|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
Emergent Church - 6/21/2007 9:48:37 AM
|
|
|
SavedToo
Posts: 63
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
OneNewsNow.com reports that John MacArthur believes most Christians are not aware of the dangers posed by the "emergent church" movement, which he says is counter to scripture in its underlying theology. MacArthur's new book The Truth War: Fighting for Certainty in an Age of Deception, says while the emergent church talks of reaching people by appealing to the culture, emergent church leaders do not have a high regard for the unchanging truth of God's Word. And too many Christians aren't aware of the problems associated with that.
This so true. The Emergent Church should be called the dying church. I’ve been to several here in North Texas. You really can’t tell the difference between what the pastor says and Ophra.
And they do this all in the name of reaching the “unchurched”. One of the proponents of this backward philosophy is Bill Hybels. Well, I grew up his brand of church. The one characteristic in my mind that stands out is that the only folks that are left were the folks that were in leadership. I also have a friend who goes to a Hybels church as well. One day someone came up to him after the service and asked him point blank: “Do you really think you are serious about discipleship?” At least he was honest and said, “No”. Sad words from someone in “leadership”.
I totally agree with MacArthur. This isn’t about style, but truth.
Matthew 28:19 -20 says, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen.”
The above verse commands us to make disciples, not entertain the unchurched.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/22/2007 2:49:55 PM
|
|
|
Rick4Him
Posts: 102
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
savedToo,
I read MacArthers book, it was a great read and hits hard at the false movements within the church today. Most will call us wacky fundamentalists though and say we're out of touch with the culture.
Rick
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/23/2007 2:07:31 AM
|
|
|
iratenate
Posts: 56
Joined: 9/3/2005
Status: offline
|
you wacky fundamentalists...
Nate
_____________________________
www.MilePost13.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/23/2007 2:20:13 PM
|
|
|
NEXGEN
Posts: 4
Joined: 6/23/2007
Status: offline
|
In regards to this matter, I agree with the views of John MacArthur, before I found this site I ran across a site from a emergent group, at the time I did not no this was a emergant site but as I began to read there views I saw that it was in conflict with the scriptures, when I stated my opinion as to how I disagreed with there views because they are not in line with the basics of scripture, I never got a response back. It seems that they have subjective truth, nothing firm in its structure, there is really no objective truth in there belife.
Its almost heart breaking because they truly belive they are in the right. They really want to make a difference from what I read, and they sincerely belive what they say, they are just sincerely wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/25/2007 5:06:30 PM
|
|
|
hisson7
Posts: 19
Joined: 5/2/2007
Status: offline
|
Praise the LORD!!!
I've heard of this 'emergent church' only upon this site. What I've garnered from that which I've read, they're just another apostate church system or group. We should preach against them and try to lead their membership to the truth about JESUS! We must remember though, we are in the end times and this has been predicted for nearly 2000 yrs.. We'll see more and more of these types as we get nearer to the LORD's second coming. We must remember to treat these people in a loving manor, as the LORD did, yet stand firm all the while in our beliefs.
The main reason I've just heard of this 'church' is that I'm to busy doing the LORD's work for me within my ministry. What the LORD has for me, is that which I shall do and that to the fullest of my ability!!!
GOD bless and good day,
_____________________________
Rev. M.T.Barth
Vine of CHRIST Ministries
www.vineofchrist.org
If I had but one day left to live, let me live it serving the LORD!!!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/25/2007 5:30:48 PM
|
|
|
brotherbrian
Posts: 283
Joined: 3/6/2007
Status: offline
|
Not to flog a dead horse again, but please remember that if a church fellowship "looks different" that's not proof positive that they're "doing it wrong".
No church could have looked more different than how "The Way" looked to the ancient Judeans of Jesus' day..
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/28/2007 8:54:53 AM
|
|
|
P31W
Posts: 3005
Joined: 6/13/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Not to flog a dead horse again, but please remember that if a church fellowship "looks different" that's not proof positive that they're "doing it wrong".
No church could have looked more different than how "The Way" looked to the ancient Judeans of Jesus' day..
BroBrian,
We are not discussing "style" nor does MacArthur in his book. We have discussed on many many threads their false "doctrine". In all the threads almost all of us who have "studied" the doctrine that is "most popular" in this group we flat out say "style" is not what we are looking at.
