"All we need is Jesus" and a million dollars

I've been reading Why We're Not Emergent (By Two Guys Who Should Be) by Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck, mostly because I've become intrigued by the emergent movement in the church and its unfortunate ties to postmodernism. By ties I mean origins. In a nutshell, it is somewhat a backlash against the megachurch, Joel Ostein phase that is leaving many people jaded and empty. My understanding is that its big thing is that there is not really authority or absolute Truth, but that Christianity is grey, ambiguous, and mysterious (and that that is a good thing). This is not going to turn into a rant filled with Bible passages pointing out the absoluteness of our holy and righteous God, because that could get way too long. Instead, today I'm going to focus on a quote that I found particularly interesting to a broader scope than just the emergents.

"'All we need is Jesus,' many emerging Christians [and I'd say other modern groups as well] cry, 'not these fancy theologies and donctrinal formulations.' Thus Erwin McManus writes, 'The power of the gospel is the result of a person -- Jesus Christ -- not a message.' Granted, this sounds good, and McManus may mean something good by it. But the argument is overstated. How is the gospel event we proclaim different than a message? And how is a message about Jesus -- say, who He is and what He did on earth -- different than doctrine? We can tell people about Jesus every day until He returns again, but without some doctrinal content filling up what we mean by Jesus and why He matters, we are just shouting slogans, not proclaiming any kind of intelligible gospel" (108).

I think that this kind of thinking is not exclusive to the emergent church. A few times in college I attended what I'd consider a 'mega church' where the pastor's practical, almost self-help "sermons", the rock music, and the non-commital atmosphere drew in many of the cool kids of campus. In a sermon about love, the pastor labored the importance of action by saying (almost a direct quote), The doctrine of justification does not matter; what matters is that we love each other.......
.....Ali's jaw hits the floor.........
........You mean the reason I'm going to heaven doesn't matter?!?

My question is: Why is doctrine a bad word? The dictionary defines doctrine as a specific belief. So it's bad to believe something specific? Or is it just bad to know what you believe? I think this is the rub, because whenever one gets too specific about one's beliefs, there could be (gasp) a differing opinion. I've often heard "Doctrine divides," which is true, but so does Christ, and the Gospel, and I'll tend to side with the offensive Truth.

I've sadly seen way too many people who "are just shouting slogans, not proclaiming any kind of intelligible gospel" because they do not know wonderful, deep, enriching, and life-changing doctrine. They most likely have never been taught of the wonder and awe of studying Who God is and what He has done. The Lord spoiled me with parents who seek Him fervently, and I've never known anything different, and therefore people who claim to be Christians but seem comfortable with not really knowing what that means often frustrate me. People sing songs that have no meaning (7-11 songs - 7 word repeated 11 times), they say words that have no root in anything real ("I'm saved" From what? "uhhh?"), they go through actions motivated by who-knows-what-really; and why? because they do not seek to know Him and Him alone. Too many people focus on what Jesus can do for them and not Who He is.

It seems that every errant movement is really the same: it's all about me and what I want. Or is it just me?