Commentary by Roger Oakland
www.understandthetimes.org

 

Promoters of the emergent conversation say we are on the verge of an era that promises renewed spiritual awareness. “Spiritual disciplines” are being touted as the avenue to a “spiritual reformation” that will take Christianity to a new and higher level of spirituality drawing all participants closer to God.

Books published by major Christian publishers written by well known authors are plentiful on this topic. For example, J.P. Moreland and Klaus Issler are both professors at Talbot School of Theology at Biola University in southern California. Moreland is professor of philosophy. Issler is professor of Christian education and theology. In 2006, Navpress published a book they co-authored titled The Lost Virtue of Happiness: Discovering the Disciplines of the Good Life. [1] On the back cover, the following statement is made:

Authors J.P. Moreland and Klaus Issler illustrate how we are happy only when we pursue a transcendent purpose – something larger than ourselves. This involves a deeply meaningful relationship with God through a selfless preoccupation with the spiritual disciplines. The Lost Virtue of Happiness takes a fresh look at the spiritual disciplines, offering concrete examples of ways you can make them practical and life transforming. [2]

The title gives a good overview of what the book is about. Moreland and Issler believe they have rediscovered important spiritual principles that have been lost. If you follow these principles and they become part of your everyday Christian life, you can be transformed.

One of the spiritual disciplines the authors have recovered is outlined in a chapter titled “Gaining Happiness by Losing Your Life.”  Under the subheading “Two Friends: Solitude and Silence” the authors make the following statement:

The disciplines of solitude and silence are absolutely fundamental to the Christian life, are naturally practiced in tandem. In solitude we choose to be alone and to reflect on how we experience the facets of life (family, job, relationship with God, finances) and what they mean to us while in isolation. We unhook from companionship with others; we take ourselves physically and mentally out of our social, familial, and other human relationships. [3]

While it is true, getting away and alone somewhere is often the best way to concentrate and evaluate life’s most important decisions, the isolation and solitude that Moreland and Issler are promoting as a spiritual discipline in the name of Christianity has some eastern mystical overtones. Further the authors attempt to add credibility to this rediscovered “spiritual discipline” by quoting Roman Catholic mystic and priest, Henri Nouwen, who once said:

The man or woman who has developed this solitude of heart is no longer pulled apart by the most divergent stimuli of the surrounding world but is able to perceive and understand this world from a quiet inner center. [4]

This “quiet inner center” Nouwen wrote about is suspect, especially in light of spiritual disciplines practiced by those involved in the Buddhist and Hindu faiths.

Further, it seems that Nouwen’s Roman Catholic mystical beliefs and teachings have strongly influenced the authors. Continuing to develop their idea of the importance of rediscovering the lost art of finding the “quiet inner center,” they state: 

Go to a retreat center that has one of its purposes the provision of a place for individual sojourners. Try to find a center that has gardens, fountains, statues, and other forms of beautiful artwork. In our experience, Catholic retreat centers are usually ideal for solitude retreats… We also recommend that you bring photos of your loved ones and a picture of Jesus… Or gaze at a statue of Jesus. Or let some thought, feeling, or memory run through your mind over and over again. [5]

I have searched the scriptures. Gazing at a picture or statue of Jesus or concentrating on a thought or feeling in order to establish “a quiet inner center” just isn’t there!

 

God’s Word or Man’s word

It is apparent to me after reading countless books published by mainline publishers on the subject of the emerging church movement that there are two underlying common denominators.

First, it is apparent that the “new kind of Christian” that is being groomed by emergent teachings is being conditioned to accept, embrace and promote a “new mysticism” under the banner of spiritual formation. However, the so-called spiritual disciplines that are promoted as part of this spiritual formation are not new. They are the same methods and techniques that have seduced the masses since the fall of man in the Garden of Eden.

Second, the teachings and beliefs of Roman Catholic mystics who embraced eastern mysticism in the past are being reintroduced, and for many, are taking precedence over the Word of God. The onslaught of ideas promoted by these Roman Catholic mystics is staggering. Why is this so? Is it possible many are being seduced and don’t realize what is happening? Why can people not see the Roman Catholic connection? Have they been blinded?

For example, in a section of The Lost Virtue of Happiness: Discovering The Disciplines of The Good Life, Moreland and Issler provide tips for “developing ongoing prayer.” Here are some of the points they made:

• We recommend that you begin by saying the Jesus Prayer about three hundred times a day. [6]
• When you first awaken, say the Jesus Prayer twenty to thirty times. As you do, something will begin to happen to you. God will begin to slowly occupy the center of your attention. [7]
• Repetitive use of the Jesus Prayer while doing more focused things allows God to be on the boundaries of your mind and forms the habit of being gently in contact with him all day long. [8]

You don’t have to be Bible scholar to understand that repetitive prayers designed to get one into a state of consciousness in order to bring one closer to God, is not in the Word of God.