It's some terrible stuff. To date I have read more EC material and books than most people "involved" in the EC have. So far only ONE well known leader/author teaches sound doctrine. The rest either leave you with "more questions" or take you far away from the Truth about the gospel.
Mark Driscoll was one of the guys who started the EC movement yet has remained "true" to scripture. I have never seen anyone on "this forum" or in outside written material bash him for his "style". That's because we don't have a problem with "style" of worship rather who are you worshipping, what do you teach about scripture and what do you teach about Jesus Christ.
Currently in the Chruch forum there is a thread on Mars Hill - Rob Bell. We are discussing his book and the Christanity Today article where he says and I quote from this link
http://culture-makers.com/articles/the_emergent_mystique
The Bells started questioning their assumptions about the Bible itself—"discovering the Bible as a human product,” as Rob puts it, rather than the product of divine fiat. “The Bible is still in the center for us,” Rob says, “but it’s a different kind of center. We want to embrace mystery, rather than conquer it.” .....
And how did the Bells find their way out of the black-and-white world where they had been so successful and so dissatisfied? “Our lifeboat,” Kristen says, “was A New Kind of Christian.”
(for those of you who may not realize this Brian McLaren wrote that book.....Brian is also interviewed in this article....Brian is "out there".)
At least that’s what Rob Bell hopes. “People don’t get it,” he told me. “They think it’s about style. But the real question is: What is the gospel?”
I could not "finish" reading the book entitled "Listening to the Beliefs of Emerging Churches: Five Perspectives"
by Mark Driscoll (Collaborator), John Burke (Collaborator), Dan Kimball (Collaborator), Doug Pagitt (Collaborator), Karen Ward (Collaborator), Robert Webber (Editor)
Because it honestly made me sick!!!!! The "only" one who stood firm on sound Christian Doctrine was Mark Driscoll and he himself has taken a stand against the EC and is calling for people in the movement to take a stand with him for sound biblical doctrine.
I have kept my eye on the "most popular" and most well read authors in this movement. To date I have not found anyone else other than Mark who has taken a bold stand for biblical, historical Christanity.
Here is the direct link to the thread about Mars Hill and Rob Bell.
http://forums.crosswalk.com/Mars_Hill_Bible_Church/m_2451380/tm.htm
The only two people on that thread that I know for "sure" have read The Velvet Elivs are me and Mushhead. (take that back there is someone who said they read it over the weekend) At least we are the only ones who appear to know that Bell admits his book is about "theology" and can tell you that he teaches in that book that the Chruch gets to decide what is a "sin" and what is not a "sin". (example homosexuality is no longer a sin if the Chruch decides it's not......we beome "little gods" according to "his theology" deciding what is right and what is wrong)
< Message edited by P31W -- 6/28/2007 9:25:29 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/28/2007 12:03:16 PM
|
|
|
Rick4Him
Posts: 102
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
Good post P31W, I have read a little on EC, Kimball and McLaren. I truly don't know much about it but I agree with you, it's the liberal view of the Bible we need to watch out for.
Rick
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/29/2007 1:34:52 PM
|
|
|
brotherbrian
Posts: 283
Joined: 3/6/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: P31W
quote:
Not to flog a dead horse again, but please remember that if a church fellowship "looks different" that's not proof positive that they're "doing it wrong".
No church could have looked more different than how "The Way" looked to the ancient Judeans of Jesus' day..
BroBrian,
We are not discussing "style" nor does MacArthur in his book. We have discussed on many many threads their false "doctrine". In all the threads almost all of us who have "studied" the doctrine that is "most popular" in this group we flat out say "style" is not what we are looking at.
It's some terrible stuff. To date I have read more EC material and books than most people "involved" in the EC have. So far only ONE well known leader/author teaches sound doctrine. The rest either leave you with "more questions" or take you far away from the Truth about the gospel.
Mark Driscoll was one of the guys who started the EC movement yet has remained "true" to scripture. I have never seen anyone on "this forum" or in outside written material bash him for his "style". That's because we don't have a problem with "style" of worship rather who are you worshipping, what do you teach about scripture and what do you teach about Jesus Christ.
