6 responses so far ↓

• Jimmy Snowden // Oct 3, 2007 at 5:58 pm

  Dr. Devine,
  I clicked on the link to read your article, but only 7 pages of the article showed up. The article was cut off in mid sentence. I am not sure how much of it got cut off. Thought you might want to know.
  On a positive note, I enjoyed what I read of the article.

• brad brisco // Oct 3, 2007 at 6:00 pm

  Dr. DeVine

  Thanks for posting your article. I too agree with McKnight that the movement should be viewed primarily as an ecclesiological movement, not a theological one. This is why I still find Stetzer’s three streams or categories helpful when he speaks of Relevants, Reconstructionists, and Revisionists. The majority of those I speak with fall into the reconstructionist camp, which is primarily about ecclesiology not theology.

  However, for most of the people I speak with the reconstructionist perspective is not coupled with a heavy protest. Instead of protest it seems to be more of a feeling of disappointment and/or restlessness, not only over a lack of connectedness with the pagan culture but also a lack of genuine spiritual transformation in the lives of believers. Maybe this doesn’t sound much unlike “protest” but to me the protest tag doesn’t seem to fit in many cases.

  At the same time I agree whole-heartedly that the cultural accommodation that is exhibited by some (which I believe are mostly in the revisionist camp) is a move towards destruction.

  Thank you again for making your voice heard in SBC circles.

• Dr. Mark DeVine // Oct 4, 2007 at 7:09 am

  Jimmy

  I cannot reproduce your difficulty. The article goes onto the 8th page a couple of lines.

  Brad

  I agree that “protest” is misleading with reference to some of the leaders within emerging. Some want to plant new models of church, not so much because they disapprove of existing models but because they want to target unbelievers they deem unreachable by existing models.

• Mark Richardson // Oct 4, 2007 at 12:05 pm

  Money Quote: “Default capitulation to whoever is strictest or boasts the longest list of litmus test
  issues where Christian fellowship is concerned is not only unloving, but also unbiblical
  and unspiritual. Not every purity postured willingness to divide the Body of Christ wins
  the favor of our Lord!”

  I pray many of our convention leaders and trustees read your article. It gives me cautious hope.

• Bill Victor // Oct 7, 2007 at 8:43 am

  Mark,
  I thoroughly enjoyed your article. I read Moran’s article first, was extremely riled up and angry and then read your article and was calmed. I am curious, did it make it through without many major edits?

• Dr. Mark DeVine // Oct 7, 2007 at 11:06 am

  No editorial changes were made to the article.

Leave a Comment