Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints who are at Ephesus and who are faithful in Christ Jesus: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. - Ephesians 1:1-2
A young seminary friend of mine is enamored by a theology full of holes. While claiming this new, improved gospel is "taught everywhere" in Scripture, he offers no specific passage that teaches it. Meanwhile, he keeps a running list of at least 15 significant conundrums his theory creates and several "problem passages that seem to disprove it." He labors under the struggle.
Why believe a theory with such a flimsy foundation?
I prefer to abandon my pet theories when they clash with the teachings of Scripture. A basic tenet of my Bible study methodology is: when my understanding differs from what Scripture teaches, my understanding is wrong and Scripture is right, and my understanding must change. You could even say changing my understanding is the goal.
My friend's continued striving to make his tenuous theory work puzzled me until I read Rutledge Etheridge series on Emergent Theology (ET). [Part 1: An Unconditionally Conditional Faith; Part 2: Understanding Emergent Theology; Part 3: (Dis)ingenuous]
My ET-influenced friend is bouncing erratically on a theological trampoline.
Etheridge writes:
Rob Bell, perhaps the most famous name associated with ET, gives some illustrative imagery. He thinks of biblical doctrines as springs on a trampoline as opposed to bricks in a wall. Springs are sturdy but flexible; they can be adjusted as necessary, allowing users to jump and to feel the joy of flight. Bell sees such movement as analogous to a healthy relationship to God, a faith not grounded by the dead weight of inflexible, brick like doctrine. Practitioners of “brickianity”, however, are doomed to a frustrating faith, vulnerable to collapse. Their indubitable, inerrant doctrines are stacked upon one another such that if one brick falls, the whole fortress comes crashing down.
Bell writes: “What if tomorrow someone digs up definitive proof that Jesus had a real, earthly, biological father named Larry . . . and archaeologists prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that the virgin birth was really just a bit of mythologizing . . . ? What if that spring was seriously questioned? . . . Could a person still love God? Could you still be a Christian? Is the way of Jesus still the best possible way to live? Or, does the whole thing fall apart?” He goes on to write: “I affirm the historic Christian faith, which includes the virgin birth and the Trinity and the inspiration of the Bible and much more . . . But if the whole faith falls apart when we reexamine and rethink one spring, then it wasn’t that strong in the first place, was it?” (Rob Bell, Velvet Elvis (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), p.026.)Rutledge Etheridge
Well, yes, if the whole thing was a lie, then it wasn't truth. "The way of Jesus" may still be the "best possible way to live" but if it is proved a lie why should I believe it?
ET does not overtly deny cherished Christian truth. Rather,