Currently in the Chruch forum there is a thread on Mars Hill - Rob Bell. We are discussing his book and the Christanity Today article where he says and I quote from this link
http://culture-makers.com/articles/the_emergent_mystique
The Bells started questioning their assumptions about the Bible itself—"discovering the Bible as a human product,” as Rob puts it, rather than the product of divine fiat. “The Bible is still in the center for us,” Rob says, “but it’s a different kind of center. We want to embrace mystery, rather than conquer it.” .....
And how did the Bells find their way out of the black-and-white world where they had been so successful and so dissatisfied? “Our lifeboat,” Kristen says, “was A New Kind of Christian.”
(for those of you who may not realize this Brian McLaren wrote that book.....Brian is also interviewed in this article....Brian is "out there".)
At least that’s what Rob Bell hopes. “People don’t get it,” he told me. “They think it’s about style. But the real question is: What is the gospel?”
I could not "finish" reading the book entitled "Listening to the Beliefs of Emerging Churches: Five Perspectives"
by Mark Driscoll (Collaborator), John Burke (Collaborator), Dan Kimball (Collaborator), Doug Pagitt (Collaborator), Karen Ward (Collaborator), Robert Webber (Editor)
Because it honestly made me sick!!!!! The "only" one who stood firm on sound Christian Doctrine was Mark Driscoll and he himself has taken a stand against the EC and is calling for people in the movement to take a stand with him for sound biblical doctrine.
I have kept my eye on the "most popular" and most well read authors in this movement. To date I have not found anyone else other than Mark who has taken a bold stand for biblical, historical Christanity.
Here is the direct link to the thread about Mars Hill and Rob Bell.
http://forums.crosswalk.com/Mars_Hill_Bible_Church/m_2451380/tm.htm
The only two people on that thread that I know for "sure" have read The Velvet Elivs are me and Mushhead. (take that back there is someone who said they read it over the weekend) At least we are the only ones who appear to know that Bell admits his book is about "theology" and can tell you that he teaches in that book that the Chruch gets to decide what is a "sin" and what is not a "sin". (example homosexuality is no longer a sin if the Chruch decides it's not......we beome "little gods" according to "his theology" deciding what is right and what is wrong)
And you haven't seen me defending Rob Bell, nor will you until I read more about him that will make me change my mind about him.
I'm not on the same page as him, that's for sure.
My point is (and has been) that way too many people lump any and all churches that are "different looking" under the EC banner, and condemn the EC IDEA out of hand because they're more afraid of making established saints feel a bit uncomfortable than they are of truly going fishing in today's lake, and the culture surrounding it's shoreline.
We are in a post Catholic church child molesting, post Jimmy Swaggart hooker visiting, post Jim and Tammy Baker embezzling, post Brother Bob Tilton, Benny Hinn et al "faith healing, post liberal/anti-Christian media dominating, and post "Moral Majority" world today.
Never before have unbelievers had more "evidence" to bolster their erroneous notion that Christianity is all talk and no substance.
Now WE all know that the above reflects the small minority, yet it's "commonly known" in today's culture that Christians talk a good game and that's about all.
In my opinion (and most of y'alls) MUCH of the EC has unwittingly thrown the baby out with the bathwater---in their efforts to actually reach out and fish, they've all too often forgotten the basics of fishing our Lord taught us by concentrating on simply feeding people instead of teaching them to fish for themselves.
They often produce a weird sort of Christian "welfare state" in which the congregants don't know what to do when the river dries up for a spell--they become over-reliant on the "feeling" they get when being fed by spoon.
I LOVE what they're about in theory, as long as they don't sacrifice sound doctrine, biblical pastoral mentorship, biblical pastoral discipline lovingly and gracefully administered, and spiritual maturity and growth.
For far too long, so many of our "regular churches" have read about fishing for men, but just never seem to actually get the boat out on the water and get our lines wet.
The EC DOES that, and that should righteously shame many of us.
We have meetings about fishing, we teach people how to fish, we teach people how to teach OTHER people how to fish, and we buy all the "tackle" from books to tee shirts to coffee mugs about the joys of fishing and the majesty of the Cheif Fisher of men, but we just never seem to take the time to actually GO fishing.
