a splendid source of superb social research to reconsider your stated thesis above about "dieing well." This research is laid out in David Kinnaman's newly released book (October 2007) entitled, unChristian - What a New Generation Really Thinks About Christianity - And Why It Matters. Kinnaman has been George Barna's protege over the last 12 years and is President of the Barna Group, unequivocally the ongoing source of reliable social research about Christians, Christianity and the Church, particularly in the U.S..
This book is sobering. I wept at certain parts of it. We Christians have made a mess of Christianity in North America and the established Church most certainly has its share of the blame. As Kinnaman says, "We can't change what we are known for unless we change how we live." (p. 231). This "living" includes the "life" of the Church. Kinnaman goes on to say that we must "discern how deep and serious the problems are, so that our missional engagement in the coming years won't be more of the same." (emphasis is mine).
It is my prayer that we shall choose to cease engaging in the lovelessness that we birth and perpetuate in well intentioned books like Why We're Not Emergent - By Two Guys Who Should Be. Of course, we can conjure up all sorts of rationalizations and justifications based upon various perversions of duty and a maligned sense of self-righteousness. However, the world yearns for the life-giving witness that only the presence of such lovelessness prevents. The choice is ours.
Call Brian McLaren and Tony Jones. Buy them lunch. You can't help but love these guys. The love of Christ remains contagious. May we all infect this, His world, with the same. The choice is ours.
 A good roadmap in a minefield. June 26, 2008
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
I have worked full-time in Young Life for 30 years and am also ordained in the PCA. And I have been very disturbed by the number of our young staff and leaders who are jumping on the Emerging bandwagon without any theological reflection whatsoever. I've read a ton of Emerging stuff, and also D.A. Carson's very heady critique of the movement. But this book is just what I was looking for. It's well researched, appropriately humble, appropriately tough, and extremely readable. These guys deal with nearly all of the landmines and deficiencies of the Emerging movement and make a strong case for the idea that it is not nearly as "emergent" as it says it is. They take some of the Emerging icons to task for shoddy and even sub-Christian theology. A valuable book to share with those who are captivated by this Emerging fluff.
What more can I say... I liked it so much that I bought 25 copies and have already mailed 14 out to friends who need to understand why the Emerging movement is such a dangerous thing. And I'm sure the last 11 will be gone soon!
Solid, entertaining and "relevant" June 9, 2008
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
This is a great book to share with your family or friends who are interested in the Emerging/t movement. Although the indictment of the failing American church is a valid argument. The solution is NOT to forsake the bible and the gospel to cater to our corrupt culture. The power of the gospel is not in our feeble, human presentation but in the Holy Spirit's faithfulness to the simple truth. This is very easy to read. The handoff's between the two authors in each chapter make it addicting.
Can You Critique An UnDefined Movement? June 6, 2008
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
Young people seem to have a way of looking at the status quo and finding flaws and errors; and feeling frustrated at the existing structures and beliefs and traditions. And, so, they criticize and challenge and initiate change. Frankly, that can be good and it has its place and it is, no doubt, an inevitable part of life.
Sometimes, however, after the years go by, and these young people have aged and gained some experience at the school called "life", they come to see that some of those old structures and beliefs and traditions had some wisdom that they had overlooked in their youthful omniscience and zeal.
That is, of course, a great oversimplification of reality, but that's the thought about the "Emergent Movement" that kept occurring to me as I read "Why We're Not Emergent".
This is an interesting book that does a good job of explaining and critiquing a movement that is inherently hard to define and has no recognized headquarters or statement of beliefs--it's a movement where even its recognized leaders and spokespersons will sometimes not identify themselves as part of the movement. The authors characterize the task of defining and critiquing the Emergent movement as being like trying to nail jello to the wall. (At least, I think I read that in this book. I might be wrong. If I am, disregard the last three sentences and move rapidly to the next paragraph shaking your head and saying, "tsk, tsk.")
The book is interesting and funny and the positions of the authors--who are definitely not Emergent--were well reasoned and well stated. But, I appreciate that it was also, in my opinion, a reasonable and irenic treatment of the Emergent movement and its ideas and approach.
DeYoung and Kluck don't back down from stating their beliefs, but you get the impression that they were really trying to disagree lovingly. To "disagree lovingly" is a form of tolerance that is not well recognized in our culture because we've redefined the whole concept of tolerance so that many believe it means that everyone is always right. But DeYoung and Kluck write in a manner that evidences the true spirit of tolerance--which includes disagreement.
Why We're Not Emergent would be a helpful book for people who would like to gain some familiarity with the Emergent movement. And it could also be a profitable intellectual challenge and, dare I say, corrective, for those who consider themselves to be Emergent.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
