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.

Heaven, Hell, and the Kingdom of God

Heaven. Hell. The kingdom of God on earth. What do these three things have in common? They are at the heart of a controversial shift of thought in today’s church. But even in this controversy, there is a middle road for us all to tread that will help us to all work together.

One side indicates that that heaven and hell are the only two things to think about. This thought is mainly attributed to the older generation. Heaven is the only motivation for people on earth. We should live our lives here on earth simply looking forward to the day when we can go to heaven. Also, hell is the other side of our motivation. We come to Jesus because He saves us from hell. We witness to others for the sole reason that they will not go to hell. Everything in our lives revolves around the motivations of heaven and hell.

The other side – the side attributed to the postmodern and emergent church – downplays the role of heaven and hell in a Christian’s. Instead, they focus everything upon living out the kingdom of God on earth. They want to live their lives fully here on earth – not simply waiting for heaven, but working hard to make this world better. Also, they witness to people because they want them to experience the kingdom of God on earth, as well. Everything revolves around living and furthering the kingdom of God on earth.

So why are these two thoughts so opposed? One side can’t believe that a Christian wouldn’t care about heaven or hell. The other side wonders why everything Christians do is only concerning heaven or hell. One side just doesn’t want people to go to hell. The other side wants people to know there is so much more than just heaven and hell. Who’s right? Who’s wrong? What should we be preaching, teaching, living, and believing?

Well, not to be anti-climactic, but we should be doing both. Why does it have to be one or the other? It doesn’t. I will argue that point with anyone. We do not have to choose between these two things. We can preach and teach and live both of these principles – and we need to, as well. It is becoming a divisive issue. The older generation is worried about a weak Christianity that is not focused on what is most important: the eternal state of the soul. The younger generation is frustrated with how the church has forced heaven onto people and scared them with hell over the years. It is beginning to look like lines are being drawn over this issue.

But it does not need to be so. There is a middle road that we can tread. This issue does not have to be either/or, but it can be both/and. Heaven and hell are important factors to the Christian story, but it can be portrayed in a much more relevant way. The kingdom of God is a wonderful motivation, but the eternal state of the soul needs to be of vital importance, as well. We can combine our thoughts. We can mold our beliefs about this issue. Both sides have good hearts; we simply need to find the middle road on this issue: a middle road called “both/and”.

We must find the middle road on this issue.

A Path for Us All

Why do we argue – when we can understand.
Why do we assume – when we can simply ask.
Why do we attack – when we can join.

The next series of posts will be examples of the things that we do to divide us. I will try to show that there is a middle road in the midst of some of the disagreements that we have with each other. Sometimes the older generation is fearful of what the younger generation is trying to say. Sometimes the younger generation does not know what they are trying to say exactly. But if our hearts are in the right place, then we can find our middle road and continue walking together.

There is a middle road to the arguments and disagreements (whether petty or viable) that we have inside of the Church. There is a path that we can all tread together. A rope that we can all pull together. A conversation that we can all have together. We need to find these ‘middle roads’ so that we can understand each other. Then we can get to a point where we can adapt and subsequently join. And it is essential that we join. We need each other. And those without Hope and help need us, too.