Anywho, I will always defend pastors and churches who lead people to the foot of the cross; and I will fight against them being UNFAIRLY slandered and back-bitten UNLESS they preach an honestly different Gospel down deep where the rubber meets the road.
I probably err on the side of pastoral support, and that may be to my shame; but I know how hard they work and how heavy the burden of discipleship can be for them, and how many are the personal sacrifices they make in regards to family and self.
The ones who head thriving fellowships that are seeing lots of new birth and who ARE doing as the Lord and the Earthly Church fathers would approve of shouldn't get knee-jerk lumped in with the apostates who'll say anything at all to get people in the door so they can toss a little in the plate.
I know I've rambled all up and down the road, but some people in here don't know where I'm coming from really, and think I don't honor sound doctrine.
In the end, I just want to see as many as possible find the foot of the cross, and I'll leave it up to the Holy Spirit to lead those freshly saved souls to another "tour guide" if they're being led by somebody who's wandered off in the deep weeds doctrinally, well intentioned though they may very well be.
< Message edited by brotherbrian -- 6/29/2007 1:39:40 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/29/2007 2:23:18 PM
|
|
|
P31W
Posts: 3005
Joined: 6/13/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Anywho, I will always defend pastors and churches who lead people to the foot of the cross; and I will fight against them being UNFAIRLY slandered and back-bitten UNLESS they preach an honestly different Gospel down deep where the rubber meets the road.
Then you should honestly have no problem with what I have posted. I've done my reasearch. More than most when it comes to the EC.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/29/2007 2:25:07 PM
|
|
|
rcjames
Posts: 5668
Joined: 7/15/2005
From: Oklahoma
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: brotherbrian
In the end, I just want to see as many as possible find the foot of the cross, and I'll leave it up to the Holy Spirit to lead those freshly saved souls to another "tour guide" if they're being led by somebody who's wandered off in the deep weeds doctrinally, well intentioned though they may very well be.
To me this is the most dangerous attitude of thinking about a lot of the Church.
They came to the Lord however, and now it is up the the Holy Spirit to lead them to the truth.
Jesus did not seem to agree that bad doctrine was not a problem;
(Mat 15:14) Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
and even more forceful;
(Mat 23:15) Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
Peter chimed in on false teachers and bad doctrine;
(2Pe 2:1) But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
(2Pe 2:2) And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
(2Pe 2:3) And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
So this "emergent church" nonsense; this universalism, denying the whole counsel of the New Testament, this: if one walks like Jesus "In peace and humility" then they are saved (including Ghandi) is leading folks to hell in wholesale numbers and should be exposed for the heresy that it is.
There are a couple of older threads (last year I believe -P31W probably knows) that go very deeply into the heresy.
Thanks
RC
edited for spelling
< Message edited by rcjames -- 6/29/2007 2:30:18 PM >
_____________________________
Just a country Preacher's humble opinion
Read the first chapter of my latest book here;
http://www.deliveranceofsara.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/29/2007 4:13:10 PM
|
|
|
jazzact13
Posts: 485
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
I heard of EC a few months ago, and have tried to learn about it. I've read some in a couple of McLaren's books, and from a few others associated with the movement. I've visited a few of their blogs and discussion forums. I'm even familiar with a fellowship that is somewhat EC, and I think it is ok--they aren't out in left field, so to speak.
If it were a matter simply of style, perhaps they would be a good thing. Even in matter of "living like one is a Christian", they could have given some life to the church. That is the sad thing about it to me, that so much good is being wasted.
My observations, though, are not very positive. They strike me as being very arrogant, as thinking of themselves as people who have discovered the 'correct way' of doing Christianity (if they even call it that), and considering that attaching some kind of label like 'modern' (as opposed to 'postmodern') to those who disagree with them is enough of an answer. Their descriptions have often left me with the impression that before they came along, 'Christian' were concerned only with high theological discussions which had no relation to real life, and not with actually helping the poor and social justice.
It doesn't take long, though, to understand what they consider to be helping the poor--socialistic economic policies, acceptance of gay 'civil unions' and possibly even gay marriages, environmental policies to combat the fiction of global warming, and litle if any military.
