# Becoming Conversant Emergent Church (Carson)



## RamistThomist (Mar 4, 2015)

Carson, D. A. _Becoming Conversant with the Emergent Church_.

Introduction

The book is an honest critique. Nothing more, nothing less. Carson begins gently and then pulls no punches. 

The Problem of Definition

So what is “emergent” or “postmodernism?” This is an annoying question because at any moment in the critique, someone can say, “Yeah, but that’s not our position.” Emergent is easy enough to define. Most of the emergent guys write books with emergent in the titles, so we can assume that is their position. Postmodernism on the other hand, is a thorny problem. It is not synonymous with relativism nor are all postmodern philosophers saying the same thing.

But this might not be an insurmountable problem. Emergent guys play off postmodernism as the “Other” of modernism. That might be a workable enough definition. 

Where the Emergent Church Accidentally gets it right

It’s not all bad. And not all emergent guys are Obama-voting hyper-relativists. It is true that our world is changing and simply opting to have more Sunday School rallies won’t win the lost and won’t even make a dent in culture. No argument here. Further, with regards to epistemology, we can agree that we are indeed finite knowers, and any act of knowing is already always an act of knowing-at-a-specific-moment-and-a-specific-place. We didn’t need MacIntyre to tell us that (however interesting his work is). 

Postmodernism’s Story of Philosophy

This is where the Emergent Church gets it badly wrong. Or at least they are irresponsible. The EC tends to read anyone who doesn’t hold to “post-foundationalism” as holding to an extreme form of Cartesian Rationalism. Yet I don’t know any solid Evangelical that did this, not even Carl F Henry. 

Carson’s Critique

This section was masterful. I stood in awe. Carson called them out on their shallow readings of modernity (and a slight point of correction. Both Carson and Emergent guys kept saying “modernism” instead of “modernity.” Modernism is a literary response to modernity) .

Not only are EC guys irresponsible in historiography and philosophy, they are sloppy in hermeneutics and ethics. Carson’s section on the hermeneutical spiral was simply brilliant.

The EC hasn’t shown the contradiction between a) affirming objective reality and b) acknowledging we are finite knowers. If (a)-(b) hold, then the following works:

(c ) there can be accurate statements about the world, truth, religion.

In fact, EC guys will make value judgments about George W. Bush, Capitalism, Colonialism, and white males, and assume there is a connection between their judgments and real, moral truth. If there weren’t such a connection, then why even make the argument?

Conclusion

There is much, much more to this book. Carson has succeeded in his task. It is both scholarly and accessible to the lay reader.


----------



## aadebayo (Mar 5, 2015)

I will put it in my next to buy list. I am not buying any book this year, because I have so many unread books.


----------



## RamistThomist (Mar 5, 2015)

I was in a Baptist version of Goodwill and saw it for a quarter. It was great.


----------

