Politics for Ordinary Radicals

Leave it to the CNN Politics.com news site to share a story about two, politically leftist writers (of course!) - who happened to name their book, "Jesus for President" - to gleefully claim that these two men are endorsing "what is at the heart of Jesus."

Oh really???

As I had mentioned briefly in a previous post, how strange is it that the authors chose to only have part of the title of their book "Jesus for President" on the cover. They eliminated the "Politics for Ordinary Radicals" phrase! Hmmm......

Sorry fellas - but your book (with it's unfortunate use of Jesus' name in the title) is, for the most part, focused on getting their typical Bush-hating, anti-war, pro-Marxism screed out into the hands of other young evangelicals.

For shame!

How sad it is that these men have chosen to use Jesus, and God's Word, the Bible in ways that distort the true message of the gospel. How unfortunate that their own minds have skewed hundreds of Bible verses in order to promote their own worldview. There are just too many errors in their writing to list them all here.

How terribly sad it is to read that they compare Harry Truman with Hitler! This, as well as the many examples of hate-mongering done towards traditional Bible-believing, Christ following, true gospel sharing, church fellowship and Bible studying evangelicals (which, of no surprise, includes the rejection of their own parents beliefs) are quite evident in their ranting contained within the pages of this book. It is the Bush-hating, far-left secular humanist's dream to have them on their side of the political spectrum!

Do these authors know that they are using God to promote their own, anti-American political agenda?

True Christians allow God to use THEM! And, not to use His Son to promote a Marxist political agenda!!

Everyone has a worldview. Some worldviews are better than others. The Biblical worldview is having "the mind of Christ" as Paul reiterates in his epistle.

How can I judge these young men so harshly - you may ask? Because they have been deceived, that's why.

For example. In the article link above we read:

But these voters say views on abortion and homosexuality won't define them in November. The environment and social justice are moving to the forefront of their discussions.

Now, in their book we read:

"We are dying and killing for abstract nouns like freedom and democracy...but this is not the gospel of Jesus Christ." - Letter from a U.S. soldier in Iraq

So...let's see now. One disgruntled soldier in Iraq skews their "Christian" worldview to agree with a statement like that? Nouns like freedom and democracy are abstract nouns?

These authors won't let "abortion nor homosexuality define them in November." Abortion has killed 52,275,770 BABIES since that horrible ruling in 1973. That amount of babies killed through abortion will have increased by the time you view the site. THAT is the evil of our time! If you listen to, and view, the brief video at that link, you will discover that abortion has killed ONE THIRD of Shane Claiborne and Chris Haw's (authors of "Jesus for President") generation! This is FAR MORE, MILLIONS MORE than the deaths of our brave military men and women fighting valiantly in the current war against radical Islamic terrorism!

What is wrong with this picture?

What would Jesus say about that?

But the book gets worse people - MUCH WORSE.

The authors compare our great nation, liberators of millions of oppressed peoples around the globe, to Rome's empire! I can see where they get their skewed theology. They read books written by John Dominic Crossan.

Excerpt:

In the introduction of his book In Search of Paul: How Jesus' Apostle Opposed Rome's Empire with God's Kingdom, biblical scholar John Dominic Crossan asks this haunting question: "Who now is Caesar and where now is Christ?" As we consider the theology being preached from the pulpits by both pastors and politicians (and these days, its hard to tell them apart), we need to contemplate this question. Fortunately, more and more Bible-literate Christians are deeply disturbed by the skewed theology of empire. It is becoming more and more clear that the Pax Americana is not helping the world get any closer to understanding the crucified Christ and his gospel of grace. 29

O.K. We can see where they are getting their theological opinions from. But take a look at the authors' footnote. It's quite the eye-opener to their true agenda in writing this book!

29 The essence of our book is not dependent on whether the United States is truly a prideful empire. Christianity proclaims an alternate allegiance even to citizens of humble nations. And the point is certainly not that only the United States is one of the beastly powers. Among Russia, China, Rwanda, Belgium, and countless others, it would be quite a competition as to which dictatorship tops the list of most blood shed and worst publicly legitimated insanity. But to see the bad fruits of power is an important connection to make for those who have a white-knuckle grip on both the cross and the flag. When we take a good look at the history of the United States, we must face the reality that the U.S. is not, as Barak (sic) Obama (and countless others) said, "the last great hope for humanity." This not only is false according to the standards of secular history but also is heretical for us in the church. This is the kind of stuff that made John of Patmos seethe (not to mention God). And in the scope of history, the United States is a young project that doubtlessly will fall--whether in a few or in many years.

Quite the patriots...aren't they? /sarcasm

Notice how the CNN article LIED about their "neutrality" concerning the upcoming election!

CNN article:

They endorse no candidate and make no effort to sway the voters for one party or another.

Think that's bad enough? It's only the beginning. On another page, the authors discuss "idols and images". They quote Exodus 20:4, Lev. 26:1, and 4 Ezra 4:11:

"Therefore, you will surely disappear, you eagle...so that the whole earth, will be freed from your violence." The Eagle will not live forever, blessed be the Lamb.

Can you guess what is pictured next to these verses? You'll never guess so I'll tell you. They have sketches of three bombs dropping from the sky with "Made in U.S.A." stamped on them!

Some of the additional things written on the page do not even make sense. In one box, they quote Crossan as stating that, "over 50 percent of the Roman budget went towards the Roman military." Next, they write, "Of each dollar paid in taxes, 36 cents goes toward the military of the United States.

Duh!! Do these guys even know history? Do they know that military (and police) protection was the original (and only) reasons for taxes in the first place??

Here's the quote that reads a bit convoluted:

"Only God can make an image of God's self...and God did. Look in the mirror or look in the slums.

ONLY SOMETHING SACRED CAN BE DE*SACRATED.

Is "de*sacrated" even a genuine word? It's obviously misspelled.

Desecrated:
–verb (used with object), -crat·ed, -crat·ing.

1. to divest of sacred or hallowed character or office.
2. to divert from a sacred to a profane use or purpose.
3. to treat with sacrilege; profane.

[Origin: 1665–75; de- + -secrate, modeled on consecrate]

What on earth are they talking about? Sounds like gibberish to me!

Then, we have evidence of their "youthful" views:

"It was once said, if you want to know your idols, consider what you are willing to kill for. WHAT ARE IDOLS?"

Next to that quote, they have a crude drawing of a television with "KILL YOUR TV" written on it. Quite the non-sequitur, isn't it?

It gets worse! On another page in the book they have a drawing of Jesus carrying the cross with a soldier holding a bazooka sitting on the cross behind Jesus!

Are you getting the picture of their skewed thinking yet?

Do they represent many of our young evangelicals today? I hope not! I PRAY NOT!!

Now, the authors aren't crazy. I just think that they are sorely misguided. For instance, read this quote:

Aelius Aristides: "Now the earth itself and its inhabitants have been granted universal security which is evident to all. Every war begins with fear."

Ah ha! That explains it! "Every war begins with fear." Period. Nothing else? What about being attacked? What about defending our nation and our peoples from further attacks?

I could go on and on and on. There is so much skewed theology applied to anti-war rhetoric in this book it would make your head spin!!

Lastly, I will share just why these authors (and their followers, presumably) do not concern themselves with the proliferation of the homosexual agenda in the political, social, educational, judicial, and church arenas:

What was so evil about Sodom? "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned: they did not help the poor and needy" (Ezek. 16:49). That's not what we learned in Sunday school.

Whoo boy! Talk about leaving out some of the other equally important details!! Ah, but, if they included any other details about The Days of Lot and the Days of Noah, then they would have to address their errant theological opinion that the homosexual agenda "doesn't define them" or influence their voting preferences.