Concerning the Bible, they have what is called 'deconstruction'. You can define it, no one else can (much like the word 'postmodern'). It's the thing that allows them to, say, tell people that Hell doesn't really exist--it's deconstructed out of their Bibles.
Much of it seems to come down to their views of the end times. I haven't seen an explicit statement of it, but they do seem to hold to a form of preterism. At the least, they seem to dislike Lahaye and company. I've heard their views called 'post-eschatology' (another point, they like putting 'pre-' and 'post-' on things). They seem to think the the Kingdom of God is already here, and that we should live as they think people of that Kingdom should live.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/30/2007 11:24:37 AM
|
|
|
brotherbrian
Posts: 283
Joined: 3/6/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rcjames
quote:
ORIGINAL: brotherbrian
In the end, I just want to see as many as possible find the foot of the cross, and I'll leave it up to the Holy Spirit to lead those freshly saved souls to another "tour guide" if they're being led by somebody who's wandered off in the deep weeds doctrinally, well intentioned though they may very well be.
To me this is the most dangerous attitude of thinking about a lot of the Church.
They came to the Lord however, and now it is up the the Holy Spirit to lead them to the truth.
Jesus did not seem to agree that bad doctrine was not a problem;
(Mat 15:14) Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
and even more forceful;
(Mat 23:15) Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
Peter chimed in on false teachers and bad doctrine;
(2Pe 2:1) But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
(2Pe 2:2) And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
(2Pe 2:3) And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
So this "emergent church" nonsense; this universalism, denying the whole counsel of the New Testament, this: if one walks like Jesus "In peace and humility" then they are saved (including Ghandi) is leading folks to hell in wholesale numbers and should be exposed for the heresy that it is.
There are a couple of older threads (last year I believe -P31W probably knows) that go very deeply into the heresy.
Thanks
RC
edited for spelling
Would you rather have someone get saved in the "wrong church", where they WILL go, or live each day on the edge of an eternity in Hell everlasting because they WON'T go to the "right church", RC?
You and so many others seem to give the Holy Spirit so little credit.
He's been instructing, convicting, and leading Christians of all spiritual levels of maturity and discernment since the first believer.
Also, did you not read my OTHER statements regarding doctrinal issues?
You quoted one sentence out of many regarding the importance of following the scriptural model in all things of faith.
I've tried to make my position clear, but if I've been too murky to do that succinctly I'm sorry.
First and foremost I want to see souls saved for the cause of Christ and for their own sakes too.
I've lived without Christ, and I don't want that for anybody.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/30/2007 2:25:23 PM
|
|
|
contend4christ
Posts: 56
Joined: 6/12/2007
From: Los angeles
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jazzact13
I heard of EC a few months ago, and have tried to learn about it. I've read some in a couple of McLaren's books, and from a few others associated with the movement. I've visited a few of their blogs and discussion forums. I'm even familiar with a fellowship that is somewhat EC, and I think it is ok--they aren't out in left field, so to speak.
If it were a matter simply of style, perhaps they would be a good thing. Even in matter of "living like one is a Christian", they could have given some life to the church. That is the sad thing about it to me, that so much good is being wasted.
My observations, though, are not very positive. They strike me as being very arrogant, as thinking of themselves as people who have discovered the 'correct way' of doing Christianity (if they even call it that), and considering that attaching some kind of label like 'modern' (as opposed to 'postmodern') to those who disagree with them is enough of an answer. Their descriptions have often left me with the impression that before they came along, 'Christian' were concerned only with high theological discussions which had no relation to real life, and not with actually helping the poor and social justice.
It doesn't take long, though, to understand what they consider to be helping the poor--socialistic economic policies, acceptance of gay 'civil unions' and possibly even gay marriages, environmental policies to combat the fiction of global warming, and litle if any military.
Concerning the Bible, they have what is called 'deconstruction'. You can define it, no one else can (much like the word 'postmodern'). It's the thing that allows them to, say, tell people that Hell doesn't really exist--it's deconstructed out of their Bibles.
Much of it seems to come down to their views of the end times. I haven't seen an explicit statement of it, but they do seem to hold to a form of preterism. At the least, they seem to dislike Lahaye and company. I've heard their views called 'post-eschatology' (another point, they like putting 'pre-' and 'post-' on things). They seem to think the the Kingdom of God is already here, and that we should live as they think people of that Kingdom should live.