Further, Moreland and Issler attempt to justify their case for the practice of repetitive prayer in their book, claiming that such a “spiritual discipline” is biblically and historically valid. Encouraging the unsuspecting reader to be at ease, they say:

Now, before you role your eyes in disbelief, hang in there with me. Derived from Luke 18:38, the Jesus Prayer has had a powerful impact on people at various times in church history. [9] And while it comes in different forms, the wording we prefer is “Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me!” If you take up the challenge, I think you’ll see some remarkable results. [10]

Then, attempting to add more convincing biblical grounds to place a seal of approval on such antibiblical practice to get closer to God, Moreland and Issler stated:

You may be thinking that repeating a prayer over and over again violates Jesus’ warning, “And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition [do not keep on babbling, NIV] as the gentiles do, for they suppose they will be heard for their many words” (Matthew 6:7, NASB). On the contrary, the use of repetitive prayer as a spiritual training exercise does not fall under this prohibition.  As New Testament scholar Don Carson said, Jesus is not forbidding all long prayers or all repetition. He himself prayed at length (Luke :12), repeated himself in prayer (Matt 26:14), and told a parable to show His disciples that “they should always pray and not give up” (Luke :12). His point is that His disciples should avoid meaningless, repetitive prayers offered under the misconception that mere length will make prayers efficacious. [11]

This apologetic, if it was written by J.P. Moreland who is a well known apologist, justifying mindless repetitive short word prayers verses long prayers is difficult for me to accept. This would mean that for centuries Christians who have spoken out against the very thing the authors are promoting were mindless fools. This is just too much to accept.

I have been to the country of Myanmar (formerly called Burma) twice. On both occasions I observed (and have video footage) of both Roman Catholics and Buddhists practicing the spiritual principle of repetitive prayer. By the way, in both cases they were chanting these prayers over and over again while they were counting beads. Yes, Roman Catholics and Buddhists both have a “rosary” technique to keep track of how many times they have chanted a prayer.

I have also taken the time to interview Roman Catholics and Buddhists in the country of Myanmar. I have asked them what they are doing and why they are doing this. Each time that I have asked this question I have been told the same thing. It is a way to concentrate and focus their thoughts and get in tune with the spirit world.

Chanting repetitive phrases to get closer to God is not biblical, it is Satanic.

If I am wrong in what I am saying, then please show me from the scriptures. In light of what the Bible warns about repetitive prayer and the fact that Satan has a significant plan to seduce believers in the Last Days, if you are headed down this path, I implore you to stop in your tracks. Repent and turn back to Jesus and His Word!
 

---

[1] J.P. Moreland, Klaus Issler, The Lost Virtue of Happiness: Discovering the Disciplines of the Good Life, Navpress, Colorado Springs, CO, 2006

[2]  Ibid. back page

[3] Ibid. p. 51

[4]  Henri Nouwen, Reaching Out (New York, Doubleday, 1986), 25

[5]  Moreland and Issler, page 54-55

[6] J.P. Moreland, Klaus Issler, The Lost Virtue of Happiness: Discovering the Disciplines of the Good Life, Navpress, Colorado Springs, CO, 2006, p. 90

[7] Ibid. p. 92

[8]  Ibid. p. 93

[9]  See R.M. French, tans., The Way of the Pilgrim (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1988), 156

[10]  J.P. Moreland, Issler. p. 90

[11] D.A. Carson, “Matthew,” in Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), 166

As those associated with CCO/Jubilee Conference continue to deny that the Coalition for Christian Outreach are participating in the Emerging Church and Emergent Conversation — their choice of speakers is contradictive.

Meet Jubilee Speaker Karen Sloan:   

Leading Formation House is our Prior, Karen Sloan, a minister in the Presbyterian Church (USA). Her deep interest in blending old and new monasticism is expressed in her book Flirting with Monasticism: Finding God on Ancient Paths. In recent years she has been a voice in conversations about the church emerging, including contributing the chapter “Emergent Kissing” in An Emergent Manifesto of Hope, and promoting the Presbymergent network. She earned a Masters of Divinity, with a concentration in Cross Cultural Studies, at Fuller Theological Seminary. Her undergraduate degree is in Political Studies, from Pitzer College, a member of the Claremont Colleges. Karen is a high extrovert who deeply enjoys living in community and relating with the networks of folks she has gotten know around the country through several years of itinerant speaking. Before that nomadic period, Karen served as a Campus Minister at Quinnipiac University. At her core Karen is passionate about prayer in nearly any form it occurs, however she holds a particular love for fixed hour prayer, or as is traditionally referred to, Liturgy of the Hours.  

