| Re: Heresy Hunters: Is This Discernment?|
I just liked this article a lot and recommend it. Reading it was worth the time, though it was so long.
Many writings that come against discernment ministries seek to justify some erroneous teaching. That is not the case with this article. It goes beyond simply showing the errors of discernment ministries and gets to the root problem, which can exist in any of us, that being, the pride of taking it upon ourselves to do things for God by our own authority that He has not given us a right to. May we learn to wait on Him and minister life, not death, by our words!
| 2008/6/5 16:41|
MANY sermons you hear on the emergent church flat out misrepresent their beliefs/lie about their beliefs.
I didn't know anyone had successfully pinned down what the emergent church exactly does believe. ;-)
| 2008/6/5 16:50||Profile|
I havent quite figured out what they believe either, but what I have noticed is that many evangelical leaders who normally dont go around speaking against other churches doctrines ARE speaking out against the "emerging" church. Now thats saying something.
| 2008/6/6 7:18|
| Re: Emergent Church Theology|
I think the Emergent Church is just a by-word for a mish mash of liberal and new age doctrines that water down the Gospel, and create a "user friendly" environment. When they themselves [leaders of any particular vein of it] define their beliefs in writing, it is often in terms so slippery that it is impossible to grasp, and sometimes in vague, almost mystical terms.
It is sometimes the gospel with a neo- catholic bend, sometimes with an extreme grace bend; "everybody be happy and just love each other bend, and sometimes with "new Age" social ideas that we are all one under "GOD."
So therefore we cannot define it on terms of what it is, so we must define it on terms of what it is not. This must be done by the pure and holy terms of [b]What the GOSPEL Is,[/b], nothing added, nothing subtracted.
Look at the "Emergent Church" more as a picture of a wave, than a movement. It is not organized or compartmentalized. It is widespread. As it sweeps to the shore, it will corrupt the fresh water that we drink. I see this movement as this, designed by Satan to corrupt the [b]PURITY[/b] of the Gospel.
I see much of this activity designed also to "pre-empt" the coming true moves of God, that will create a worldwide Bride without spot or blemish". I also see the now lying prophets being used by the Devil, to pre-empt this coming pure Church. The Emerging church mostly believes that they are a part of the church, but in each of the fingers of this movement, there is dirt and corruption; not a lot, just partially; just enough to stain the Bride.
We must hold to living the purity of the gospel. This is the only place that Grace is given. We must not be deceived in that we understand and know the gospel, that this is the doing of it.
I want to thank Sermonindex for striving to encourage this endeavor to purity also. This is the core of our Battle.
| 2008/6/6 10:42|
I just think it's funny that folks accuse others of being heresy hunters, and of being judgemental... and dont even notice that in doing so they are being judgemental as well.
Round and round we go...
| 2008/6/6 10:57|
Let me start off by saying I am NOT defending the heretical neo-catholic view of any church. I just want to warn of "blanket statements" on what could be considered an evangelical movement.
I have in recent times undertaken reading emergent church groups, b/c I have a bud who really holds up this movement (I am 23 he is 24)
While listening to sermons I heard overwhelmingly that the whole movement was a liberal, non-biblical movement. My buddy on the other hand, personally holds the view of inerrancy, and digs systematic theology, and reads church history. So being confused I went right to the horses mouth. I picked up books by Mclaren, Kimball, and Driscoll.
I believe after reading this too many of us make and emergent blanket statement assuming all of the leaders/members are like Brian Mclaren. Brian Mclaren makes me sick. He is a major spokesman for the emergent church, and if you read his stuff or listen to him preach...you wonder if he ever really met the resurrected Christ. His "generous orthodoxy" could leave someone believing that muslims love the LORD, the Bible is really mystical and unclear, that the Truth of the gospel really isn't important as long as it's relevant, and much more(very angering book). Kimball on the other hand holds a good view of scripture. I can definatley see how his relativism will get in the way, but his views are not angering. Driscoll also is the same, except his theology is really awesome. I know many don't like him (there is a lot to not like) but you could not say that he has a low view of the person and work of our Jesus.
Their is also some good in this movement (on the Mclaren side A LOT more terrible than good). I left these books realizing I really need to "reach-out" more, b/c in our culture people are used to being catered to(they would call this being missional). Being conversational is another aspect the emergent church pushes. I think that can be a very healthy approach to EVANGELISM (not from the pulpit and never leaving a conversation open to bending the truth we nee to use conversation to cleary explain the Christian faith). The last thing is they all push education... that may be a stretch but a lot of Christian movements (especially experiential movements) do not push education.
In closing I guess I would just say beware of blanket statements. We should be able to clearly define te specifics of our beliefs and disputes. I would gladly stand and say the movement of Brian Mclaren is a heretical movement that does not reflect the Biblical Christian faith, but I would not be able to do the same with Kimball. Although I disagree with tactics and some doctrine his movement is not heretical (open enough to lead to heresy...time will tell..maybe).
