Misunderstandings and the Middle Road

Lately, there seems to be some contention between two different camps: the emergent church and the traditional church. (Note, I just use these terms for lack of a better name. I think we know what I am referring to when I use these terms even if they are not exactly correct.) This contention is not necessarily veiled, but it has been openly voiced by many different people and groups. Yet I believe that this contention is not due to inconsistencies with Scripture, open heresy, or unwise interpretations. Many of the arguments between the traditional church and the emergent church are simply because of misunderstandings.

And if we make an effort to better understand each other – I know we can find a middle road to walk on together.

Here is one example.

Rob Bell presents a different view of the story of Jesus walking on water than most traditional teachers and pastors. It is a more personal view that looks more in depth at what Jesus was trying to say specifically to Peter. Bell tries to make this story very applicable to real life and to issues that we struggle with spiritually, emotionally, and mentally everyday.

But David Brickner the Executive Director for Jews for Jesus discourages Rob Bell’s interpretation of this Scripture passage. He believes that Bell’s teaching is harmful and off-centered. He lumps Rob Bell’s teachings in with other harmful teachings that he believes are bringing down the church (Here is the link to the article - http://jewsforjesus.org/publications/newsletter/2008_04/01).

So is there a real problem here? Do these two men have different goals for the Church and for people? Honestly, I don’t think so. It’s only a misunderstanding.

Brickner is worried about the role of Jesus being watered down. Anything that may take away from the importance of the Lord is what makes this man upset. He views Bell’s message as a replacement. He believes that Bell is replacing a belief in Jesus with a belief in self. But that is not what Bell is talking about at all. Bell wasn’t trying to make the point that we should replace our belief in Jesus with a belief in self. He is simply saying that sometimes we limit our belief in Jesus by having a disbelief in ourselves and our ability to follow Jesus. Brickner was assuming that the question posed was “Who should we believe in?” which has an obvious answer of Jesus. Since Bell’s teaching was about having a belief in ourselves, Brickner obviously had a problem with that. But that was not the question! Bell was not trying to answer that question. He was just stating that one small part of this faith journey is that sometimes our poor self-image and self-esteem can limit our ability to believe in Jesus. These two men were talking about two different things.

If we try to understand each other better, we will be able to find a middle road. We don’t have to be quick to argue or assume the worst even if something is different from what we are used to. We simply need to amend these misunderstandings so that we can connect with each and move on together.

Move on through the Middle Road.