Spencer Burke “catches up with Karen Sloan at the Emergent Church Conference”

Notable Quotes from Karen:

” . . . the part of the Body of Christ that comes out of Ancient Monasticsm . . .” 

“Read your Bible and Pray” BUT our tradition doesn’t have a whole lot of resources as to how we do that . . .

“Flirting with Monasticsm isn’t the only way to get close to God but I highly recommend that one . . .

“What we want to do is to create channels for people to go deeper in their own faith . . .”

HT: Apprising Ministries

Watch this informative and entertaining video of Spencer Burke of  The Ooze interviewing Brian McLaren.

Over at Living Jubilee, the blog for CCO/Jubilee there is an interesting post:

How to Fall In Love . . . One Book at a Time
by Derek Melleby  Derek is the Director of CPYU’s College Transition Initiative and has a M.A. in Higher Education from Geneva College.

As I read the post, there were several statements which made me quite curious as to what did this author actually believe? After all this is a post on a website dedicated to Christian college ministry, he is used to questions and  ’conversations’.

In fact the author, himself is past CCO staff and works for Center for Parent and Youth Understanding (for years I subscribed to their newsletter and found it quite helpful as they provided information/research on many components of youth culture — I particularly found the research on music/musicians very helpful to have conversations with our teens.) 

Walt Mueller, Founder and President of CPYU, is also a past CCO staff.

I left a comment for this post on Friday which has yet to be approved, so thought I would ask my questions here.

Reading requires sustained motivation. Not to take this analogy too far, but after my honeymoon period of reading, I needed a new reason to continue. The words of Jesus came to mind: “Love the Lord your God with all of your heart, soul, strength and mind.” Reading is one way to love God with our minds. There are other ways to love God with the minds we’ve been given, for sure, but there is something about reading that stretches our thinking. Or better, it gives our brain (a muscle, you know) a work out! Reading can be an act of worship and love toward God. Is there a higher motivation? [emphasis mine]

1.  What written word other than God’s Word “is one way to love God with our minds” ???

2.  What written word other than God’s Word “can be an act of worship and love toward God” ???

“As you know, our faith is based, to a large extent, on the written word. Discipleship requires reading. And reading, I believe, brings us closer to the word made flesh.”  [emphasis mine]

3.  What written word other than God’s Word “is our faith based” ???

I fully expected Derek to respond and tell me (and the many college students who might frequent this CCO/Jubilee sponsored blog) that of course he was speaking of only reading God’s Word — Scripture  . . .

 . . . but perhaps that isn’t his answer?

Certainly this verse in God’s Word does not align with Derek’s wisdom concerning reading books . . .

“But beyond this, my son, be warned:
the writing of many books is endless and excessive devotion to books is wearing to the body.” Ecclesiastes 12:12.

 

 

 

The burning of these old Ephesian books!

(J. R. Miller, “Paul’s Message for Today” 1904)

“Many of those who believed now came and openly confessed their evil deeds. A number of them who had been practicing magic brought their books and burned them at a public bonfire. The value of the books was several million dollars!” Acts 19:18-19  

 

One proof of the power of Christianity, was in the way these new believers at Ephesus renounced their evil ways and gave up their profitable sins. They saw the emptiness and folly of the things in which they had been trusting, and openly confessed the sinful deeds they had been doing. Many of them who had been engaged in the practice of magic arts, brought their books together and made a bonfire of them in the public square.

Always, those who follow Christ should be ready to part with whatever is sinful in their life and work, that Christ may be honored above all. Sins kept in the heart–poison the life, hide God’s face, and shut out blessing. No matter what it may cost, our sins must be sacrificed, or they will destroy us!

The burning of these old Ephesian books suggests that we should have bonfires of our evil books. There are many books which ought to be burned! They carry in them Satan’s poison! To read them is to debauch our own souls. To put them into the hands of others–is to ruin them. [emphasis mine]
 

In India, a man took down a book from the shelf–and a viper came out of the book and stung him to death! Just so, there are many books in which deadly vipers lie hidden! We should be most careful in choosing the books we read. A good book is a great blessing–but a bad book is a curse! 

Grace Gems

 

 

 

 

“Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.  And he said to the woman, ‘Has God indeed said…?’ “ 
Genesis 3:1

~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~

 

Heretic:  (from Theopedia)  

In Christianity, a heretic is one who holds a theological or religious opinion or doctrine in opposition or contrary to that which is considered as orthodox, or right doctrine. For example, one writer defines it in this manner: “A heretic is a baptized person who obstinately denies or doubts a truth which the Church teaches must be believed because it is part of the one, divinely revealed, and catholic (that is, universally valid) Christian faith.”

Heretics usually do not define their own beliefs as heretical. Heresy is a value judgement expressing the view from within an established belief system.

