 |
Why We're Not Emergent: By Two Guys Who Should Be by Kevin DeYoung, Ted Kluck
Book Summary InformationAuthor: Kevin DeYoung, Ted Kluck Foreword: David F. Wells Edition: Paperback Audio: English (Unknown); English (Original Language); English (Published) Published: 2008-04-01 ISBN: 0802458343 Number of pages: 256 Publisher: Moody Publishers Product features: - ISBN13: 9780802458346
- Condition: New
- Notes: BRAND NEW FROM PUBLISHER! 100% Satisfaction Guarantee. Tracking provided on most orders. Buy with Confidence! Millions of books sold!
Book Reviews of Why We're Not Emergent: By Two Guys Who Should BeBook Review: Informative, readable, balanced, and humorous treatment of the emerging church Summary: 5 Stars
I confess that when I first saw the "cool" poly-chromatic cover of this book and the provocative title I envisioned something alone the lines of "Do Hard Things" by the Harris boys---a book that doesn't give you serious insight as much as it makes you smile and think, "Gee, I'm glad that there's still solid kids out there!" While I would have enjoyed such a book, what I actually read was immensely superior.
The book is a theological and "on-the-street" perspective of the emerging church (henceforth EC), written by two Reformed guys in their early thirties. Both great writers, they each contribute in a different way while still complementing one another. I appreciate that they worked on this together. I'll discuss Kevin DeYoung, the pastor-theologian, first. DeYoung's theological treatment is very well-researched, balanced, and wide. He hits all of the main facets of the EC, succinctly summarizing the essence of this movement and deftly pointing out its flaws.
Since the EC is difficult to define, I was very curious as to how DeYoung would actually begin. Much to my surprise and delight, on p. 20-22 he presented a long list of characteristics that give you a decent feel for what this whole "emergent" thing is all about. This is the beauty of stereotypes---though imperfect and often times exaggerative, its still nice to read them and think to yourself, "Ohh... I think I see who he's talking about." This approach works because it gives the reader context, allowing him to draw upon what he probably already knew but could never put a name on. And then DeYoung spends the rest of the book filling in the details or sanding off the rough edges of some of the more questionable or comical stereotypes.
And as I mentioned, DeYoung seems to cover all of the bases: journey versus destination, "Jesus is all I need" theology, God's "knowability", revelation, mystery, certainty, doubt, argument versus conversation, propositions, foundationalism, postmodernism, modernism, orthodoxy, "repainting the faith," theological and political liberalism, doctrinal boundaries, exclusivism, false dichotomies, semantic difficulties, church leadership, preaching, social justice and activism, the kingdom of God, the gospel, Hell, and God's wrath.
Once again, his discussion of these topics isn't an in-depth scholarly treatment, but it doesn't need to be. DeYoung spends sufficient time on each topic before moving on, generally stating the emergent position (using the words of emergent thinkers, of course), gently pointing out the problems, and explaining the significance of the issue from a Refomed perspective. He certainly has a gift for organization---each chapter covers just the right amount of topics that seem to have just enough in common with one another. All the chapters are valuable, but I particularly enjoyed the one on the "boogeyman" of modernism, which points out the historical revisionism behind the emergent caricature of evangelicalism.
As mentioned before, DeYoung is charitable towards the EC---perhaps too charitable. I'm glad he admits that he could be misunderstanding them and that he's not trying to lump the whole movement together. I disagree, however, that all segments of the EC loves Jesus. Maybe the far more tame Scot McKnight variety, but I don't see how the EC can so openly deny Christ's words and yet sincerely love Him (2 John 6-9), as DeYoung sometimes claims (p. 204). To his credit, he does state fairly bluntly that some thinkers, like Burke and Chalke, have essentially abandoned the gospel. A few more minor criticisms: DeYoung at one point unwittingly nods his head toward the very fallibilist argument that renders knowing God (or anything, for that matter) impossible (p. 83). Next, I wish he had explained in brief why social justice---a huge pillar in the emergent orthopraxy wing---is unbiblical. Finally, DeYoung often describes the emergent church position from a first-person perspective, which can be confusing. For example, on p. 194 he alternates between describing his position and the emergent position, without using quotes or italics to differentiate, in the same paragraph.
Moving on to Ted Kluck: I love this guy. Though I bought the book primarily for the theological insight, I found his chapters very well-written, clever, and laugh-out-loud hilarious. In journaling his thoughts and experiences with the EC and some of its critics he really does capture a lot of the frustration, attitude, and emotion of the emergent church. Though he is dead serious at times, much of his writing is satirical, which I greatly appreciate. Whether poking fun at John Piper "groupies" or describing Rob Bell's white, middle-class, suburbanite congregation trying to sing civil rights spirituals, Kluck often had me rolling. Indeed, for all of the hoopla about being innovative, different, postmodern, whatever---the EC really doesn't bring any new moves to the dance. Its warmed over theological liberalism with a side-helping of neo-orthodoxy, all wrapped in cute cliches and pseudo-intellectual verbiage. At times this is troublesome, at times its just downright silly. Kluck emphasizes both nicely without coming across as having an axe to grind.
As a Calvinist I appreciate DeYoung and Kluck's Reformed perspective. I think that Reformed theology, particularly presuppositional apologetics, offers an antidote to the disillusionment of both traditional evangelicalism and "postmodern theology". I won't go into depth on that topic here, but I did enjoy DeYoung drawing upon Jonathan Edwards, John Piper, and DA Carson.
Finally, I want to defend DeYoung and Kluck against the notion that the book's subtitle is just a marketing gimmick. I do believe that many of us young guys raised in the evangelical church "should be" emergent---according to the EC, at least. You see, I just spent five years at a conservative Christian school where I saw firsthand the fruit of the clash between the "modernists" and the "postmodernists". (Wasn't pretty.) I saw the arguments on both sides. I became disillusioned with much of evangelicalism---both the form and the doctrine. I should be emergent. But instead I became Reformed. Likewise, since DeYoung and Kluck operate right outside of MSU they of all people should know that "modern Christianity" isn't working in this "postmodern culture". But instead of abandoning orthodox Christianity for paradox, mystery, and uncertainty they are holding tight to the faith once for all delivered to the saints.
In conclusion, I was already familiar with the EC before I read this book, having read McLaren, Bell, and Miller, but I can easily say that I walked away with a more solid understanding of the movement. I will undoubtedly recommend this book as the best overview of the EC available: charitable, insightful, informational, humorous, and---last but not least---just the right length.
Summary of Why We're Not Emergent: By Two Guys Who Should Be?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.
|
 |