This is a video with R.C. Sproul, Al Mohler, and Ravi Zacharias discussing post-modernism, modernism, liberalism, and the emergent church. The question is asked, Is there any real difference among the four? I’ll reserve my comments for later, but the comment about Mohler being the pre-eminent scholar of postmoderism and the emerging church is unfortunate.
Straw men abound in this video. For guys so concerned about the “truth,” I would have hoped that they would be more interested in correctly characterizing the emerging church. Instead they take the easy way out and paint everyone with the same brush. Unfortunate.
It’s also unfortunate to the point of being comical the way they slam postmodernism, all the while showing their unquestioned allegiance to modernity, as though that was so much better.
Steve,
I agree wholeheartedly with what you are saying. What saddens me is that it seems they did not even research what they talked about. They got McClaren’s statement about not talking about homosexuality wrong. RC Sproul was smug and arrogant as well. Mohler was angry.
I’m not a McClaren apologist by any stretch of the imagination. I haven’t read even one of his books completely. And I have been privy to some interviews that in you did not know who made said what was said, you would think they were coming from the pulpit of fundamentalists.
Now again, I’m not an apologist of Emergent. I’m not Emergent, more like emerging. But as someone mentioned to me today, if my only choice is between the heretics and the a-holes, I’d have to think seriously about where I’d align.
David:
In your comment to Steve you said:
“. . . if my only choice is between the heretics and the a-holes, I’d have to think seriously about where I’d align.”
Straw men, indeed. How can you speak that way while criticizing these men on the basis of an unscripted and extemporaneous conversation/interview? Frankly you sound like a sweaty third-tier political candidate in a televised debate who resorts to name calling in the absence of a valid point. Your credibility is missing in action. As for me, you managed to totally destroy your own argument.