I just know as a man I hate to be misrepresented especially by brothers in the Lord. Let's earnestly contend for the faith as accuratley and carefully as we can. Never settling for less than the undrossed gospel of Christ. Never surrendering truth, but never misrepresenting false doctrines. Evil will lose out, the light will be victorious!
| 2008/6/6 11:28||Profile|
| Re: Thommy2... Emerging from what to go Where?|
I was simply responding to the thread about the theology of the "Emergent Church" being undefinable, and this would be irrelevant if their would be no conflict with the institutional or true church. My post then, must address these conflicts, in the light of the Scriptures, which in turn must divide into the positive true, or the negative false. I did not intend for you to assume that i thought that you were defending any views or doctrines.
I believe that your post has eloquently proved my point, pointing out the many conflicts and contrasts of their supposed leaders. It's a mish-mash of ideas and doctrines that all seem to encompass a little more than the plain Gospel. If this were not true, this movement would not be Emergent.
Is God the author of Confusion? Even you seem to be troubled, attempting to decypher and hold to the true, for it is vague, isn't it?
In deception there is always truth, just not the entire truth, and , yes there are many true Christians in every movement, for the true Church is in Heaven, and we travel there from below.
[b]"Let no man beguile you away from the simplicity that is in Christ."[/b]
| 2008/6/6 13:20|
Cool Brothertom I understand what you are saying and I agree full heartedly with your Colossians quote. The simplicity is where the beauty and power is. and the confusion factor is where the e church is very angering/saddening.
See your from Southern Illinois...hope you're not a Bears fan :-x
| 2008/6/6 13:35||Profile|
Hi again everyone,
Brothertom, about this
"Remember, the holy spirit has made you a BROTHER first and above all."
I hope that we can always do what is best for those around us.
I think too though of how Absalom was the brother of Tamar, and Amnon, whom he had killed, because he had forced himself upon Tamar. And how, when he rebelled against his father David he went to the gate of the city and met those who came for judgment unto the king, and how he said
"Oh that I were made judge in the land, that every man which hath any suit or cause might come unto me, and I would do him justice!"
Or too how Simeon and Levi were brothers of Dinah, and how they killed Shechem and all the men of the city after he had taken Dinah. And how Jacob said of them
"Ye have troubled me to make me to stink..."
and also how when he was old he said of them
"...in their anger they slew a man, and in their self-will they digged down a wall."
I wish us all well as we try to understand how to love and protect others, and ourselves.
Christopher Joel Dandrow
| 2008/6/6 22:21||Profile|
| Re: A Brother or sister first, unto the least|
"As much as you have done it unto these, the least of my brothers, [b]You have done it unto me!"[/b]; Jesus speaking.
I am trying to live my life according to this word. Any blood washed, born again family member is mine, and my stewardship of grace in this relationship is to treat him or her, just as Jesus would do. ...any where, anytime , anyplace. This is what I mean in God making us a brother first, as our calling.
This applies to each and every member of the body of Christ. Jesus never passed by the one, but stopped, and loved and healed. This is the Christian. The other may just be your position, for now. Impregnated in this virtue of love unto the least, is the fear of God, for failing. Jesus used this standard of love, unto the least, to separate even unto the Lake of fire and Satan's justice, all the way to New Jerusalem for those who obey this mandate.....'As much as you have done it unto these the least,,,,,[b]You have done it unto Me!"[/b].
This is the heart of the table of communion, in my view, and a very serious issue, and the terrible fall of some, who cannot or will not accept it.
1st cor: 11 vs, 29...."For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgement to himself, if he does not judge the body rightly.for this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number are dead.'
I think that probably most in 'the ministry" today are the most susceptible to ignoring the command to lay their lives down for these, the least, or the weak. They, in their positions, see themselves, or the ministry as separate; perhaps the pulpit, and this brings a wall, from which their idea of ministry prohibits real contact and compassion to evolve. We are Pastors, after all.
We all will be judged, today, in the weight of grace we have given, and mercy, to the poor and weak among the church. A denial to do so [b]will[/b] result in the Lord disciplining you. This is why we see today, the amazing weakness in ministry, in the Pastorate today. We grow in Love, for faith works by love, and those in the Pastorate are often dwarfed, or spiritually retarded, because they cannot or will not interact as a "Brother First." They cannot, for you see, "this is not my position". It is the error of "nicolaitism", as a ruler over God's people, as being the qualification for the Pulpit.
I know this is off track some for this thread, but when we lose our anchor of being a good sister or brother, to please Jesus first[in the secret place, always.], then Jesus judges us for not honoring those He bled for and loved. We become His enemy, all in the religiosity of our devoted life. This leads to it is all about my ministry, and my anointing. This can lead to being judged unto death. Good fruit eaten, bad fruit thrown away. Bam.
| 2008/6/7 11:22|