Are you saying its better to have the false teachers to invite people to their churches than to not have the false teachers with churches at all?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 6/30/2007 10:24:18 PM
|
|
|
BlackCapnHarlock
Posts: 365
Joined: 8/20/2005
Status: offline
|
I understand where John M. is coming from. True Doctrine is being slaughtered and dumped out back in the church today. Too many "feel good" preachers and not enough hardcore "doctrine" being taught.
With that being said, many so called EC's are teaching GOD'S word in sound doctrine. Yes there are some weak dudes out there, but there are some solid ones out there as well.
I have been to small churches that taught error and large churches that taught true doctrine. I have been to Southern Baptists churches that are racist and hateful, and have met southern baptists who were thoughtful and full of the love of the Lord.
Size doesn't matter, style does matter to an extent, but overall it's the doctrine of JESUS the Christ that must be lived by the leaders and members, and secondly be taught by the leaders and members. Whether your pastor is a Republican or Democrat, whether you read Phil Yancy or Wilmington and Worthington III.
_____________________________
Ezekiel 16:6 Eze 16:6 And when I passed by thee, and saw thee polluted in thine own blood, I said unto thee when thou wast in thy blood, Live; yea, I said unto thee when thou wast in thy blood, Live.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 7/1/2007 8:10:01 AM
|
|
|
jazzact13
Posts: 485
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Are you saying its better to have the false teachers to invite people to their churches than to not have the false teachers with churches at all?
May I ask for you to please clarify you statements here. I don't understand what you're asking me.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 7/1/2007 1:56:48 PM
|
|
|
contend4christ
Posts: 56
Joined: 6/12/2007
From: Los angeles
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jazzact13
quote:
Are you saying its better to have the false teachers to invite people to their churches than to not have the false teachers with churches at all?
May I ask for you to please clarify you statements here. I don't understand what you're asking me.
Sorry used the wrong quote wasnt you
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 7/1/2007 1:58:48 PM
|
|
|
contend4christ
Posts: 56
Joined: 6/12/2007
From: Los angeles
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: brotherbrian
quote:
ORIGINAL: rcjames
quote:
ORIGINAL: brotherbrian
In the end, I just want to see as many as possible find the foot of the cross, and I'll leave it up to the Holy Spirit to lead those freshly saved souls to another "tour guide" if they're being led by somebody who's wandered off in the deep weeds doctrinally, well intentioned though they may very well be.
To me this is the most dangerous attitude of thinking about a lot of the Church.
They came to the Lord however, and now it is up the the Holy Spirit to lead them to the truth.
Jesus did not seem to agree that bad doctrine was not a problem;
(Mat 15:14) Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
and even more forceful;
(Mat 23:15) Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
Peter chimed in on false teachers and bad doctrine;
(2Pe 2:1) But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
(2Pe 2:2) And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
(2Pe 2:3) And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
So this "emergent church" nonsense; this universalism, denying the whole counsel of the New Testament, this: if one walks like Jesus "In peace and humility" then they are saved (including Ghandi) is leading folks to hell in wholesale numbers and should be exposed for the heresy that it is.
There are a couple of older threads (last year I believe -P31W probably knows) that go very deeply into the heresy.
Thanks
RC
edited for spelling
Would you rather have someone get saved in the "wrong church", where they WILL go, or live each day on the edge of an eternity in Hell everlasting because they WON'T go to the "right church", RC?
You and so many others seem to give the Holy Spirit so little credit.
He's been instructing, convicting, and leading Christians of all spiritual levels of maturity and discernment since the first believer.
Also, did you not read my OTHER statements regarding doctrinal issues?
You quoted one sentence out of many regarding the importance of following the scriptural model in all things of faith.
I've tried to make my position clear, but if I've been too murky to do that succinctly I'm sorry.
First and foremost I want to see souls saved for the cause of Christ and for their own sakes too.
I've lived without Christ, and I don't want that for anybody.
Are you saying its better to have the false teachers to invite people to their churches than to not have the false teachers with churches at all?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 7/1/2007 7:49:12 PM
|
|
|
blessednw
Posts: 724
Joined: 4/12/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: hisson7
Praise the LORD!!!
