Emerging Movement: Future or Fad?

“the EM [emerging movement] is a missionally shaped ecclesiology that seeks to unite Christians for the sake of unleashing the gospel to change the world, rather than a theological movement designed to demand conformity on specific theological issues.”

Scot McKnight, The Future of Fad: A Look at the Emerging Church Movement, (PDF)

Ahhhhh. Now I can exhale. An American academic gets it.

Just going to take a little space here to enjoy the moment

ahhhh . . .


uuuuhuhhhhh . . .

Scot McKnight is Karl A. Olsson professor in religious studies at North Park University in Chicago. But more importantly, he is a blogger. This article is an Evangelical Covenant Church publication called The Covenant Companion.

Technorati Tags: ,


Andrew Jones launched his first internet space in 1997 and has been teaching on related issues for the past 20 years. He travels all the time but lives between Wellington, San Francisco and a hobbit home in Prague.


  • Mark Berry says:

    Amen – great quote

  • way out west says:


    TSK has this great quote from an article that quite a few folk seem to be talking about… I’ve downloaded the .pdf but not yet had chance to read it…  but here is the quote Andrew’s blog… “the EM

  • Liam says:

    At last a Emergent soundbite I can agree with entirely

  • dave says:

    I saw this article the other day. Strangely enough I got to it through emergentno, which is normally a source of anti-emergent bigotry.
    I thought McKnight’s criticisms were valid and all the more so because of his appreciation of the movement’s strengths.

  • jeffrey says:

    “Ahhhhh. Now I can exhale. An American academic gets it.”
    ha ha ha. Yup. We capitalistic, thick headed, Americans always seem to turn EVERYTHING into a competition and a program…
    oh yeah, an I do tend to lurk here, my bad. lol.

  • jim says:

    Hello! This my first time bloggin so if I don’t have correct eticate or something, please extend me grace. LOL
    I have a question about the article and the statment about the “theological” and “missional” dichotomy. Can we as Christians have a proper mission without a proper theology? I am not saying that all people of the Way must agree on all things but should we have a basic theological framework that we recognize as one body?

  • andrew says:

    hi jim
    thanks for all your comments. i am traveling at teh mo and dont have much time
    question for you – does theology spring from missiology or the other way round?
    and also – if the one body of Christ was to come up with the basic theological framework (many would say the the Bible is ADEQUATE), which country would you chose to frame it? Africa? China? America?

  • Jim says:

    Thank you much for your reply Andrew. It is much appreciated and I will attempt to answer in such a way as to glorify God and honor you also. To your first question;
    As far as I can figure thus far, our missiology should flow from our theology. Who God is and what he has done is the basis for the mission. Just like the gospel message (what and who King Jesus is, why and what he has done) coming from the gospel itself (the proclomation that Jesus is King over all). Without knowing the core of belief, what message can one give?
    On your second question, that is abit trickier I will admit. If we agree that Jesus is King and God at the same time (yes, I know hat seems silly to say but many as you know claim one w/o the other), that would be a core that all cultures would agree on or they would be outside what the Bible itself says. Framing isn’t the issue for me, the Bible itself makes the basics clear I think. We all come with cultural, doctrinal prejudices true but they are usually not about theology really but about doctrine. I personally am a pre-trib, pre-mil believer who also is a strong adherent to much of the already/not yet eschatology. I see much of those differing views that make sense and work together and are not contradictory. But, my brothers and sisters of other eschatological persuasions are still my brothers and sisters. We just disagree on something that is not an esential belief in order to be within the bounds of Christianity.
    I know that was a long way of answering and I apologize for the length of the reply. I guess you could say that the core message is the same no matter what culture it is presented. The message may have to be tailored so people understand it in their culture but the picture is the same, no matter the frame.

Leave a Reply