What Happens When the Church Puts Primary Value on Attendance and Not on Discipleship and Doctrine<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
 
If you type "emerging church" in Google™ it will produce over two million links, but if you go to the Yellow Pages, it's nowhere to be found in my area. It is because the emerging church is not a building where people go; it is a thought process or methodology of engaging the culture. I can't remember ever meeting a pastor that affiliated the emerging church with where they stood theologically. Nowhere is there a doctrinal statement to which emerging leaders adhere. It is a way of thinking that encompasses a broad audience that many have put aside their beliefs for the common goal of reaching people.
 
Reaching people is a very generic term. Corporations reach people with their messaages.  The Emerging Church Movement is about evangelizing the consumer. This thinking is not new. Consumer evangelists have been around for some time. Here's what you do; find out what the unchurched (unchurched is a nice way of saying lost and going to hell) want and need and give it to them. Their target audience just so happens to be those in their 20s and 30s.
 
I have been to emerging leadership conferences and have heard many of the proponents of this movement. It seems to me that the common theme is reaching a people group by repackaging the church to reflect postmodernism. The thinking is that they will be able to reach the postmodern audience that traditional churches have failed to reach. 
 
The emerging conversation didn't sprout up overnight and it isn't anything we should be surprised about because it is a direct byproduct of the evangelical thought process that has been around for a long time. Over the last 25+ years the church has put great value on attendance and less value on discipleship and doctrine. As a result, when Generation X came into leadership in every denomination they were already conditioned to a thought process of reaching people by whatever means possible. When it seems, then, that numbers equal success, there is an enormous temptation to sweeten the gospel message that few can resist.
 
When attracting people and creating community becomes a primary focus it is not healthy to stress doctrinal issues. The less that you define your beliefs, the more attractive you become to others. Thus, the emergent conversation is about putting beliefs aside so we can have unity and build community.
 
There is no doubt that the leaders have passion for reaching people and to me they're just playing by the same rules as the leaders before them. It's their worldview that is skewed. The whole thought process came out of the church being ineffective. It is essentially a new marketing approach and a repackaging of church. "Let's make church popular again. Let's stress a more popular message of God." The church has become effective in its attempt to make the Christian walk more casual instead of more committed.
 
To pick on one group would be unfair when denominations around the country have been doing this for years. Water the gospel down a lot or a little, it makes no difference. It is still a half truth. Just because everyone's doing it, does that make it right?
 
Many view the effectiveness of the gospel with regard to how many respond to it. Should the gospel message be popular? Should we use this corporate mentality of gauging the effectiveness of the gospel? If that is the case, then the apostle Paul was very ineffective. He should have adapted to make the message more relevant.
 
But what was the response that early followers received when preaching the gospel? It was persecution, imprisonment and death. Why aren't we faced with persecution? It's a sobering thought that should bring us to the realization that the church today is not preaching the gospel in its entirety. In the Old Testament, God instructed Jeremiah not to omit a word in relaying the message of the judgment to come.
 
Are we afraid to share the gospel in its entire form? Do we shy away from the mention of hell? The need for repentance? All because we are afraid of the response of this unpopular message? Is it really logical to believe that the true gospel is ineffective? Or have hearts hardened and become the exact description in 2 Timothy 3?
 
When the church attempts to be all things to all people and eliminate the exclusivity of the church being for the believer, the church has forgotten its responsibility to Christ's followers. If the church isn't going to use the scripture as the model then it is up for grabs as to what church should be and look like. If attendance is the only sign of success then it doesn't matter what is being preached because we think God is blessing because people are showing up. This thinking goes out the window when you look at the growth going on in Islam, Mormonism and the Jehovah's Witnesses…is God blessing those religions? Absolutely not.
 
I believe in being discerning and contending for the faith, but we can't single out a movement that is doing the exact same thing the church has done for years; making the gospel message align with the masses.  In this case we are all guilty. Jesus, "please forgive us."