Emergent No More?
"Emergent" is falling out of favor as a useful term. It's become "overused and corrupted." It is hard to conduct a productive dialog when the word has to be defined so careful to distinguish the target. However, I'd rather the bad ideas associated with some uses of the term rather than just the term were falling out of favor. It's the bad ideas, not the term, that's the problem.
Are they now "divergent emergent"?
Posted by: francis beckwith | September 19, 2008 at 12:28 PM
Careful Dr. Beckwith, someone may accuse you of having a sense of humor. As Christians we're supposed to be going around 'thumping' people on the head with the Bible. Or am I missing something here?
Posted by: Tim | September 19, 2008 at 02:22 PM
"Post-emergent" will be the new moniker for those of this ilk.
Posted by: cp | September 19, 2008 at 07:08 PM
If an Emergent Church merges with a Dutch Reformed Church, does it become a Detergent Church?
Posted by: francis beckwith | September 19, 2008 at 08:16 PM
"If an Emergent Church merges with a Dutch Reformed Church, does it become a Detergent Church?"
Now that right there is funnnnnny! Yes sir. Whooo hooo!
Posted by: Eric Peterman | September 20, 2008 at 09:18 AM
It's like the term "postmodernism": when it includes such *incredibly* divergent thinkers as Rorty and Heidegger, it loses meaning as it refers to no one in particular or mischaracterizes the thinkers who simply do not fit the overly-generalized understanding.
Posted by: Kevin Winters | September 20, 2008 at 09:44 AM
The names have been changed to protect the marginally emergent.
Posted by: Louis Kuhelj | September 20, 2008 at 12:09 PM