Revolutionaries For God
This is a time of revolution. The geo-political balance is restructuring with new in-groups and out-groups that will affect trade and other alliances for the coming 50 to 100 years. Global enterprises merge and expand beyond any attempt to define their nationality and grow to sizes that dwarf small nation states. War is fought in a decentralized fashion that blurs attempts to define who is on which side. And faith and spirituality move out from under the control of institutional religion and into the hearts of individuals who ally themselves with like-minded individuals and in overlapping and unrelated organizations. And it's happening at the edges of authority and orthodoxy.
In his latest book Revolution: Finding Vibrant Faith Beyond the Walls of the Sanctuary, George Barna describes and documents the revolution in Christianity that's been occurring beyond the walls of Christendom, and even despite institutional religion, for some years now. I've personally been in contact with such revolutionaries off and on for 15 years. And this web site is dedicated to these revolutionaries that Barna is now describing in rationalistic, empirical terms. Take a look at Reido's Church Without Walls.
The United States is home to an increasing number of Revolutionaries. These people are devout followers of Jesus Christ who are serious about their faith, who are constantly worshiping and interacting with God, and whose lives are centered on their belief in Christ. Some of them are aligned with a congregational church, but many of them are not. The key to understanding Revolutionaries is not what church they attend, or even if they attend. Instead, it's their complete dedication to being thoroughly Christian by viewing every moment of life through a spiritual lens and making every decision in light of biblical principles. These are individual who are determined to glorify God every day through every thought, word, and deed in their lives.
This is not Emergent Church, by the way. It may well be emerging church, in the sense that church includes all believers. In fact, if there is a true emerging, it will be among these because they fit the definition of emergence much better than a consortium of pastors and missionaries who take the name for their group. It is not a movement in the sense that there is central control or even a conversation.
Revolution may seem an inappropriate term in this era of radical and violent religious fundamentalism, but it fits well. The two phenomena are related in the sense that they are the opposing tails of the great bell curve of human religious orthodoxy. Both are on the edges of orthodoxy—regardless of fundamentalism's claim of orthodoxy. Both seek to return efficacy to the tepid and complacent inert coagulum of the mainstream. But they differ in that one wished to force change in others while the other changes itself.
This web site was established one year ago intending to give voice to those who seek God outside of, or in spite of, institutional church. And I am grateful that a man of such a stature among the church leaders as George Barna has written a book to document this phenomenon that some of us have felt and known for several years now. This book is now one of the books in my new study into emergence as a scientific and social force and how the real church, the ekklesia, might be affected, not only by emergence, but by society's increasing ability to grasp emergence and complexity as ways to understand our physical, social and spiritual world. While I don't expect to learn much that's new to my own experience, I do hope that Barna will give me some substance to help in convincing others that the barbarians are not only at the gate, but that they are here to help.











Emerging/Emergent
Bill
I was thinking of this difference when I was reviewing some of the orthodox police articles on McLaren. It is worth noting that some of these speakers who are not so welcome in orthodox circles, have sizable corporate representation via publications, churches where they minister, etc.
There is a whole nuther category of people who are not a people...that is, no recognition, none wanted, none expected...it's part of the intended picture. Reminds me how early on, someone wrote to tell me that the name "Church Without Walls" was already copywrited. I looked up the site and sure nuf. But it caused me to ask myself why would such a name be used, then copywrited? Doesn't make sense to me. Is it a concept or a piece of real estate? Don't believe one can copywrite a people concept.
reido