~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~

Considering the powerful influence that Rob Bell has had on many undiscerning Christians today, it is fitting that he be exposed as a heretic (Eph. 5:11). The following video takes quotes from Bell’s writings and interviews and compares them to Scripture (Acts 17:11).  It is interesting to note that often Bell offers his ‘thoughts’ in the form of a question.

An open letter to Byron Borger of Hearts and Minds Books,

You have been a frequent visitor and commenter here on our blog for the past few months.  You have questioned our motives, criticized our positions and our methods in an attempt, we assume, to better understand our beliefs and/or to hold us accountable. 

With Coalition for Christian Outreach Campus Ministry’s (CCO/Jubilee) annual conference fast approaching, we pray that you would be extremely careful in your promotion of certain authors.  You have expressed a measure of influence with CCO/Jubilee and it is with this in mind we write this open letter to you. 

Please know that this letter is not intended to be personal; however, you have made it quite clear of your willingness to give an ear to emergents and that you demand clarity in the use of words. You also claim to understand what a Christian ministry should be; therefore, we plan to hold you accountable, as well.

Plain and simple we desire to bring to your attention our concern for what will be offered to the students from your book table at CCO/Jubilee in February, hopefully, prompting you to reconsider your promotion of a number of controversial authors and books.

At your Hearts and Minds Books website, you regularly review books for your audience and customers.  Here is a sample of authors and/or books that you have mentioned there with some details about each one added by us.

Brian McLaren, from whom you claim to have learned quite a bit, wrote Finding Our Way: The Return of the Ancient Practices.  As you read did you recognize that nowhere in this book does he speak of the exclusivity of Christ, but rather finds common ancient practices with the teachings of Judaism and Islam? 

Were you aware that McLaren, in an interview with Leif Hanson,  positively quoted a pastor that said?: 

 The traditional understanding says that God asks of us something that God is incapable of Himself. God asks us to forgive people. But God is incapable of forgiving. God can’t forgive unless He punishes somebody in place of the person He was going to forgive. God doesn’t say things to you—Forgive your wife, and then go kick the dog to vent your anger. God asks you to actually forgive…. And there’s a certain sense that, a common understanding of the atonement presents a God who is incapable of forgiving. Unless He kicks somebody else.

Does this type of talk concern you?  Are you confident that if students at CCO/Jubilee read McLaren’s writings, they will be able to glean anything that points them to orthodox Christianity?

More on McLaren here.

Phyllis Tickle, who is a part of McLaren’s book and who wrote, The Great Emergence, says of the Bible, “We begin to refer to Luther’s principle of “sola scriptura, scriptura sola” as having been little more than the creation of a paper pope in place of a flesh and blood one.  And even as we speak, the authority that has been in place for five hundred years withers away in our hands.” 

Are you sure you want to promote an author that calls the Holy Scripture ‘a paper pope’?

More on Tickle here.

Richard Foster, in Celebrate Discipline says, “Christian Meditation is an attempt to empty the mind in order to fill it.” 

What Scripture reference could he possibly use to justify this statement to ‘empty the mind’?

Are you aware that Foster promotes mystics who saw God in all things (panentheism) and that his  teachings are aligned with Thomas Merton, a Trappist monk, who taught that God is in all of us?

Here’s an excellent book review of Foster’s dangerous book. 

Henri Nouwen, Catholic priest & mystic, who states in his book, Sabbatical Journey, “Today I personally believe that while Jesus came to open the door to God’s house, all human beings can walk through that door, whether they know about Jesus or not.  Today I see it as my call to help every person claim his or her own way to God.” 

Would you offer a college student a book by an author who says that?

Leonard Sweet in Quantum Spirituality says the Quantum spirituality is “a structure of human becoming,  a channeling of Christ energies through mindbody experience.”  And that we, as Christians must replace the ‘old teachings’ with the new teachings of ‘the New Light”.

This is dangerous New Age teaching, Byron.  Do you sell Sweet’s books at Jubilee?

Doug Pagitt  in Church Re-Imagined states,

“At Solomons Porch, sermons are not primarily about extracting truth from the Bible to apply to people’s lives.“  

And in an interview with Todd Friel, of Wretched Radio, said this,

“… there’s going to be no difference between the way God is going to interact with you when you die and the way God’s going to interact with a Muslim when a Muslim dies.”

Do these comments strike you as unbiblical? And coming from a pastor, too?

Rob Bell,who, in Velvet Elvis, suggests Christians spend three months studying Ken Wilbur’s book, A Theory of Everything.  Wilbur, unfortunately, is a guru of the ‘new global spirituality’ and is quoted as saying,  “If you want to know God, you’ve got to get your brain out of the way first. It’s just one big stupid filter….” 

Wilbur gets his mind out of the way by using transendental meditation. 

Is this what Rob Bell suggests Christians study for three months:

Didn’t God command that we love him with all our mind?  (Matt. 22:36)

Here are your comments on Bell’s Nooma videos & books: 

“From the very first, we’ve been supportive of these well-made, edgy, creative and mostly quite solid 13 minute teaching parables. I’m not the hugest fan of SexGod, although it is worth reading, and younger friends love it.  I like Velvet Elvis a lot (and the audio CD is him reading it, very well, unabridged.)  The last few chapters are brillant, rejecting the sacred-secular split in ways that shows God’s redemptive care for everything.  Everythingggg.  Some like his design, and appreciate his intense, postmodern ethos.  I’m glad for what he does…and we’ve got the books on sale.”   

If Rob Bell is influenced by the likes of Ken Wilbur, could his theology be out of the scope of orthodoxy?   Are you confident that Bell won’t lead students into Wilbur’s arena?

Eugene Peterson, who decided to add his own version of God’s Holy Word, The Message,  to a growing list of paraphrases, adds to, distorts and confuses the Scripture.  Here’s an excellent side-by-side comparison of his version and NIV/KJV. 

Just a taste:  Peterson re-writes Matthew 6: 10, from “…on earth as it is in heaven…” to “…as above, so below…”.  

Could this occultists’ mantra, “as above, so below,” just be an oversight on Peterson’s part? 

Google the phrase and see what comes up!   

You say this about Eugene Peterson’s writings:

 “I raved about his exceptionally well-written biblical meditations such as Long Obedience in the Same Direction, Traveling Light, and especially Leap Over a Wall. Each of these, I suggested, were chock-full of insight for what we in the CCO call whole-life discipleship.“    ”…his writings virtually throb with an earthy spirituality.”   {emphasis ours}

Byron,  what type of “earthly spirituality” do you plan to present at CCO/Jubilee by offering books by this author? 

We will admit that most of the above people recognize the failings of the church today.  They may have seen how Christians have failed in ‘the Great Commission’ that we’ve been called to; how we have failed to be ’salt and light’ in this darkened world.  We posit that they, unfortunately, have turned away from God’s plan of doing things to man’s ways; a dangerous and deceptive path to take.   They are deceived and/or deceiving.

May we recommend that at your book table you offer one of these excellent, discernment books?  We are confident that students will benefit greatly from these sound authors/teachers.

Seduction of Christianity, by Dave Hunt, who clearly demostrates how the church has been deceived by worldly philophies of men.

A Time of Departing by Ray Yungen, who writes how ancient mystical practices are uniting Christians with the world’s religions.

Faith Undone by Roger Oakland, where he questions whether the emerging church is a new reformation or an end-time deception.

The Truth War by John MacArthur, which is a call to arms against the tide of apostasy in the church today.

The Emergent Church: Undefining Christianity, Bob DeWaay’s thorough expose on the core beliefs of this movement.

It’s one thing, Byron, to read books by authors that question orthodox Christian theology or that have different beliefs, for discernment purposes; to compare them to Scripture  (Acts 17:11).  It is quite another to offer these same books to students who do not have the discernment to tell the difference; who are zealous for the Lord, but immature in their knowledge of doctrine. 

Jesus warns in Matthew 18, “But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea.”

We exhort you to prayfully consider this!

Contending earnestly for the faith,
Judy & Yvonne
Jude 3-4

Chris Seay, one of the leaders and ‘voices’ of the Emergent Movement is a speaker at the Coalition for Christian Outreach’s annual convention, Jubilee.

On a rainy Sunday, I stumbled across this ’sermon’ by Seay preached at his friend, Rob Bell’s church — Mars Hill. Chris was the ‘kick-off’ guest speaker for 2007 Advent.  It left me wondering – which gospel was Chris preaching?

I never heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Worship The Baby Resist The Empire

Part of the sermon was this You Tube Video. 

Listening to this sermon — weeding through all the stuff about him — First, Chris answers this question:

What is Adam and Eve’s struggle in the Garden?

(Paraphrased) Adam and Eve have everything — they have perfection — but they want more. They obsess over the one thing they couldn’t have.

As I was using this sermon to teach our children how to recognize deceptive teachings –  my college student quickly said — but that’s right!  Expecting her response, I shared the  context of  Chris’ thoughts.  Seay used his idea to support the central point in his sermon about the lavishness and materialism of our culture in preparation for Christmas. Not to teach obedience to God, sin, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Which gospel is this?

Chris spoke of a vacation home rented for his family on the beach

The family’s trip to the home of Leonard Sweet on an island off of Washington State.

Their experience at Sweet’s island home – sitting in the hot tub overlooking the ocean and describing a magnificent whale pod display.

Chris describes one of his plane trips  — being upgraded to 1st class on one flight and then having to sit in the back of the plane on another flight . . .

. . . Chris and the congregation enjoyed a good laugh about the sweaty, overweight man assigned to the seat next to Chris on that flight.

I wonder from which gospel this is?

"A Scripture project to rediscover the story of the Bible"

And then Chris read from the word, his word, The Voice.

Luke 2:11 — “Today in the city of David a liberator has been born for you. He is the promised liberating king, the supreme authority.”  The Voice (Brian McLaren’s assignment was the Luke chapter.)

Which gospel is this?

Luke 2:11 (NASB) — “for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Chris the Lord.”

I know this Gospel — this is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

The ideas Seay presented in The Voice illuminates the key point of his ’Advent Sermon’

” . . . and this Christmas we are going to obsess over the other things we want . . . and while we are obsessing in our abundance; we live with the reality that across the globe there is a level of poverty we can hardly fathom . . .”

Which gospel is this?

Chris gives the Benediction:

“We pray that God would burst something within us as we anticipate the birth of the Christ Child that is beautiful and hopeful. the joy boxes are her for you to give today a the conclusion of our services. I pray that you are also praying about how you can give as Mars Hill prepares for the Christmas offering and being part of the justice causes that your church has championed to that the reality is that we don’t live in a world where we are blind to two year old and three year olds dying when we know we can prevent it.

God, we pray that as we go we would leave as those expecting a baby to be born. lord that we would be nesting as a pregnant mother would that we would be creating space within our homes and our hearts and our lives that says the liberating king will be born and come to free me from the bondage that I live in the bondage of consumerism and pain and struggle and longing for more and more and more –

– and in that freedom, I would give abundantly. I would share and find beauty and hope in a world that is also filled with suffering and pain.

Go and be blessed. In the name of the Lord Jesus, In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. We pray, Amen.”

Which gospel is this?

. . . and what about the sweaty, overweight man?

Does he not deserve dignity,

compassion,

and the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

 

by Phil Johnson,
Executive Director of Grace to You and Pyromanic blogger
Article published at 9Marks website

The gospel’s most dangerous earthly adversaries are not raving atheists who stand outside the door shouting threats and insults. They are church leaders who cultivate a gentle, friendly, pious demeanor but hack away at the foundations of faith under the guise of keeping in step with a changing world.

No Christian should imagine that heresy is always conspicuous or that every purveyor of theological mischief will lay out his agenda in plain and honest terms. The enemy prefers to sow tares secretly, for obvious reasons. Thus Scripture expressly warns us to be on guard against false teachers who creep into the church unnoticed (Jude 4), wolves who sneak into the flock wearing sheep’s clothing (Matt 7:15), and servants of Satan who disguise themselves as angels of light (2 Cor. 11:13-15).

Theological liberalism is particularly dependent on the stealth offensive. A spiritually healthy church is generally not susceptible to the arrogant skepticism that underlies a liberal’s rejection of biblical authority. Liberalism must therefore take root covertly and gain strength and influence gradually. The success or failure of the whole liberal agenda hinges on a patient public-relations cam­paign.

That is precisely how neo-liberals have managed to get a foothold in the contemporary evangelical movement. Consider how evangelicalism has changed in just a few short decades.

CLASSIC EVANGELICALISM

Historic evangelicalism has two clear distinctives. One is a commitment to the inspiration and authority of Scripture. The other is a conviction that the gospel message is clear and non-negotiable.

Specifically, evangelicals understand the gospel as an announcement of what Christ has done to save sinners, redeem Adam’s fallen race, and usher believers into his eternal kingdom. The gospel is not a mandate for sinners to save themselves, redeem humanity, recover human dignity, safeguard cultural diversity, preserve the environment, eliminate poverty, establish a kingdom for themselves, or champion whatever social concept of “salvation” might be popular at the moment. In fact, the gospel expressly teaches that sinners can be justified only through faith in Christ alone, and exclusively by his gracious work—not because of any merit they earn for themselves.

The Protestant Reformation clarified and illuminated those same two principles—sola Scriptura and sola fide. Indeed, they are sometimes known as the formal and material principles of the Reformation. But they weren’t novel ideas someone dreamed up out of thin air in the sixteenth century. They are and always have been essential principles of biblical Christianity. In the long course of church history, those truths have frequently been clouded and confused, or mingled with (and sometimes overwhelmed by) bad teaching. Yet since the time of Christ and the apostles those truths have never been totally silenced. They are in fact the very backbone of New Testament doctrine.

Historic evangelicalism made much of that fact. From the dawn of the Reformation through the mid-twentieth century, few evangelicals ever thought of questioning Scripture or modifying the gospel.

CONTEMPORARY EVANGELICALISM

With the advent of the seeker-sensitive movement, however, evangelicals began to be influenced by a new species of entrepreneurial leaders who marginalized those core doctrines by neglect. Most of them didn’t overtly deny essential biblical truths; but neither did they vigorously stress or defend anything other than their own methodology.

The results were predictable: Churches are now filled with formerly unchurched people who are still untaught and perhaps even unconverted. Multitudes of children raised on a treacly diet of seeker-sensitive religion have grown up to associate the label evangelical with superficiality. Most of them cannot tell you what the term originally meant, and they reject whatever vestigial evangelical boundaries or doctrinal distinctives their parents may have held onto. But they still call themselves evangelicals when it’s convenient, and many have remained at the fringes of the visible movement, decrying how out of step the church is with their generation. That, after all, is exactly what they learned from their parents.

This is fertile soil for liberalism to burst into full flower, and that is precisely what is already happening. Evangelicals are blithely following a number of trends that advance the neo-liberal agenda. Unless a faithful remnant begins to recognize and resist the neo-liberal strategy, evangelical churches and institutions will eventually succumb to rank liberalism, just as most of the mainstream denominations did a century ago.

FOUR LIBERAL TRENDS EVANGELICALS MUST RESIST

To help you withstand the drift, here are four major trends today’s crop of neo-liberal leaders are fostering and taking advantage of:

1. They recklessly follow the zeitgeist.

Theological liberals have always been diligent students of the spirit of the age. A century ago, they were known as “modernists” because post-enlightenment values were the pretext they used to advance the liberal agenda. They insisted that if the church refused to change with the times, Christianity itself would become irrelevant.

Naturally, “changing with the times” meant abridging the gospel message. Sophisticated modern minds would not accept the miracles and other supernatural elements of Scripture. That was okay, the modernists insisted, because the real heart of the Bible’s message is the moral and ethical content anyway. Besides, they said, practical virtue is what the church ought to focus on. They considered it sheer folly for preachers to stress difficult doctrinal features that sounded primitive and offensive to modern ears, such as the wrath of God, blood atonement, and especially the doctrine of eternal punishment. Future generations would be lost to churches that held onto such beliefs and refused to accommodate modern thought, they solemnly warned. The situation was urgent.

(Of course they were dead wrong. Churches and denominations that embraced modernist ideas declined severely, and some died. Churches that stayed faithful to their evangelical convictions thrived.)

Nowadays, neo-liberals argue that the church needs a thorough overhaul based on the challenge of postmodernism. The world has changed its point of view once more, and the liberals still complain that the church lags behind, out of step, and increasingly irrelevant. Notice, however: although the neo-liberals’ pretext departs from the modernism favored by their nineteenth-century counterparts, both the line of argument they use and their theological agenda remain exactly the same. The doctrines postmodern liberals relentlessly challenge are the same ones the modernists rejected, especially God’s hatred of sin, penal, substitutionary atonement, and the doctrine of hell.

It’s no secret that the world has always despised certain aspects of biblical truth. If it were a legitimate goal for the church to keep in step with the world, it might make sense to review and revise the message from time to time. But the church is forbidden to court the spirit of the age, and one of the main reasons the gospel is such a stumbling block is that it cannot be adapted to suit cultural preferences or alternative worldviews. Instead, it confronts them all.

Beware of church leaders who are more worried about being contemporary than they are about being doctrinally sound, more concerned with their methodology than they are with their message, and more captivated by political correctness than they are by the truth. The church is not called to ape the world or make Christianity seem cool and likable, but to proclaim the gospel faithfully—including the parts the world usually scoffs at: sin, righteousness, and judgment (cf. Jn. 16:8). Jesus expressly taught that if we are faithful in that task, the Holy Spirit will convict hearts and draw believers to Christ.

The desire to be hip and fashionable leads to another trend currently advancing the neo-liberal agenda:

2. They want the world’s admiration at all costs.

There is, of course, nothing wrong with being winsome. As recipients of divine grace and the Spirit’s fruit, we should by definition have personal charisma (cf. Gal. 5:19-23). We also ought to maintain a good testimony before the world. In fact, to qualify as an elder, a man “must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace” (1 Tim. 3:7).

That of course speaks of a person’s character: graciousness, compassion, and a reputation for integrity. It is not a prescription for appeasing worldly tastes or endorsing every earthly fashion. When we need to shave corners off the truth or compromise righteousness in order to gain the world’s friendship, bearing the reproach of Christ is an infinitely better option. No true friend of God deliberately seeks the world’s camaraderie (Jas. 4:4).

But one of the common characteristics of liberalism is an obsession with gaining the world’s approval and admiration no matter the cost.

We witnessed the germination of this attitude in the evangelical movement at least four decades ago, especially among contemporary church leaders who let neighborhood surveys and opinion polls determine the style and agenda of the church.

When churches give in to that craving for worldly approval, they inevitably subjugate the gospel to a more popular message. At first, they won’t necessarily deny (or even challenge) core gospel truths such as the historical facts outlined in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4. But they will abbreviate, modify, or add to the message. The embellishments usually echo whatever happens to be politically correct at the moment—climate change, world hunger, the AIDS crisis, or whatever. Those things will be stressed and talked about repeatedly while the historic facts of Christ’s death and resurrection, the great themes of gospel doctrine, and the actual text of Scripture itself will be largely ignored or treated as something to be taken for granted.

Feed any church a steady diet of that for a few years and they will have no means of defense when someone attacks the faith more directly. That’s precisely what is happening today with various attacks on substitutionary atonement, the exclusivity of Christ, the authority and inerrancy of Scripture, and other essential Christian truths. All of those things were first downplayed in order to make the church’s message sound more “positive.” Now they are being subjected to a full-scale assault.

Such problems are exacerbated and the liberal craving for worldly esteem reaches a white-hot intensity in the academic realm. That brings up yet another feature of the neo-liberal agenda to watch out for:

3. Their “faith” comes with an air of intellectual superiority.

Liberals treat faith itself as an academic matter. Their whole system is essentially a wholesale rejection of simple, childlike belief. Their worldview foments an air of academic arrogance, setting human reason in the place of highest authority, treating the Bible with haughty condescension, and showing utter contempt for the kind of faith Christ blessed.

Consequently, liberals are and always have been obsessed with academic respectability. They want the world’s esteem as scholars and intellectuals—no matter what they have to compromise to get it. They sometimes defend that motive by arguing that the secular academy’s acceptance is essential to the Christian testimony.

Of course that is a quixotic quest. It is also a denial of the Bible’s plain teaching. Believers cannot be faithful to Scripture and win general accolades from the wise men, scribes, and debaters of this age. The world hated Jesus, and he made it clear that his faithful disciples mustn’t expect—or seek—the world’s honor (Jn. 15:18; Luke 6:22; cf. Jas. 4:4). Paul, himself a true scholar in every sense, wrote this world’s wisdom off as sheer foolishness: “Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is folly with God” (1 Cor. 3:18-19).

True Christian scholarship is about integrity, not accolades. Liberalism covets the latter, and that explains why liberals are always drawn to ideas that are stylish and politically correct, yet they are resistant to virtually all the hard truths of Christianity, starting with the authority Scripture claims for itself.

Be on guard against that tendency. Here’s one more:

4. They despise doctrinal and biblical precision.

This may sound like an oxymoron, but while treating faith as an academic matter, liberals prefer an almost anti-intellectual, agnostic approach to dealing with the specific truth-claims of Scripture. They like their doctrine hazy and indistinct.

One maneuver neo-liberals have perfected in these postmodern times is an artful dodge when they dislike a particular doctrine but cannot afford to make a plain and open denial. Instead, they will claim, “Scripture is simply too unclear on that point. We can’t really be sure. The point is disputed by top scholars, and who are we to speak with too much certainty?”

Thus without denying (or affirming) anything in particular, and without even technically dismissing the matter under discussion as an unimportant point, the ruse effectively sets the truth aside. The skeptic’s goal is thus accomplished without incurring any of the odium of skepticism.

Heavy doses of that flavor of postmodern, neo-liberal evasion have conditioned multitudes of church members to regard carefulness and precision in handling doctrine as both unimportant and potentially divisive. These days the person who shows evidence of doctrinal scruples is much more likely to be held in suspicion or disdain among evangelicals than the neo-liberals who have deliberately made the study of biblical doctrine seem so cloudy, confusing, and contentious.

In reality—and this is a lesson the church should have learned from both Scripture and church history—unity and harmony cannot exist in the church at all if there is not a common commitment to sound doctrine.

CONCLUSION

As long as these four trends and others like them continue to thrive within the evangelical movement, the threat posed by neo-liberalism looms large. Conservative evangelicals should not grow apathetic or take too much comfort in the apparent meltdown of Emergent Village and the liberal wing of postmodernized Christianity. Even if the Emergent ghetto does finally and completely give up the ghost, many of the leading figures and popular ideas from that movement will simply blend into mainstream evangelicalism, which is growing less mainstream and less evangelical all the time.

We must pay attention to the lessons of history and stand firm on the truth of Scripture—and we desperately need to be more aggressive than we have been so far in opposing these neo-liberal influences.

Phil Johnson is Executive Director of Grace to You and he teaches regularly as a lay pastor at Grace Community Church, Sun Valley, CA.