In reading various articles/books by and about the "emerging church," one thought in particular has struck me time and again; namely, ECers have a penchant for dividing up Scripture according to what is “red letter” and what is not. They’ll talk about the Word of God and profess to love it, but if you use the term “Scripture” instead of “Word of God,” they turn into stone and mumble something about Jesus being the Living Word of God – which is true, mind you, but then they use that as an excuse to denigrate all Scripture outside of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. In their simplified form of higher criticism, they have forgotten (or ignored) that Jesus Himself stated quite emphatically, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's who sent Me." (John 14:23-24)
This is precisely the MO of the "emerging church": posit a false dichotomy between Scripture and Jesus, then claim the moral high ground by presenting yourself as a "follower of Jesus" - the implication being that those who hold to sola scriptura are bible-olaters, followers of a dead letter, love Paul more than Jesus, etc., etc.
In reality, the "emerging church" crowd is nothing more than the heirs of the theological liberals of Spurgeon's and Machen's days - they even recycle the same old canards that were in circulation a hundred years ago. The "emerging church" thinks that they've arrived at a new methodology for reaching the "postmodern" generation, but all they're doing is feeding the age-old hatred that unregenerate man has for God's Word, the Scriptures.