I've heard of this 'emergent church' only upon this site. What I've garnered from that which I've read, they're just another apostate church system or group. We should preach against them and try to lead their membership to the truth about JESUS! We must remember though, we are in the end times and this has been predicted for nearly 2000 yrs.. We'll see more and more of these types as we get nearer to the LORD's second coming. We must remember to treat these people in a loving manor, as the LORD did, yet stand firm all the while in our beliefs.
The main reason I've just heard of this 'church' is that I'm to busy doing the LORD's work for me within my ministry. What the LORD has for me, is that which I shall do and that to the fullest of my ability!!!
GOD bless and good day,
To all of you,
I am so glad that someone is talking about this!!! I have heard views, I have read a little. I understand that some have good motives, ie: let's reach the younger generation that believes in a spiritual world but does not know about a biblically taught spiritual world view.
I whole heartedly agree with that motive. Yet I have seen that people can mouth good "people reaching" visions and actually be seeking ways to cover for a compromised lifestyle according to Scripture.
When I got saved, I was radically saved. what changed right away? My world view. Did this impact me in my subculture???You bet it did! I was really different right away. My unsaved friends ridiculed me and joked about my "finding religion". I knew I had been born again and that really, really, all things were new, but I had to accept that they were on a completely different path. The Lord had me in a new place and discipleship right away. If I had not been radically taught, I am sure I would've fallen away.
The Gospel is the most radical message in existance. In the name of reaching different people groups, let us not twist or ignore the clear revelation of God. If we give them half a gospel, they will miss out on true renewing of their hearts and minds. We should not be ashamed of the sometimes radical and sacrificial obedience that walking with the Lord calls for.
I would've had such little respect for a church that told me to not do drugs, but had regular nights of wine/beer and fellowship. I would've been disillusioned and thought them hypocritical. I couldn't have brought a recovering alcoholic to the meeting. Things were a little more defined.
Let us never give up the power of obedience to God's word, within the grace and mercy we all need for our sin. Lets give them the whole Gospel.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 7/2/2007 1:45:53 AM
|
|
|
timbo6585
Posts: 14
Joined: 4/13/2007
Status: offline
|
the emerging church is a very broad term that encompasses lots of different beliefs and people and styles and everything. to simply stereotype this entire movement, whether in a positive or negative light, isn't wise, accurate, or helpful. there is a group that takes the name Emergent that falls into the emerging church, but i think everyone hear is refering to the broader term that encompasses the present postmodern movement in Christianity.
im not exactly sure why people are up in arms over the emerging church, maybe i haven't looked into it enough yet. i think the most important thing thru this is to keep the centrality of Christ. keeping true that He's the only way to heaven. and also guarding the facts about His Life and Nature, like the early apostles did when battling gnosticism. i think if we keep our eyes on Jesus and look to Him and don't fall into false teachings about Him then there isn't an imminent danger.
my general understanding of the emerging church is that it is comprised of a lot of people who aren't satisfied with traditional churches, and they have every right to their dissatisfaction. i won't make this a church-bashing post, but there is nothing sacred about the man made structures in a church, emphasis on man made. look how vastly our mindsets have changed from the early church and the modern church. before they WERE the church, and now we GO to church. my point is that there isn't any reason to defend the man made hiearchial structure that is misnamed church. and lest anyone think im some burned out rebellious former church goer i'm not, i just absolutely hate sitting in a pew and seeing the Body of Christ reduced to two members, the mouth(pastor) and the ear(congegrants). why defend a structure that inhibits the free functioning of the members of the Body?
like i said, im not as well educated about the emerging church as i should be, and i realize people throw scary words out like relativism and postmodernism and everything when talking about the EC, but if it's simply structure that they want to change(better yet, do away with) and not the truths of Christ then i don't see a big deal.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Emergent Church - 7/2/2007 2:31:16 AM
|
|
|
timbo6585
Posts: 14
Joined: 4/13/2007
| | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
) of God's word. I don't agree with some of the emergents out there because of the weak stances or no stances they take on things, but that can trancend denominations. I have seen it in the southern baptist (which is the denomination I am a part of) that can be the same way, and be purely entertainment. 
