A valid definition of the Emergent Church is "Vintage Christianity connects with emerging post-seeker generations who are very open spiritually but are not interested in church." As if that was not enough, the Emergent Church movement has among its defenders Brian McLaren and Tony Campolo, etc. As James White says, McLaren speaks of the "apologetic of good lives and good works" being more "costly" than "asserting the message of absolute objective truth or proclaiming a version of Christianity as the true metanarrative." Why is there such an aversion on the part of postmodernists to use biblical language to express biblical truths? Why do we have to adopt the skeptical, confused, disjointed language and beliefs of the world? Why can't we trust the Spirit to change the hearts and minds of His elect people through the proclamation of the Gospel has He has done for two millennia? Postmodernism does not flow from the imago Dei, it flows from a sinful culture and educational system.

A good book here is The Church in Emerging Culture: Five Perspectives, by Andy Crouch (Re:Generation Quarterly editor-in-chief, A columnist for Christianity Today), Michael S. Horton (WTS professor and reformed theologian), Frederica Mathewes-Green (author, commentator, and Orthodox Christian, contributor to Christianity Today, Focus on the Family-Citizen, and Touchstone), Brian D. McLaren (postmodernist, author, pastor, and Emergent senior fellow), and Erwin Raphael McManus (author and pastor of the innovative and interethnic L.A.-based church, Mosaic). One must use a lot of discernment in reading this book.

PS: The idea of the Reformed faith reforming is valid, however we do not wish to reform to be more like the world, but more like Jesus. Those of the Reformed faith desire to grow in grace and truth and not further the cause(s) of heresy.

Reformed and Always Reforming,