Of course, pluralist, you have assumed that what is reasonable is liberal and what is evangelical (because it is not liberal) is therefore not reasonable. Just because reason is here doesn’t mean it is caused by “liberality” (read: non-evangelical).

Therefore, I submit that emergent differs from mainstream evangelicalism (and I combine fundamentalism in this for the sake of argument and without nuance) in that:

Emergent acknowledges that the bible is not the sum of its parts but is greater.

Emergent believes that the Kingdom has been misunderstood and misappropriated (not just be contemporary evangelicals!) and is at the heart of Christian faith.

(borrowed from McLaren) Emergent emphasizes that believing and living Christianity in the world need not be separate.

I also observe an *emerging* :) emphasis on pneumatology as the outworking of the Kingdom as opposed to more therapeutic, personal-experiential emphases or downright marginalization.

Also emerging is an emphasis on justice/righteousness (dikaiosyne) as central to discipleship.

Commonalities:

An emphasis on evangelism (granted it looks very different!)

An emphasis on personal piety and personal relationship to God

A retained emphasis on non-liturgical prayer (although liturgical prayer is respected and incorporated as well — yet neither is exclusive)

Opposition to modernity and its arrogant certainty (ironic, yes?)

That’s all I can think of for now but I hope it generates discussion…