The Emerging Deconstruction
Written by Aaron Miller | Pastor of Equipping
Something feels off in modern American evangelicalism, and it has for a few years now. There is an expanding gap between what people claim to believe and how they actually live. This is most evident in content posted on social media. Many Christians might agree with the teachings they've learned, but their actions often tell a different story.
Some who no longer associate with the American church noticed this disconnect twenty years ago, and back then, offered critiques and ideas for a practical pathway forward. Sadly, their views have since changed. Now, they promote leaving the church altogether, or as it has been coined, deconstruct the faith.
A few decades ago, the Emergent Church movement, led by personalities such as Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, and Doug Pagitt, sought to address the church's shortcomings. But the critiques and changes they suggested, in the final analysis, were not a safe place to land. By the way, where are these Emergent Church leaders today? They were convinced their ideas were grounded in the Bible, that their views would likely lead to a more authentic version of Christianity. They spoke at conferences, published books, and sat down for interviews peddling their fresh approach to the Christian faith. However, in the end, it seems their solutions were worse than the problems they tried to fix.
To grasp what the Emergents were getting at twenty years ago, it's helpful to understand a little bit about the impact of postmodernism. According to a postmodern worldview, the Enlightenment led to a rigid way of thinking that dismissed traditional viewpoints and used truth as a means to gain power. Remember, the Enlightenment period followed the Reformation and the Renaissance in Europe. In the aftermath of this time, the Word of God was unleashed and widely used. As a result, the mindset of the age began to shift in accordance with the pattern of truth. Clarity resounded from pulpits and manifested itself in the marketplace. Categories began to open, and people began to discover anew the world God had designed for his creatures. Worldviews were indeed enlightened.
However, the presence of sin within the framework of humanity caused societal developments to derail. By the twentieth century, instead of leading to a global utopia, the Enlightenment led to two world wars and the Holocaust. By the mid-twentieth century, the Western world had become calloused and skeptical about truth claims, religion, and institutional authority. This included the church.
“The modern world at that time became decidedly post. Truth and morality became relative, and criticism of the Bible reached a new level of intensity.”
The Emergents agreed with this postmodern shift and argued that the old-world mindset had been too influential on modern Evangelicalism. In their view, religion followed strict standards of truth while failing to embody those principles. They pointed out that the church often valued certainty over humility and faithfulness. Emergent leaders believed that to grow, the church needed to let go of this rigid certainty in favor of faithfulness, suggesting that doubt is not the opposite of faith; rather, certainty is.
The pressing question is, did their ideology work? Seriously. Where did these guys go?
According to the postmodernist view, knowledge and power are deeply intertwined. This suggests that those with expertise often use it to maintain control over others. Postmodern thinkers have taught, and continue to teach, that certainty is a hallmark of Fundamentalism, which can lead to outdated frameworks that no longer serve us. Accordingly, Emergent thinkers advocated for a shift away from certainty towards a more open-minded, exploratory approach to faith, emphasizing dependence on God rather than a need for control.
Many in the Emerging Church argued that God was more likely to ask if we were faithful to the truth rather than if we were right. This perspective raised an important question: how would we measure faithfulness? If I believe that the gospel should be shared with confidence, am I supposed to set aside that truth? This Emergent view created a contradiction because their call for faithfulness relied on a certainty that their approach was correct, while eliminating any measurable standard.
The more pressing issue was that this view missed the core of the gospel. It's not about how faithful we are, but about how faithful Jesus has been for us. The gospel centers on Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, working in concert to bring us salvation, not just on following his example. If the focus shifts to redefining a Christ follower as a moral guide, then we lose the hope that comes from His redemptive work. The Emerging Church's approach risked burdening people with a heavy moral code instead of offering the grace that sets us free.
Being a Christ follower in this context can reduce Jesus to a moral teacher rather than recognizing him as the Savior who rescues us from sin. This perspective can lead to a misunderstanding of our need for salvation. Jesus said, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me” (Luke 9:23). However, when we view spirituality as a series of ethical practices without acknowledging the need for redemption, it becomes a heavy load that no one can bear.
The apostle Paul warned that in the last days, people would be "always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of truth" (2 Tim. 3:7). This reflects those who seek knowledge while avoiding certainty. It is the mindset of many of my emerging friends, whom I’m eager to run into again.
The tension between certainty and faithfulness is both contradictory and against biblical teachings. It's easy to claim that speaking with certainty is arrogant, but those who do so are exhibiting a form of certainty. The irony is that it's arrogant to reject the evident truths presented in the Bible.
“The Bible emphasizes that faith is about assurance and conviction, not uncertainty.”
While there was some truth in what Emergent thinkers said about the misuse of certainty, it's essential to recognize that every perspective can be misused. They, too, seemed pretty certain in their stance against certainty. We should learn from their overcorrection, and instead of dismissing certainty altogether, we focus on how to hold onto it without causing harm to others. The honest answer lies in embracing the gospel of grace rather than a moralistic approach that leads to comparisons and pride.
Ultimately, the Emerging Church identified issues within modern Fundamentalism that dated back fifty years. Still, the problem was a misunderstanding of grace rather than the certainty itself. Certainty for certainty's sake isn’t noble. Certainty that is rooted in God’s ability to supply all we need to follow him in obedience is our foundation for faith. A proper understanding of God's sovereignty and Jesus' work can help recover the essence of the gospel that seems lost in many modern approaches.
So, whatever happened to the Emergent Church? It seems the movement burned out under the burden it never meant to create. They forgot the taste of redemption's freedom that only comes through Christ and his gospel, and recreated a religious system that the Reformation rejected 500 years ago. In an effort to find the light, they retraced their steps into a darkened cave. In the end, they dismissed their emergent attempts to find a solution, never finding a safer place to land. By and large, they headed for the exit. The Emergent Movement deconstructed.
The world and its philosophies are constantly changing, and one generation often looks down on the previous one. The Bible, however, stands firm amid these shifts. Many in the Emerging Church gave the impression that they had finally figured things out, dismissing centuries of Christian belief. Let us pray for these departed brothers and sisters, that they would not remain on the path of Demas (2 Tim. 4:10), but come home to the grace and freedom only found in Christ.