Look at the skewed way they describe the meaning of being "born-again" :

"So being born again redefines family: it grants a new way to see the world, a way to see right past the artificial borders we create and proclaim a deeper allegiance and affection. For those who pledge allegiance to the kingdoms of this world, Jesus preached good news: repent and become born again, "see the kingdom," and find a new identity. This is not a set of political suggestions for the world; this is about invoking and embodying the alternative. handwritten: (More on that later.) All of this is an invitation to join a peculiar people--those with no king but God, who practice jubilee economics and make the world new. This is not the old-time religion of going to heaven; this is about bringing heaven to the world."

We can agree with some of what is written in that paragraph. However, the ultimate point of being born again in Jesus Christ is to humble ourselves, confess and repent of our sin; then, invite Jesus Christ into our hearts where he will reside through the power of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit of God.

Question. Do the authors even mention this? No. It is no where to be found. Notice that the cross isn't mentioned in the above paragraph, either. Finding a "new identity" isn't defined either. Whose identity are they emulating? We are not told. Plus, that last sentence sounds more like Oprah's New Age theology rather than genuine Christianity.

Your thoughts?

*******
P.S. Apparently, Shane Claiborne is 33 years old and Chris Haw is 27. However, it appears that their radicalism is appealing to 20-something-year old evangelical Christians. God help us!

*******
Update: SJ Camp has a somewhat related post regarding skewed theology and how important it is to stick to biblical truth over at Camp On This

Excerpt:

"Gifted men of God, like Keller, know this and know better than this. When they flirt with pushing the edge of biblical truth by redefining God in today's postmodern terms out of the pragmatic emerging church framework, they make it difficult for the many of us who want to trust them in how they handle God's Word to do so. But as in this case, orthodoxy it seems was not the prime consideration; but relating to an audience, being clever, and cutting edge. IOW, pragmatics again.

Biblical terminology should not be stretched to a place that is foreign to the meaning of those words as found in God's Word. It can be very confusing for younger believers in the Lord, it can be gangrenous to the body of Christ in general, and the fallout to maintaining a right view of God compromised. "

(bold mine)

Gifts, Jesus, & Politics

My son and daughter always get me the best presents! For Mother's Day, my son bought tickets to the Spirit West Coast Concert this month! I'm really excited to attend because several of my favorite Christian artists and bands will be appearing! Hopefully we can encourage a group to attend with us!

Brief Spirit West Coast video

He gave me the funniest card! On the cover was a photo of a dog (looked similar to our puggle!) with a towel wrapped around it's head and two pop-out cucumbers on it's eyes.

The card read:

It's your special time, your day to be #1...
Then it's back to me the rest of the year, right?
Happy Mother's Day

Sooooo cute! Really made me laugh, too, because it's so true! Our puggle (Sasha) runs my life! Ha ha

My laughter turned to tears...of joy...when I read what my son wrote:

Mom,
I don't think I'll every find a better card than this one! Thank you so much for everything you do for us. We are blessed to have been raised by such a loving and caring person. I don't thank God enough for you because I should be doing that everyday! I love you so much, Happy Mother's Day!

Love, your son! (and Sasha)

My daughter's card made me cry just by reading the cover! LOL There is a picture of two cartoon-like women on a blanket in a meadow with a picnic basket nearby.

My Mom
if I had to get right down to the reason you're everything from my hero to my friend, it would be this:

your constant, strong, forgiving love.

Inside:

I believe that God is good and kind and generous - I feel that way because He gave me you.

Happy Mother's Day
with Love
(heart shape) always,
your daughter

Then she wrote in the card:

Mama-
Happy Mother's Day! I hope today is everything you could have wanted on Mother's Day. I hope you know how much I truly appreciate all that you do for me. All the advice you give, support, guidance, and even just the random chats...none of it goes unnoticed. Even if I don't say it enough, know I want to say it a thousand times! & more! THANK YOU! for all you do for me and for being the best mom and friend I could have ever hoped, wished, and prayed for. You are an amazing woman. I love you so so very much. AND of course you're beautiful! & YOUNG! :-)

If only the "beautiful and young" part were true! Ha! I look much older than my profile pic, now. Ah well. See what three years of blogging can do to a person? heh heh

Now that she is about to turn 21 soon, our chats often include how grateful she is that I didn't allow her to do certain things when she was growing up. She has seen the fallout from the errors of other young women who either did not have such guidance or didn't heed the warnings and advice of their moms. It is very gratifying to now know that she sees such past restrictions as helpful in avoiding the painful consequences that she has seen others around her now (unfortunately) bearing.

She gave me the greatest gifts, too! A CD by Natalie Grant, a book called "On The Anvil - Stories on being shaped into God's Image" by Max Lucado, and a book called "Jesus For President."

"On The Anvil" is Max Lucado's first book. He wrote it back in 1985. It has been re-published this year. I like what is written on the back cover:

We are all somewhere in the blacksmith's shop.

We are either on the scrap pile,
IN THE MASTER'S HANDS ON THE ANVIL,
Or in the tool chest.

Some of us have been in all three.

In this classic collection of inspirational reading, best-selling author Max Lucado takes us on a tour of the blacksmith's shop - examining every tool and looking in every corner, from the shelves to the workbench, from the water to the fire...

For those who make the journey -- who leave the heap, enter the fire, and dare to be pounded on God's anvil--a grand privilege awaits: to be called one of God's chosen instruments.

SEE YOU IN THE SHOP.

Since I didn't recognize the authors of "Jesus for President," I flipped through it briefly to get a "feel" for it. Well, the first well-known name that I ran across was "Tony Campolo." O.K. now I knew that this was another book similar to "Unchristian" - which hails from the liberal Christianity crowd.

In the back of the book are photos of stacks of book titles. I didn't recognise many of them. Then I realized why! Towards the end of one stack on the second page of these photos, there was more evidence of the liberalism I was about to read in this new book because Brian McLaren's book (Everything Must Change) was listed there.

While flipping through the book, I noticed this subtitle on page 106:

"On Citizenship in Heaven and Being Born Again."

I will have a lot more to say about that particular chapter. For now, I will just give you a glimpse of what the authors think being "born again" means. At the end of this section, they write:

This is not the old-time religion of going to heaven; this is about bringing heaven to the world.

Today, I decided to see the reviews on this book at Amazon.com.

There were only a few negative reviews, but I found one in particular to be quite accurate in his evaluation based on some of what I had already seen and read in the book.

It's Sad: Legitimate theological issues are hampered by awful logic. by "Phil K."

It's funny. Pastor Miles McPherson tells the congregation to "vote God." I don't think that he had what the authors of "Jesus for President: Politics for Ordinary Radicals" had in mind!

Christine

P.S. How strange that the authors only have "Jesus for President" on the cover. They eliminated the "Politics for Ordinary Radicals" phrase! Hmmm......

*******
Update: Just received an email with a link to Dr. David Jeremiah's new book called, Hopeful Parenting. Looks really good!

Warren: Unity Trumps Truth

Ran across a great blogpost today. It is on the subject of whether or not Satan's greatest weapon is "disunity."

Excerpts:

In Rick Warren's Ministry's Toolbox letter November 14, 2007, What the Bible says about handling disunity, Warren clearly illustrates that any threat to unity in a congregation is unacceptable and must be dealt with by the pastor.

Warren selectively cites scripture to support his six action steps. [Please see these at the link.]

Well there it is...Unity at all costs, Truth if possible. Unity trumps contending for the faith, guarding what was entrusted, fighting the good fight of faith, guarding the flock from ravenous wolves, being Bereans, testing all things, false teaching causes division for profit and gain (see verses below). In the consumer-driven church of PDL, Christians are customers and if you don't like what's being served, just leave and go somewhere else. We will help you to the door.

In perhaps the boldest statement in this letter Rick Warren makes an amazing statement:"it’s our job to protect our congregations from Satan’s greatest weapon – disunity."

Satan's greatest weapon is deception, which causes disunity and division in the Scriptures, and ultimately the destruction of souls. Rick Warren's encoded message to his purpose driven pastors might read:

Do not tolerate those who resist the purpose-driven messages that I send you to grow your headcount and draw bigger crowds. Throw them out with their Bibles.

Please read all of the Scriptures at the end of the post. You will plainly see Warren's arrogance against the true meaning of God's Word on this issue.

HT: Watcher's Lamp

The "Great" Pretenders

Wow!! The following blog post is so good, I wanted to share it here:

They Do Not Profit This People

Excerpt:

Thus says the Lord of hosts: “Do not listen to the words of the prophets who prophesy to you, filling you with vain hopes. They speak visions of their own minds, not from the mouth of the Lord. They say continually to those who despise the word of the Lord, ‘It shall be well with you’; and to everyone who stubbornly follows his own heart, they say, ‘No disaster shall come upon you.’”

The twenty-third chapter of Jeremiah falls near the halfway point of the book, in the midst of a section where the prophet is foretelling the end of the Davidic dynasty and the coming captivity of God’s people. In this particular chapter, Jeremiah pronounces judgments against the false prophets who had become a plague within the nation. While these words were spoken some 600 years before Christ and in a particular context, his words ring as true today as they did then. “They speak visions of their own minds, not from the mouth of the Lord. They say continually to those who despise the word of the Lord, ‘It shall be well with you’; and to everyone who stubbornly follows his own heart, they say, ‘No disaster shall come upon you’” (16, 17).

How can these words fail to remind us of the false prophets who plague the church even in the twenty-first century? So many men and women today speak visions of their own minds, and teach what has so evidently not come from the mouth of the Lord. So many say that it shall be well with people who in reality are destined to suffer eternal torment for their hatred of God. They seek to show from Scripture that Christ will save those even who have never heard His Word, and who have never humbled themselves before the Lord. They say, “It shall be well with you” to those who sit in the pews but have never had their hearts of ice melted by the Lord. They speak lies and blasphemies, all the while pretending to the speak for the Lord.

The next verse, verse eighteen, teaches us how to choose good and noble teachers of the Word. If only we could master this simple piece of wisdom the church would be revitalized!

Amen to that!!

The great pretenders. That's what we have out there in Christendom today. From the Emergent movement, to the Seeker-Sensitive movement, to the homosexual "christian" movement to those who follow "The Message"; the need for true biblical exegesis and steadfast discernment is entirely necessary today.

My message board friend Sothenes (a.k.a. Sosthenes), has been quite busy posting lots of important information about The Message Bible by Eugene Peterson.

Here's a copy of his first post in that thread link (above):

The Message Bible by Eugene Peterson
By Sosthenes 1-20-2008

Eugene Peterson is responsible for "The Message" and it is a loose paraphrase of the Bible. This is what Eugene Peterson thinks about the Bible:

Quote:
Eugene Peterson:

Even now, in all of my courses, students read poetry and novels. In my course in spirituality they write reviews of the book Middlemarch, The Power and the Glory, and Walter Wangerin's Book of the Dun Cow. The importance of poetry and novels is that the Christian life involves the use of the imagination, after all, we are dealing with the invisible. And, imagination is our training in dealing with the invisible, making connections, looking for plot and character. I don't want to do away with or denigrate theology or exegesis, but our primary allies in this business are the artists. I want literature to be on par with those other things. They need to be brought in as full partners in this whole business. The arts reflect where we live, we live in narrative, we live in story. We don't live as exegetes.

Quote:
EP:

I think it's partly our sin. One of the Devil's finest pieces of work is getting people to spend three nights a week in Bible studies.

MH

I'm sure that's going to surprise a lot of readers!

Eugene Peterson:

Well, why do people spend so much time studying the Bible? How much do you need to know? We invest all this time in understanding the text which has a separate life of it's own and we think we're being more pious and spiritual when we're doing it. But it's all to be lived. It was given to us so we could live it. But most Christians know far more of the Bible than they're living. They should be studying it less, not more. You just need enough to pay attention to God.

Eugene Peterson:

I think I would want to say it a different way. We treat the text as if it is in a separate world of its own, apart from our lives. This text reveals God lovingly at work in the world. And the intent of the text is to draw us into that world of God's action. Study is normally an over intellectualized process. It takes us out of relationships. And so I guess I'm just not at all pleased with all the emphasis on Bible study as if it's some kind of special thing that Christians do, and the more they do the better. It needs to be integrated into something more whole.

Leadership U.com

So when Paul says,"Study to show thyself approved" and Jesus says to "..abide in my word" then Eugene Peterson thinks it is the devils works because he said,"One of the Devil's finest pieces of work is getting people to spend three nights a week in Bible studies.

"To attribute studying the Bible to the devil is close to calling Jesus accursed:1 Cor. 12:3

Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and [that] no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

I'm also studying this website which has some interesting information on Eugene Peterson and I have to question his credentials and those who would support his work: Seek God

The Message Doctrine & Gnostic or New Age Terms and Concepts May 13, 2006

The Message Doctrine & Gnostic or New Age Terms and Concepts Cont. May 13, 2006

Go to the message board link to read much, much more on this!

HT: Challies.com
Sothenes
Leadership U.com

Masking Their Ungodliness

I was reading an article over at Americans for Truth about "Bishop" Vicky Imogene Robinson. Yes. His first and last names given by his parents were girls names!

The story about his difficult birth and sad upbringing is very tragic. This man needed gender identity counseling, not advancement to a position of bishop in the Episcopal church!

Excerpt:

"I bring this up – with the caveat that I have not read anything except the above on Robinson’s upbringing — to remind readers of a cold reality: parents can do a number on their kids, and stories of dysfunctional upbringings in the lives of homosexuals are about as hard to find as corn in Iowa. This is a pitiable yet crucial part of the debate on homosexual development that the media downplays in favor of sexy “gay gene” stories or gay-victim pieces focusing on society’s “homophobia.”

Whether it’s a boy who grew up perceiving rejection from his emotionally distant father, or who had no father; a girl who experienced abuse or rape; or early sexualization or molestation in the young life of one who subsequently becomes a “gay” adult – there is ample evidence that confusion, abuse, alienation and/or neglect have an important role in the formation of “gay” identity.

How awful is it that C-SPAN chose to give this very confused, dysfunctional man the opportunity to "preach" on T.V. this past Christmas Eve!

Here is another excerpt from Americans for Truth that is truly alarming to read:

So now comes along Vicky Gene Robinson, who attributes his work, and no doubt his choice to embrace sinful sexual behavior, to the work of the Holy Spirit.

This is not from [the] Holy Spirit, but the outworking of fallen humanity.

I can only imagine how difficult this man’s life has been, but that can never justify his joining the dark side (abusing his pastoral authority to teach sin as a social good to others). In his defining, media-hyped crusade, Robinson personifies the most evil aspect of the “gay” movement: the crusade to re-write Christianity itself to accommodate their besetting sin.

This man, given the opportunity, was allowed to parade his sin right in front of a T.V. audience on one of the most holy days on the Christian calendar!

Read what MacArthur states in the chapter, "The Evil of False Teaching" from his book, "The Truth War" -

"Apostates face an interesting dilemma. They frequently become so lost to honor, so lacking in decency, so indifferent to disgrace that they often don't care who sees their sin, especially in their own inner circle. They wear it arrogantly like a badge of honor. In Jude's words, they become like "raging waves of the sea, foaming up their own shame."

The good news is that God will not be mocked. God alone is truly sovereign. His eternal purposes are not the least bit threatened by the efforts of false teachers. His truth will triumph in the end.

The tragic consequence for the false teachers and all who follow them is sure and certain condemnation. As Jude says, they already have a long-standing appointment to that end.

There is a really good discussion going on about a heresy group called "Soulforce" over at Pastor D.L. Foster's GCM Watch.

That discussion reminded me of the next two chapters in MacArthur's "The Truth War" book. He must have had a group like Soulforce in mind when he wrote about apostates and the evil of their false teachings, as well as their deliberate assault on Divine Authority:

At the heart of their apostasy is rebellion against Christ’s lordship. They may call Jesus, “Lord, Lord,” but they do not do what He says (Luke 6:46). In the words of Paul to Titus, “They profess to know God, but in works they deny Him, being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every good work” (Titus 1:16). Their apostasy eventually poisons all their doctrine. They twist and pervert and reinvent teachings of Christ. They adjust the gospel to suit their own tastes. When you get to the core of where they are, they simply want to be kings of their own domain.

Wow! Is that a perfect description of the intent behind their ungodliness and the lies that the gay christian movement and groups like Soulforce spread?

MacArthur then discusses the issue of character:

Apostate false teachers are not humble. They are not broken. They are not submissive. They are not meek. They are blatant, proud sovereigns of their own religious empires. And while they like to use Christ’s name for their advantage, they do not really know, obey, or love the truth - written or Incarnate.

Some people reading here may think that the following statement written by Pastor D.L. about the group called Soulforce (which is a group of gay "christians" going around to colleges and churches to change minds about the subject of homosexual behavior) may be considered as too harsh:

They are snakes and vipers and their father is satan.

Ouch! But in reality, it's not too harsh. IT IS 100% CORRECT! As Pastor D.L. had stated:

"Even when their error is shown to be 100% error they yet refuse to repent and have no intention of leading people to God."

You see, that's the bottom line when discussing this topic. The spiritual destiny of all souls involved in such heresy and apostasy are at stake!

What a terrible thing to realize! Groups like Soulforce are 100% in error, refuse to repent and have no intention of leading people to God!

Who does that sound like?

Lucifer!

He had no intention of worshiping God, was cast out of heaven and took 1/3 of the former angels turned demons with him!

Some people claim (even Christians!) that those who identify as being gay "christians" are not all that bad. Just leave them alone. They're not in danger of hell for all eternity.

I often hear, "God will judge and take care of it." Yes. He will judge. And if they continue to refuse to repent of their sin, their eternal destiny will be away from God forever! This is a good thing?

The gay christian movement is a very serious, grievous, heretical abomination that leads to church denomination apostasy and separation from God!

You tell me. Are Christians supposed to stay silent about this fact??

I peeked ahead to the next chapter. MacArthur says it better than I can:

"The false teachers' absolute rejection of Christ's Authority was the root and the real motive for their apostasy in the first place. They resented the Lordship of Christ and disowned Him as their true Master because they had rebellious hearts and wanted the authority for themselves. (bold mine)

Again...who does that sound like??

Opposing false teachers, of any type, is a difficult, yet a very necessary duty given to us as Christians believers. We are to oppose them and contend earnestly for the faith here and now...just like the true believers of old did when the heresies of Sabellianism and The Arians were raging against the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. In the case of The Arians, the battle raged, was subdued for a time, then re-surfaced again. It took over 12 years to reach it's demise. Even still, some of the same heretical beliefs that were apparent in The Arians are now found in the New Age teachings today.

Christian brothers and sisters...be prepared for criticism. No one enters into the Truth war without being slandered, criticized and unfairly labeled as a hater. Urging people to repent, turn to the true gospel of Jesus Christ and thus escape the depths of hell is a spiritual battle like no other!

Some people, on the opposite side of Biblical Truth are unknowingly, and ignorantly, led away from that truth. Others, like V. Gene Robinson, Brian McLaren, Tony Campolo etc. are deliberately leading those who are seeking away from the truth.

There are many apostates who will never turn back to the Lord.

Why?

Because they will continue to refuse to repent and turn to the true gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ which has been forever delivered unto the saints.

Such apostates mask their ungodliness because they proclaim a message that transforms the idea of grace into license for sin. They try to give spiritual-sounding justification for their ungodliness.

MacArthur even goes so far as to call it, their creed.

Look at what the Emerging church movement is suggesting to evangelicals these days. They want us all to back away from confronting Western culture over moral evils like abortion and homosexuality!

This was one of the "themes" in the book I recently read called "UnChristian."

For example. Tony Campolo once explained to a reporter why he wrote his book Speaking My Mind :

"My purpose [Note: there's that familiar Emerging church movement word!] in writing the book was to communicate loud and clear that I felt that evangelical Christianity had been hijacked. [Note: Isn't that what Barack Obama recently said too? Hmmm.....] When did it become anti-feminist? When did evangelical Christianity become anti-gay? When did it become supportive of capital punishment? Pro-war? When did it become so negative towards other religious groups?"

Ahhh!! That man's skewing of the truth to fit his liberal worldview makes me absolutely CRINGE!

Would Mr. Campolo ever turn away from his heresy and back to the true gospel of Jesus Christ? I do not know.

But I do know this.

Jude shares with us how to try and rescue people from heresy and apostasy. There are ways to do it very compassionately. For others, we need to save them with fear. We need to WARN THEM OF THE DANGER THEY ARE IN! When people are comfortable with their touchy-feely-religious-sounding-biblically-ignorant dogma, they will fight tooth and nail in order to stay in their rebellion. It's just a fact of this life.

There will be times when believers will need to leave an unrepentant person, "shake the dust from their sandels" and move on to the next person. Not all will accept the truth.

Luk 9:5 And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them.

In Jude 1:23, we read that we are to try and "pull [them] out of the fire." Do you know what that means? It means that they are already under condemnation (as we all are before being born again in Jesus Christ). The analogy of "pulling them out of the fire" doesn't sound delicate to me. Does it to you? It has a sense of urgency about it. It has a sense of effort and force to help them escape from the heresy and apostasy that is bringing them down in condemnation.

It helps to remember that people we attempt to pull back will fight, sometimes viciously against us.

Why?

Because they probably don't realize the depth of their dire situation.

Think of a child who has not ever been burned by fire before. The flickering flames are enticing...leading them to want to touch it. When a parent sees what is happening, he or she yanks that child away from the danger...just in the nick of time. That child's arm may hurt. He/she may cry because of it. But ultimately, that moment of pain kept him/her away from the serious pain...and possible death...of being engulfed in that fire!

Take a look at Jude 1:23 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge page at the Blue Letter Bible website.

Jud 1:22 And of some have compassion, making a difference:

Jud 1:23 And others save with fear, pulling [them] out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.


2Cr 7:12 Wherefore, though I wrote unto you, [I did it] not for his cause that had done the wrong, nor for his cause that suffered wrong, but that our care for you in the sight of God might appear unto you.


1Ti 4:16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.

The Truth War

I have almost completed reading the book that I previously blogged about called "UnChristian - What a New Generation Really Thinks About Christianity."

As I read Steve Camp's blog post today, I found myself recalling the Emergent church attitudes and errors that were blatantly obvious within the theme of "UnChristian." The philosophy, premise, and theological opinions of the book authors stand in stark contrast to the biblical truth of the matter that John MacArthur points out in his new book, "The Truth War."


On the back cover of the "UnChristian" book it says in large black type:

1. Christianity has an image problem

2. Leaders offer vision for the future.

Note this very telling sentence:

"Find out why these negative perceptions exist, learn how to reverse them in a Christlike manner, and discover practical examples of how Christians can positively contribute to culture."

Steve's warnings in his blog post expose the conceptual errors inherent in the "UnChristian" book.

He writes:

Temporal vs Eternal

Emergent Christianity guts the faith to appeal to culture; and their myopic view of the kingdom of God predisposes them to be more concerned with the temporal, than the eternal.

The ECM has two Fundamental Flaws:
1.) a lack of reverence for God and His Word; and

2.) the unquenchable need to contextualize the Christian faith in adapting it to culture.

This is gangrenous to authentic Christianity. Erosion of the truth always begins with the subtle wandering away off the path of the essentials of the faith.

I have found that the Emergent church movement and several of its errant offspring movements, have the bad habit of moving towards either a "cross-light" (i.e. - "light" meaning, severe de-emphasis of the depravity of man and his need for repentance at the foot of the cross of Jesus Christ in order to be reconciled back to Holy and Righteous God) or, just tend to ignore the subject altogether. Some have become so steeped in cultlike error that they have even gone so far as to actually call Christ's sacrifice for man's sin as "insane" and, thus 'celebrate' a totally cross-less Gospel.

Since the authors of "UnChristian" are so concerned with "negative perceptions" about Christian faith, why would they want to preach the Cross of Christ which is "offensive to those who are perishing?"

The answer?

They wouldn't...and they don't!

In their skewed worldview, tolerance trumps the need to preach repentance.

I am currently reading John MacArthur's "The Truth War." It is EXCELLENT! I think that I first heard about the book at Steve's Camp on This blog.

EVERY CHRISTIAN needs to read this book! You will then be better able to discern the truth, that is, Orthodox, Biblical Christianity and recognize the falsehoods and deceptions of the Emergent church, gay "christian" movement, and "seeker-sensitive" false teachers (like Brian McLaren).

MacArthur's subtitle says, "Fighting for certainty in an age of deception."

Deception is rampant in today's culture. It's not only deceiving those who have absolutely no Christian beliefs, but many deceptions disguised as "Christianity" are fooling many who claim to be Christians.

Those who deem themselves as Christians, yet are ignorant of what the Bible teaches, could end up going to an emergent church without having the discernment ability to recognize any errors being taught by the leaders there. This is especially problematic when the teaching and preaching at these churches are not biblically sound. The attraction of the "emergent friendly" atmosphere might "tickle their ears" but will, unfortunately, lack the sound doctrine of the true gospel of Jesus Christ.

MacArthur has so many great quotes in his book that it is hard for me to choose which ones to share today.

As I continue to read through The Truth War book, I plan to blog about portions of this important book that will definitely help readers have more of an ability to discern truth from error.

For now, I want to show how MacArthur demolishes the "UnChristian" authors' premise in their book. Here are just a few of the relevant quotes:

"The idea that the Christian message should be kept pliable and ambiguous seems especially attractive to young people who are in tune with the culture and in love with the spirit of the age."

"People are experimenting with subjective, relativistic ideas of truth and labeling them "Christian." This trend signals a significant departure from Biblical and historic Christianity."

"The postmodernist recoils from absolutes and does not want to concede any truths that might seem axiomatic or self-evident. Instead, truth, if acknowledged at all, becomes something infinitely pliable and ultimately unknowable in any objective sense."

[Time out. For those who might be interested in seeing a debate that shows how a "postmodernist recoils from absolutes," I invite you to view a video that shows the exchange between New-Age guru Deepak Chopra and Christian Apologist and Ambassador for Christ, Greg Koukl on a program called "Faith Under Fire." The video is a bit grainy, but it's certainly worth your time to see that as the dialogue progresses, Chopra takes pride in "embracing his uncertainty," yet, verbally indicates that his relativistic worldview causes him to recoil from Koukl's certainty in his faith about the Person of Jesus Christ.]

Back to John MacArthur's quotes:

"Uncertainty is the new truth. Doubt and skepticism have been canonized as a form of humility. Right and wrong have been redefined in terms of subjective feelings and personal perspectives."

Here is the crux of the emergent movement. The notion that certainty about anything is inherently arrogant.

I have read countless blog posts from people who refuse to repent because they want to hold onto a particular sinful lifestyle; yet, make want to make the claim that they are Christian. This is wildly popular today in this age of postmodernism. The "UnChristian" book was filled with applause for the "do not judge" view!

How ironic is it that the belief that no one can really know anything for certain (e.g. "my" truth tells me differently from "your" truth mantra) is emerging as virtually the one dogma postmodernists will tolerate!!

MacArthur provides a biblical definition of truth.

Truth is that which is consistent with the mind, will, character, glory, and being of God. Even more to the point: Truth is the self-expression of God.

He goes on to support this claim with Bible quotes, including what Jesus has said about truth. He also shows the necessity of absolute truth, why we can only get it from God, and how all other definitions which try to omit God, hopelessly fall short.

If you took the time to view the video of Chopra and Koukl's debate, you would have noticed that Chopra holds to the idea that his own cynicism should be regarded as the most splendid of all virtues! You can actually see the contempt on his face and his dislike for Greg Koukl when Greg shares the fact that (paraphrased here) "since all religions claim different things, logically, it is impossible that each religion can be true all at the same time."

Chopra thinks that his view is more "tolerant." He thinks that his view is more "noble." Chopra even naively claims that unlike Koukl, he does not "impose" his beliefs upon everyone else.

Greg nailed it when he came back at Chopra's hint of having "humility" with the fact that Chopra has sold millions of books promoting his views about his "uncertainty."

This claim of uncertainty on the part of Deepak's worldview is supposed to be an indication that Chopra isn't "imposing his views" upon others? C'mon!! How hypocritical is that?

Greg Koukl's book, "Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-Air" describes Chopra's worldview and exposes the irrationality of it.

Absolute truth does exist. It can be found in the pages of the Bible.

To claim religious neutrality is a fallacy. There is no such thing. Even the religions of atheism, skepticism, and secular humanism all have an object of worship. Namely, the self!

What is really sad, my Christian friends, is the fact that false teachers like Brian McLaren have much more in common with Deepak Chopra than with the Truth of Orthodox, Biblical, historic Christianity.

What does this tell us?

It tells us that the emergent church movement is moving away from the truth into a spiritual oblivion, similar to the one that Chopra embraces!

MacArthur writes:

Listen, for example, to how Brian McLaren sums up his views on orthodoxy, certainty, and the question of whether the truths of Christianity are sound and reliable in the first place:

How ironic that I am writing about orthodoxy, which implies to many a final capturing of the truth about God, which is the glory of God. Sit down here next to me in this little restaurant and ask me if Christianity (my version of it, yours, the Pope's, whoever) is orthodox, meaning true, and here's my honest answer: a little, but not yet. Assuming by Christianity you mean the Christian understanding of the world and God, Christian opinions on soul, text, and culture...I'd have to say that we probably have a couple of things right, but a lot of things wrong. 1

1 Brian McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004), 293.

McLaren suggests that clarity itself is of dubious value. he clearly prefers ambiguity and equivocation, and his books are therefore full of deliberate doublespeak. In his introduction to A Generous Orthodoxy, he admits, "I have gone out of my way to be provocative, mischievous, and unclear, reflecting my belief that clarity is sometimes overrated, and that shock, obscurity, playfulness, and intrigue (carefully articulated) often stimulate more thought than clarity." A common theme that runs throughout most of McLaren's writings is the idea that "there is great danger in the quest to be right."

Doesn't McLaren's doublespeak (which is masterfully pointed out by Dr. MacArthur's comments about McLaren's quote from his book) eerily remind us of Satan's encounter with Eve in the Garden of Eden and how he (Satan) led her astray by saying, "Did God really say....?"

Hat Tips:

Camp On This

GCM Watch

Faith Under Fire

The Truth War

******* to be continued *******

Update: "Unchristian"

Update:
I'm back.
The following (below...after my rant!) is a commentary written by Brian McLaren that appeared in chapter 7 entitled "Too Political." As I mentioned in the previous post, McLaren's commentary is rhetoric that is mostly in direct contradiction to what was written by John Stott in his commentary. Compare and contrast them for yourself!

This chapter (Too Political) nearly sent me over the top!

Quips like "Christians rely too heavily on political influence" is considered "unChristian," while "We are cautious not to place too much emphasis on politics" is considered "Christlike" made my jaw drop. I kept thinking...says whom??

Then, the authors have the nerve to write the following:

Christians seem to fall on two sides of the path: too political or too apolitical. It is important to find an appropriate balance - neither ignorant and silent nor relying too heavily on political solutions to societal problems.

Obviously, these two authors have the "see no evil," "hear no evil," "speak no evil" mentality when it comes to the radical homosexual agenda being forced upon Christian believers.

Don't they know how important groups like The Alliance Defense Fund has become in the war against traditional marriage? Are they not aware of the gay indoctrination going on in public schools? Do they care? Apparently not. They devote an entire chapter (5) to describing how Christians show contempt for gays and lesbians. They even labeled it "Antihomosexual." But guess what? There is absolutely NO MENTION of those who have overcome homosexual behavior and identity through the saving grace and transformation that can be found through being born-again in Jesus Christ.

Why is that?

Probably because it doesn't fit in with their political agenda and views...that's why. To a liberal left Christian advocate, there is no such thing as a genuine, happy, saved by grace ex-homosexual.

Sorry. Didn't mean to go off on that tangent. It just strikes me as so disingenuous when Christians like these authors label themselves as "tolerant and loving," yet view those who have ministries that exist to help homosexuals overcome unwanted sexual behavior and attraction as "anti-homosexual."

Jesus said, "What does it profit a man to gain the whole world (put in your idol or sinful endeavors) and lose his own soul?"

Ironically, the authors then state:

unChristian: Christians get enamored with politics.
Christlike: There is nothing gained by winning elections if we lose our soul in the process.

Involvement in politics is seductive.

So I must ask the authors, what ISN'T SEDUCTIVE ABOUT THE HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA AND INDOCTRINATION GOING ON IN THE MEDIA, SCHOOLS AND POLITICAL ARENA?? WHAT ABOUT THE GAY "CHRISTIAN" MOVEMENT THAT WANTS TO SILENCE THOSE WHO HOLD TO BIBLICAL DOCTRINE REGARDING HOMOSEXUAL BEHAVIOR IS SIN AND AN ABOMINATION TO GOD?

Oh...it gets better. You are gonna love the next one:

unChristian: Christians drown out and demonize the voices of others.

Christlike: Respect our enemies and be aware of our capacity for myopia.

Guys...you need to take that myopia concept to heart and apply it to yourselves!! Watch the news on any given night and you will see how much "drowning out" and "demonizing" is going on against the traditional Christians.

Want a current example? How about the fact that Mike Huckabee can't even deliver a commercial message that stresses the fact that we celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ at Christmas? Why is his wishing everyone a "Merry Christmas" considered "offensive?"

It's so ridiculous!

Sheesh!

The authors go on and discuss some gibberish about how Christians "do not respect leaders whose political viewpoint is different from their own" and that the "Christlike" way is "respect and listen to our leaders and pray for them."

Where have these guys been over the last 7 years? Have they not noticed the leftists constantly bashing President Bush...a Christian??

Okay. On to the original subject of this update.

Changing The Perceptions

Gaining The World, Losing The Soul by Brian McLaren

From a vantage point further in the future, I think that an honest diagnosis will tell the truth aboutr the pivotal role the Religious Right has played in these depressing statistics. In the aftermath of the Religious Right's ascendancy, it is not an accident that "antihomosexual" is the number one perception of Christians in America these days, followed closely by "judgmental" and "hypocritical" and "insensitive." Young people today could, if we had taken a wiser path for the last few decades, think "antipoverty" or "pro-environment" or "pro-fidelity" or "antiviolence" when they hear "Christian" or "evangelical." But because of the path influential people have taken over the last thirty or so, what young people think of the Religious Right is what they think about evangelicals and even Christians in general.

That's why some of us believe that leaders in the Religious Right have, in a classic case of gaining the world and losing the soul, successfully gained political clout but helped lose our next generation.

But even so, a diagnosis of the evaporation of Christian commitment in the West and a prescription about how to respoind must go deeper than complaining about the mistakes of the Religious Right. There are many factors, and they run deep. As for prescriptions, yes, we need more Bible - but we also need a better, more holistic and profound understanding of the Bible and what it says about justice, compassion, the future, power, poverty, money, war, sex, and the kingdom of God. Yes, we need more maturity - but we also need a better and more holistic maturity, a maturity willing to face the historic and social realities of our so-called Christian past: a past that includes anti-Semitism, racism, chauvinism, holocaust, colonialism, apartheid, slavery, attempted genocide of native peoples, and much else that is ugly and calls not for excuses and minimization but for forthright repentance. Yes, we need more discernment that goes beyond name-calling and making pronouncements on two or three issues.

The data presented here can help us greatly in this regard, prompting us to discern how deep and serious the problems are, so that our missional engagement in the coming years won't be more of the same.
- Brian McLaren
founding member, emergentvillage.com

Comments?

Criticism, & Some Praise for "Unchristian"

Remember that book I mentioned a few weeks back called, "Unchristian"? It appears that my first blogpost about the book was tracked by one of the author's "Summize" websites.

They're watching me!

Well, since I didn't get into any trouble (yet) for quoting extensively from the book in that first post, perhaps it might be okay to quote more today.

I did promise to share some of the good things that I found within the book. However, one problem that I found is that there aren't many to report. If I were to do a book review, my evaluation would most likely be quite negative. Why? Several reasons.

First, in chapter 2 (entitled, "Discovering Unchristian Faith") the definitions given for "evangelical," "born-again," and just plain "Christianity" were left up to the young people being asked questions for the survey to define! Isn't that a bit odd? Even the authors admit that this led to a "great deal of confusion."

Duh!!!!

With this in mind, they asked "Outsiders" (the term they gave to non-Christians) how they perceive the Christians within these categories.

The chart is so skewed that I question it's validity. In fact, the validity of most of the charts are questionable! The following is just one example.

The percent of outsiders, ages 16-29 equaled a sample size of 440 people.

1. Know of/aware of

a. Christianity = NA (not applicable? Why??)
b. Evangelical Christians = 57%
c. Born-Again Christians = 86%

2. Have bad impression

a. Christianity = 38%
b. Evangelical Christians = 49%
c. Born-Again Christians = 35%

3. Have neutral impression

a. Christianity = 45%
b. Evangelical Christians = 48%
c. Born-Again Christians = 55%

4. Have good impression

a. Christianity = 16%
b. Evangelical Christians = 3%
c. Born-Again Christians = 10%

It is sad and sobering to realize that one-third of young outsiders said that Christianity represents, as the book informs, "a negative image with which they would not want to be associated."

Furthermore, one out of every six young outsiders (17 percent) indicates that he or she maintains "very bad" perceptions of the Christian faith. Though these hard-core critics represent a minority of young outsiders, this group is at least three times larger than it was just a decade ago.

I haven't finished reading the book yet, but from glancing through the final few chapters I doubt that I will find one mention that the mainstream media's negative output regarding the Christian "religion" in general. I also highly doubt that the authors considered that the harsh and negative representation of certain Christian leaders (usually designated by the negative label of "The Religious Right") in particular, could have had a severely negative influence towards the current perceptions that these young people hold!

Note the next paragraph in the chapter on this topic:

Outsiders direct their skepticism toward all things Christian: the faith itself, the people who profess it, the Bible, and Jesus Christ. Frankly, their feelings toward all of these are interwoven. Still, don't assume that each of these four elements is perceived on equal footing - young outsiders are most likely to be frustrated with present-day expressions of Christianity, followed by their aggravation with Christians.

My question to the authors would be what do you expect?? Jesus himself told us that this would happen!

Mat 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Luk 6:22 Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you [from their company], and shall reproach [you], and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake.

Luk 6:27 But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,

Jhn 7:7 The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil.

Jhn 15:18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before [it hated] you.

1Jo 3:13 Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you.

The next paragraph in chapter 2 tells us the more likely reason why the "outsiders" hate Christians. However, the authors don't seem to make the connection between what (and why) outsiders' "impressions" of Christians are negative. Could it have something to do with their uninformed impressions about the Bible and their ignorance regarding Jesus' question, "Who do you say that I am?

Their impressions of the Bible are mixed: most think it has good values, but only three out of ten believe that it is accurate in all the principles it teaches. And Jesus draws an interesting set of reactions. Jesus receives outsiders' most favorable feelings, but even the clarity of his image has eroded among young people. They are more likely than previous generations to believe he committed sins; they are also more likely to believe that people can live a meaningful life without him.

That phrase, "the clarity of his (Jesus') image has eroded among young people" is truly a sad state of affairs. However, unlike the two authors viewpoints and opinions on this issue (namely, blaming orthodox, biblically based Christian believers), I think it has more to do with the lack of biblical knowledge among these people! In addition, could such lack of clarity be the result of the fact that there is so much confusion among liberal left Christian circles because of their lack of biblical knowledge?

What's more, the authors own statistics reveal that I am correct about this.

In chapter 4 (entitled "Get Saved!), there is a chart that represents the

"Wide but Not Deep-Americans' Commitment to Christianity."

The chart shows that "Mosaics and Busters" [M & B] (labels given to ages 18 - 41):

1. Have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important = 65%

"Boomers and Elders" [B & E] (ages 42+)

1. Have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important = 73%

2. Absolutely committed to the Christian faith [M & B] = 29%

2. Absolutely committed to the Christian faith [B & E] = 48%

3. Possess a biblical worldview [M & B] = 3%

3. Possess a biblical worldview [B & E] = 9%

Why is there such a small percentage of those who hold a biblical worldview? We get our answer from Jesus himself when we read what Jesus said to the Father in his prayer:

Jhn 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.


Jhn 17:15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.


Jhn 17:16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.


Jhn 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

I noticed that the authors talk about urging those who call themselves Christians towards "spiritual depth." I don't see them emphasizing the need for repentance and receiving the Holy Spirit of God indwelling the soul of the believer.

In this particular chapter (chapter 4 - "Get Saved"), the authors rail against not only the ways, means, and methods utilized by traditional Christians and churches who emphasize "getting saved," but it appears that they are against the concept of conversion altogether! This is truly astonishing to me! They seem more pleased with Christians who express an "emotional connection" to Jesus; and then, instead of recognizing all of our need for transformation (as the Scriptures so attest), they simply emphasize the need for us to express more than a "one-dimensional" understanding of him (Jesus).

What is confusing, though, is that in the next paragraph the authors suggest that making "a decision for Christ" is "lightweight" exposure to Christianity where the decision is portrayed as "simple and costless."

This makes me wonder whether or not the authors, themselves, know the difference between mainstream Christians and born-again, evangelical Christians!

Next, they claim that they want to see "young adults who make emotional commitments" to Christ to try and facilitate "significant growth in the 3 percent who have a biblical worldview." Yet, they reject the very means by which we need to promote the biblical worldview. What do I mean by this?

I recall reading that one of the authors thinks that there are no judgments in the Bible. Thus, we are not to utilize any judgment in our evangelism.

Huh???

Then, how, may I ask, do they explain Jesus' own words in the following verses?

Jhn 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

Jhn 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

Confused yet?

I am!

This leads to my second reason for doubting the validity of what is espoused in this book. It could be regarded as even more important than the first reason stated above. Why? Because it explains why there is so much confusion within the pages of this book! What is this element that exists and causes such confusion?

It is the plethora of relativism that can be found amongst its pages!

Greg Koukl, one of the best Christian Apologetics leaders and teachers of our time would have a field day reviewing and refuting much of the relativistic perpectives included throughout this book!

Found another blogger who had some concerns about the book, too:

The book seems to have quite a few folks from the emerging-church/religious-left/trendy-Christian perspective, like Dan Kimball, Brian McLaren, Andy Stanley, and Jim Wallis. Why are we not hearing from anyone like David Jeremiah, John MacArthur, John Piper, or Chuck Swindoll? Were any of them asked to participate (did they decline if they were?), or do Kinnaman and Lyons think they have nothing to say (or that what they say is irrelevant)?

Who is actually guilty of creating these stereotypes? Paul & Jan and other creeps on TBN, or the Lutheran pastor down the street? Who is to blame?

Do Kinnaman and Lyons see any "negative perceptions" as being irreversible? For example, Jesus sounded like He was making an exclusive claim by saying, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No man comes to the Father, but by me." Do Kinnaman and Lyons think that Jesus was being exclusive, or, is following Jesus just one of many paths to God?

What do Kinnaman and Lyons think Jesus meant when He said, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand?" What should we repent of?

I know. By now you are probably wondering when will I get around to sharing something good about this book. It's coming!

There were snippets of good thoughts in the first few chapters. However, it wasn't until the sixth chapter (ironically labeled "Sheltered") where I found an entire commentary that I could agree with.

The author of this commentary is John Stott - rector emeritus, All Souls Church, London.

A Call To Radical Discipleship

If we belong to Jesus Christ, we have a double calling in relation to the world. On the one hand, we are to live, serve, and witness in the world and not try to escape from it. On the other hand, we are to avoid being contaminated by the world.

So we have no liberty either to preserve our holiness by escaping from the world or to sacrifice our holiness by conforming to the world.

Escapism and conformism are both forbidden to us. This is one of the major themes of the whole Bible, namely that God is calling out a people for himself and is summoning us to be different from everybody else. "Be holy," he says to us, "because I am holy."

This foundational theme recurs in all four main sections of Scripture - the law, the prophets, the teaching of Jesus, and the teaching of the apostles. Let me give you an example from each. Take the law. God said to the people through Moses: "You must not do as they do in the land of Egypt where you used to live, nor as they do in the land of Canaan to which I am bringing you. Do not follow their practices. You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am the Lord your God" (Lev. 18:3-4). Similarly god complains through Ezekiel, "You have not followed my decrees, by have conformed to the standards of the nations around you" (Ezekiel 11:12).

