This blog series is based on the research, findings, and arguments that went into my ThM (Historical Theology) thesis and new book, Reimagining the Kingdom: The Generational Development of Liberal Kingdom Grammar from Schleiermacher to McLaren.
Yesterday, someone (and I do know who you are!) posted a 1-star, 147 word review of Reimagining the Kingdom on Amazon. Aside from the fact he didn’t engage a single idea or argument in the book—which makes me question whether he even read it to begin with—he labeled it conservative propaganda, suggesting that I am “simply trying to exalt an outdated, uncritical, very limited understanding of” the Kingdom that’s “extremely narrow in scope, and will really only serve a limited few who are committed to the same branches of fundamentalism that he obviously is.”
In other words: Conservative, Fundamentalist propaganda.
Now I do admit that I am more conservative, joining others who believe Protestant liberalism doesn’t reflect the historic Christian faith because of the central pieces it denies—though, I’m not fond of labels and would certainly be considered a moderate evangelical. I also admit to holding onto the fundamentals—that Jesus was born of a virgin, is the only One true God, and was bodily/literally resurrected from the dead by the Father are examples of what I believe are non-negotiable fundamentals to the Christian faith.
I also admit that in my thesis/book I set out to show how the Emergent Church movement is simply re-packaged Protestant liberalism—as my thesis clearly states: “the Kingdom grammar of the Emergent Church movement is continuous with previous generations of Protestant liberalism, including how it defines the Kingdom of God, who is in, how one gets in, and how it solves for our human problem.” (RTK, 29-30). And I do admit I argue in the introduction and conclusion that mainstream evangelicals should treat Emergent Kingdom grammar as suspect because it is simply regurgitated liberal Kingdom grammar
So, yes, I guess you could call this book a work of conservative, fundamentalist propaganda, because all propaganda is inherently biased information used to promote or publicize a particular cause or point of view. And I am biased toward holding onto and rediscovering the historic Christian faith and work actively to promote it.
But let’s get something straight Amazon Reviewer: Every thesis is inherently propaganda! The point of any book is to argue for something from a particular perspective.
Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christianity is certainly liberal propaganda. He just couches it in disingenuous language that makes it seem as though it is new and fresh. Except it isn’t—it is Protestant liberalism repackaged for a new day. He argues that sin is environmental—we are not by-nature sinners;that Jesus is simply “divine” by nature of representing God’s character—McLaren’s Jesus is the moral, rather than metaphysical Son of God; and salvation comes through the movement founded by Jesus and perpetuated by humanity—the Kingdom saves, rather than Jesus’ death and resurrection.
In other words, McLaren’s grammar is theologically liberal. This is the thesis I sought to prove, and what my research clearly reveals—and I also happen to think that is a problem because of what that grammar means for the Church’s gospel grammar generally and mainstream evangelicalism particularly.
But rather than simply arguing against this liberalism—I think I was careful not to simply argue against a liberal understanding of the Kingdom, though my revealing effort does so by extension—I sought to show how McLaren’s “new kind of Christianity” isn’t new at all: it’s liberalism re-packaged for a new day.
Had Amazon Review actually read my book he would have realized this, that this book is about exposing the inextricable link between the Emergent Church and Protestant liberalism, which is born out in its Kingdom grammar. Those who are “seriously asking questions about what the kingdom of God is about” should probably read something else, as this book is for the person who is asking serious questions about what Liberals say what the Kingdom is about, and what that means for evangelicalism and the historic Christian faith.
So if you are interested in better understanding how the Emergent Church continues four generations of Protestant liberalism, then you might find this book helpful. If you’re looking for an academic treatment of such an understanding, then you might find what you’re looking for. If you are interested in better understanding the pieces of Protestant liberal Kingdom grammar—how they define the human problem (sin); the solution to our human problem (salvation); and the One who bore that solution (Savior)—then my Kingdom book might be helpful.
But know this: the book is conservative, fundamentalist propaganda to the extent that I, the author, still hold on to the historic Christian faith and believe that liberalism is something all together different than the historic Christian faith. While I don’t promote that point of view per se, it is the perspective out of which I expose the clear links between liberalism and the Emergent Church in order to help evangelicals reconsider their Kingdom grammar in order to guard their gospel grammar.
