Here are some remarks I ran across on a post linked above. (emphasis by me. It’s wordy but worth reading.) 

“The problems inherent in the church of modernity isn’t it’s dogma, it’s the rigid adherence to strict cultural codes that are unrelated to substanative doctrine. Those in the “conversation” make a similar blunder by strictly adhering to the code of cultural revolt. The blunder is compounded because of the philosophical doubt substituted for the sound doctrine that comprises the very message of Christ and the necessary beliefs that accompany saving faith.

It is hard for me to see (as a student of literary theory and philosophy) the Emerging “conversation” as anything more than Marxist theory applied to Christianity. Loving the unlovely and accepting the rejected are certainly part of the work of reconciliation, BUT it is worthlessly futile if the unreconciled are not awakened to their own depravity, repent, and cling to the mercy of Christ. The language of the “conversation” does not permit these to be subjects of certainty. Therefore, the lost remain lost.Life is but a vapor. I would rather be naked, cold and shivering in a corner with the assurance that one day I will be with Christ in paradise, then comfortably sipping a latte in front of warm fire ignorant of my eternal peril. From my vantage point, it is hard for me to see anything but those in the “conversation” rationalizing why this juxtaposition is anything but an illusion foisted by the dogmatists of modernity. It’s arrogant navel gazing, and shameful.”

I liked several of the posters from the post….


and didn’t like some of them: