Posts
Over the past few years I have run into this cult of non extremist- extremist that call themselves Emergent. There are plenty of them out there and they have a following Brian Mclaren, Rob Bell, Doug Pagitt seem to lead this group. However if you ask the group themselves they really have no basis for authority from either a person or the Bible. They are a group that base much of there reason and belief set from the culture or re writing history (especially Biblical History) There is more to the issue of the theology of the Emergents that are not only unbiblical but run contrary to any standard of moral truth.
Many Emergents accept abortion, the destruction of marriage and evolution. This allows them to be "free thinkers" in their own mind. They long to be relevant to the culture and they change everything from method to doctrine to meld with the culture. This causes many problems for them and absolute truth at this point will fly out the window.
I want to take the time now to look at some issues with the Emergents and Post Moderns. I put them in the same group because generally and largely they are not only similar but promote one another, and their ideals seem to be linked inexplicably.
- They deny absolute truth, usually absolutely! If you say there is no absolute truth is that an absolute statement predicated on your absolute truth?
- They use experience or feelings as an overriding factor in how they operate and come to knowledge and truth. How can we trust how we feel or what seems right? This is subjective and really provides no cop ability for truth. In fact it purposefully obscures the truth because it is so reliant on feeling. This is how New Ageism, Mormonism, Scientology, and many other false doctrines operate.
- Emergents claim Christianity, in Mclaren's case this seems purely for the publicity of removing the deity of our Creator in exchange for a social Gospel that in reality is not very social for the unborn, for marriage, only for a select group of what he claims are disenfranchised peoples.
- They are hard to pin down, even though now we have finally pinned Rob Bell down on him denying the Virgin Birth, and the Deity of Christ in print, he has been difficult to pin down. His logic and words are very obscure to say the least and does not allow for real criticizim or correction. An example of this if you have listened to him is he will start a talk with something like this. In Genesis there is a Garden, and Gardens grow corn, and so that means to me that we must stop the oil crisis with Ethanol..... This is such a poor logical jump and bad hermeneutic that it makes me literally want to cry that people would even listen to him.
- They try and meld things that really do not go together like Evolution and Christianity or Abortion and Christianity or Obama and Christianity or untruth and truth, you get the idea
They have come to Utah and in one of their first sessions they are going to discuss a heresy that was refuted 2000 years ago. I am not sure how they can call this Post Modern but they have tried. The conference they endorse is a justification by works conference as they seek to undermine the writings of Paul and pit them against the Gospel accounts. It lacks all the components of seeking Truth and instead have replaced it with a feelings oriented dialogs in order to satiate their need for a social works based false gospel that does not equate sin as sin. More on this as we examine how they have endorsed Obama through a non political polictal means.... I know it sounds absurd even as I write it...... I need to blow my nose now.
On the Media and Biblical Studies
2 hours ago
12 Comments:
As one of the Utah emergent dudes you mention in the post I would like to comment a bit on your post.
I don’t “accept” abortion, nor do I seek the “destruction” of marriage, but there are more issues out there than just these. I am also anti-war and anti-death penalty, I agree with the “seamless garment” concept that one Catholic bishop once mentioned, and gay marriage is no threat to marriage itself, and since I’m married and I’m not gay, the issue means nothing to me. So if homosexuals get married… ahh, so what. There is much more to Christianity’s engagement with politics than being just the religious wing of the Republican Party.
Now, to your list:
- I think there is an absolute truth. I just don’t think we know it absolutely. Truth is more complex and multifaceted than our mental maps can draw, and God, in his infinite majesty and understanding, knows his finite creations can never know Him perfectly and fully in all His infinitude.
- “Experience” has its place, but I don’t put much currency in “feelings”, certainly not as much as you apparently think I do. But you ask a good question here – How can we trust how we feel or what seems right? I’ve asked myself this question, and my experience has taught me to not take things just as they’ve been taught, but to seriously examine other ways of interpreting things written, to look at it from a different angle. I have no problem admitting that I have been grossly wrong in the past, and I am sure that several things I believe now probably aren’t the best. I confess my current beliefs are somewhat tentative and subject to change. But if my beliefs don’t match up with your “certainty”… well [shrugging my sholders]… tough, in my experience I’ve found that “certainty” isn’t as certain as we’d like it to be, and when I thought I was certain of something… I was wrong. God cannot be captured, and put in the nice little box of our understanding; I’ve found that leaving a wide berth for His mystery is a wise thing to do. From my perspective I think you need to take off the modernist rose-colored glasses and look at the scriptures from a new angle. Try reading the Apostolic Fathers and other early church writings, read the Desert Fathers, and take a serious look at how they, who are not living in 21st century capitalist America, interpreted the Bible.
- Probably you need to take a closer look at what McLaren is actually saying… which kinda goes right on into your next point.
- They are hard to pin down… His logic and words are very obscure to say the least and does not allow for real criticism or correction. I’ve not listened to Rob Bell much, but what I have heard from him hasn’t been difficult for me to understand.
First, part of the reason for why you might find it difficult to “pin down” emergent is simply that we don’t all believe the same thing. For example, in your post here you are fond of associating emergent with evolution… but in our little get together last month we had a mix on this, some believe evolution, some agree with ID, one may have agreed with creationism, and anyone within that spectrum is welcome at our emergent cohort. So, pinning us down will be a bit difficult in part because we simply don’t all believe the same thing, or interpret the Bible in the same way. And that’s the point.
Second, I see a pattern, both in what you’re saying here and in previous things we’ve discussed, and this will probably be the most important thing I can say on your blog: You don’t really know what you’re talking about when you discuss the beliefs of those with whom you disagree. In the previous discussion on evolution, any evolutionist will know that you don’t have a real working understanding of what evolution actually is. The answers that sites like AiG are pushing are for Creationists to consume, they aren’t convincing any evolutionists.
Here, a story, (I mentioned this event on someone else’s blog not long ago, anyway…) I remember back a short while after I joined the ICoC, aka. The Boston Movement, I bumped into this guy who had decided not to join that church a short while earlier and had decided to go somewhere else. He pulled me aside and asked if I still went to that church. After mentioning that I did, he asked, “do you realize that that church is a development out of a dog-eating cult from the Philippines?” I asked who had told him this. He said it was his pastor who had informed him of this. Well… anyone who knows anything about the Boston Movement knows it’s from Boston, it isn’t a development out of a “dog-eating cult from the Philippines”. There is much to criticize in the Boston Movement (I should know, since I am one of its many critics), but what this guy told me is not one of them.
Now don’t get me wrong here, disagree with me, emergent, evolution, etc. all you want, but I’ll be honest with ya… you sound much like that guy who has no real clue what he’s talking about. If you want to be taken seriously by those you disagree with, please disagree with what we actually believe and say. Not propped up straw men.
Well… anyway… your blog post did make for some interesting discussion tonight at our get together (I suppose you posted it so we would discuss it). We all disagreed with you.
I am sure you had a great dialog about dialoging and wasted everyones time.
Gay Marriage will ruin the institute for Marriage period, if you don't believe so, uh please see Rome before the fall.
Your statement on truth defies logic so, it is so backwards I refuse to get in such nonsensical arguments.
MaClaren is a heretic
Thomas you are just in a new and different cult now, just like you were in before, and before that. I think God is trying to reach you to the Truth.
Rob Bell is not hard to understand but he almost sounds Christian unless he is talking about real doctrines. It had been difficult to get actual writings that showed he was a heretic, he fixed that for us with Velvet Elvis and Sex God. Now we have his heresy in writing.
I cannot believe a post modern like yourself is telling me what I know and what I dont know, how ridiculous is that? I believed in Evolution for 25 years my friend. I may actually understand it better than yourself. And that is the actual problem.
I recommend reading The Devils Delusion, it is written by a secular individual, Berlinski a mathematician, he will explain Evolution to you more precisely, because you may not know it as absolutely as you think you do. Also recommend Behe's book The Edge of Evolution and quite a few others. I find it odd how judgmental and absolutely sure you are about me on this topic, it is funny. All Emergents seem to be the same, they claim they don't have the truth absolutely but then absolutely ascribe to various things in defiance. And I do agree all Emergents do not subscribe to Evolution, but the vast majority of the ones I have run into do.
Of course you disagree with me, which I find odd because it goes against your own Philosophy, I am not hear for you to agree to disagree merely to look for truth. Please understand I have made corrections myself in the past about certain things I have been dogmatic about. If you and your few new Emergent friends see fit to discuss, attack or whatever during coffee then so be it, you don't believe what Paul wrote about that anyway. :)
Finally I think it is great you are all closed minded free thinkers as Pagitt would put it, however I think you and I need to define what we believe makes a Christian a Christian, so would you please tell me how we define a Christian?
Thanks for sharing with us,
Andy
I think God is trying to reach you to the Truth.
I agree. But considering what I commented above, why should I listen to you?
You dont have to listen to me, you can choose to continue to find people who will scratch your itching ears.
Truth is what is in accordance with reality.
Check and see if that is the case.
Didymus,
Lets start at the basic level lets define Christianity. I want your definition.
We can go from there,
Andy
Based on what I’m looking at above, all you want is a “debate”. A “debate” in which you will “prove” that your point of view is “superior” and “true”, based on a “reality” that is unquestionable, and which finally you are the predetermined and self-appointed “winner”.
Well, whatever man, it’s your blog… I throw in the towel… you win.
Didymus,
Wow, your sarcasm and rhetoric is not fit for what I know about you.
Let me try now:
I am not trying to win I seek to "understand" I do not want debate I want "dialog", I need not prove lets just "contemplate" so we can "dissolve" our preexisting notions about "truth" we can "redefine" orthodoxy so that it does not get in the way of our "cultural immersion and acceptance".
Seriously, we should be able to have a conversation. I do not censor you on my blog, if you do not like doing it over here lets do it on yours. Give me fair justification and point by point examination of where I am wrong. I have been wrong before so it is likely it will happen again.
Really what makes a Christian? What is our Authority as Christians? Why does it matter?
I want you to help me understand how an Emergent like yourself would define those two items. If you would prefer you can email me or I will not respond after you post, I just want to know how you define them. (hands Didymus his towel back)
Andy, I wasn’t being sarcastic, I meant exactly what I said. You mentioned, “I am sure you had a great dialog about dialoging and wasted everyones time.” (I didn’t see you there, so I’m not sure how you know what all we wasted our time on.) Since we talked about Christianity there, how would our dialog here not be a waste of time?
Then you say, “Your statement on truth defies logic so, it is so backwards I refuse to get in such nonsensical arguments.” Well, why should bother answering your question about how I define Christianity. My definition of Christianity has something to do with my idea of truth, of which you just said it “defies logic”, and you “refuse to get in such nonsensical arguments”.
With these things in mind, and a few others assumptions made about what I believe (i.e. “you don't believe what Paul wrote about that anyway”, “they claim they don't have the truth absolutely but then absolutely ascribe to various things in defiance”), I hope you don’t mind if I take your offer of a “conversation” with a grain of salt.
Fair enough my comments back were trite and were severe. I have to remember "Truth in Love", and I appreciate you calling me on that. I was trying to stick it to you with those comments and that is wrong. I do really want to understand what you believe. Saying it was a waste of time was absolutely inappropriate. I was brash, and for that I apologize.
In general, I define Christianity by the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, with its limitations (i.e. Muslims, Hindus, Mormons aren’t Christians, etc.), its flexibility (i.e. Catholics, Orthodox, various Protestant, Evangelical, premillennialists, amillennialists, Calvinists, Armenian, Wesleyans, whatevers, etc. etc. can all be Christians), and its narrative’s transformative power (i.e. repentance, love for others, and the Holy Spirit). So you could say I am a creedal Christian.
We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten from the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of the same substance as the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father. With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
But of course, having said all that, my view is more complex than that. But I’ll leave it at that for now.
I don't see how anyone can say there are more issues then abortion. I don't care if the budget gets balanced and this country comes out on top in every single thing on the table. If we are still slaughtering our most defenseless people then we are morally bankrupt and heaping judgment on ourselves. I wish God would pour out His wrath on this country. We are ripe for His judgment.
Abortion is the one thing that has to be settled first. All else pales in comparison.
And you cannot be Christian and pro-choice (murder)
Leonard,
You said, I wish God would pour out His wrath on this country. We are ripe for His judgment.
Abraham pleaded with the Lord to spare Sodom and Gomorrah. In the end, the Lord told Abraham that for sake of ten people, a mere ten righteous people, he would have spared the whole place.
Post a Comment