It is similar in the New Testament. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus spoke of the hypocrites and the pagans and added: "Do not be like them" (Matt. 6:8). Finally, the apostle Paul could write to the Romans: "Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed" (Rom. 12:2).

Here then is God's call to a radical discipleship, to a radical nonconformism to the surrounding culture. It is a call to develop a Christian counterculture.

The followers of Jesus, for example, are not to give in to pluralism, which denies the uniqueness and lordship of Jesus, nor be sucked into materialism or become led astray into ethical relativism, which says there are no moral absolutes.

This is God's call to his people to be different. We are not to be like reeds shaken by the wind, as Jesus said, but to be like rocks in a mountain stream; not to be like fish floating with the stream, but to swim against the stream - even the cultural mainstream.

We are faced, in fact, with two cultures, two value systems, two standards, and two lifestyles. Which shall we choose? If we are not to be like chameleons, changing color to suit our surroundings, what are we to be like?

The answer is that we are to be like Christ. The eternal and ultimate purpose of God by his Spirit is to make us like Christ.

- John Stott

*******to be continued*******

Note: Check back for a second commentary quote (written by Emergent church leader, Brian McLaren) which puts forth views that are, unfortunately, quite the opposite of what John Stott has written here.

*******
Update:
I'm back.
The following is a commentary written by Brian McLaren that appeared in chapter 7 entitled "Too Political."

This chapter nearly sent me over the top! Quips like "Christians rely too heavily on political influence" is considered "unChristian," while "We are cautious not to place too much emphasis on politics" is considered "Christlike." What I would like to know is...says whom??

Then, the authors have the nerve to say the following:

Christians seem to fall on two sides of the path: too political or too apolitical. It is important to find an appropriate balance - neither ignorant and silent nor relying too heavily on political solutions to societal problems.

Obviously, these two authors have the "see no evil," "hear no evil," "speak no evil" mentality when it comes to the radical homosexual agenda being forced upon Christian believers.

Don't they know how important groups like The Alliance Defense Fund has become in the war against traditional marriage? Are they not aware of the gay indoctrination going on in public schools? Do they care? Apparently not. They devote an entire chapter (5) to describing how Christians show contempt for gays and lesbians. They even labeled it "Antihomosexual." But guess what? There is absolutely NO MENTION of those who have overcome homosexual behavior and identity through the saving grace and transformation that can be found through being born-again in Jesus Christ.

Why is that?

Probably because it doesn't fit in with their political agenda and views...that's why. To a liberal left Christian advocate, there is no such thing as a genuine, happy, saved by grace ex-homosexual.

Sorry. Didn't mean to go off on that tangent. It just strikes me as so disingenuous when Christians like these authors label themselves as "tolerant and loving," yet view those who have ministries that exist to help homosexuals overcome unwanted sexual behavior and attraction as "anti-homosexual."

Jesus said, "What does it profit a man to gain the whole world (put in your idol or sinful endeavors) and lose his own soul?"

Ironically, the authors then state:

unChristian: Christians get enamored with politics.
Christlike: There is nothing gained by winning elections if we lose our soul in the process.

Involvement in politics is seductive.

So I must ask the authors, what ISN'T SEDUCTIVE ABOUT THE HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA AND INDOCTRINATION GOING ON IN THE MEDIA, SCHOOLS AND POLITICAL ARENA?? WHAT ABOUT THE GAY "CHRISTIAN" MOVEMENT THAT WANTS TO SILENCE THOSE WHO HOLD TO BIBLICAL DOCTRINE REGARDING HOMOSEXUAL BEHAVIOR IS SIN AND AN ABOMINATION TO GOD?

Oh...it gets better. You are gonna love the next one:

unChristian: Christians drown out and demonize the voices of others.

Christlike: Respect our enemies and be aware of our capacity for myopia.

Guys...you need to take that myopia concept to heart and apply it to yourselves!! Watch the news on any given night and you will see how much "drowning out" and "demonizing" is going on against the traditional Christians.

Want a current example? How about the fact that Mike Huckabee can't even deliver a commercial message that stresses the fact that we celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ at Christmas? Why is his wishing everyone a "Merry Christmas" considered "offensive?"

It's so ridiculous!

Sheesh!

The authors go on and discuss some gibberish about how Christians "do not respect leaders whose political viewpoint is different from their own" and that the "Christlike" way is "respect and listen to our leaders and pray for them."

Where have these guys been over the last 7 years? Have they not noticed the leftists constantly bashing President Bush...a Christian??

Okay. On to the original subject of this update.

Changing The Perceptions

Gaining The World, Losing The Soul by Brian McLaren

From a vantage point further in the future, I think that an honest diagnosis will tell the truth aboutr the pivotal role the Religious Right has played in these depressing statistics. In the aftermath of the Religious Right's ascendancy, it is not an accident that "antihomosexual" is the number one perception of Christians in America these days, followed closely by "judgmental" and "hypocritical" and "insensitive." Young people today could, if we had taken a wiser path for the last few decades, think "antipoverty" or "pro-environment" or "pro-fidelity" or "antiviolence" when they hear "Christian" or "evangelical." But because of the path influential people have taken over the last thirty or so, what young people think of the Religious Right is what they think about evangelicals and even Christians in general.

That's why some of us believe that leaders in the Religious Right have, in a classic case of gaining the world and losing the soul, successfully gained political clout but helped lose our next generation.

But even so, a diagnosis of the evaporation of Christian commitment in the West and a prescription about how to respoind must go deeper than complaining about the mistakes of the Religious Right. There are many factors, and they run deep. As for prescriptions, yes, we need more Bible - but we also need a better, more holistic and profound understanding of the Bible and what it says about justice, compassion, the future, power, poverty, money, war, sex, and the kingdom of God. Yes, we need more maturity - but we also need a better and more holistic maturity, a maturity willing to face the historic and social realities of our so-called Christian past: a past that includes anti-Semitism, racism, chauvinism, holocaust, colonialism, apartheid, slavery, attempted genocide of native peoples, and much else that is ugly and calls not for exuses and minimization but for forthright repentance. Yes, we need more discernment that goes beyond name-calling and making pronouncements on two or three issues.

The data presented here can help us greatly in this regard, prompting us to discern how deep and serious the problems are, so that our missional engagement in the coming years won't be more of the same.
- Brian McLaren
founding member, emergentvillage.com

Comments?

Biblical Uncertainty Drives Emerging Movement

Steve Camp has posted a video at his blog that all Christians need to see. It visually demonstrates how the "emergent church movement" is steeped in error!

Steve writes:

Church Dystopia - What's driving the emerging/emergent movement?

Steve's brief, but absolutely accurate answer to that question?

Ecclesiastical negativity; biblical uncertainty; theological infidelity; spiritual unrest; and the thirst for cultural relevancy.

I found the video astonishing! I didn't realize how dangerous this movement really is until I saw this video. It's "leaders" can be seen and their reprobate views exposed...in an up close and personal way via the video. It's very New Agey...and the "leaders" exude a kind of guru, "touchy-feely" type atmosphere.

Very creepy...

Here is a copy of my comment at Steve's blog:

Thank you for sharing this video. It shows that the "Emergent church movement" is even more dangerous than I had first thought!

I have done several blogposts about this growing heresy, including this one.

The book of Jude warns us that false Christs will be presented and "worshipped" the closer we get to the end times. Heresies will increase and deceive many...even the elect if that were possible. In other words, there will always be a remnant of the faithful who will not be fooled by such "movements" that are blatant errors disguised as Christianity.

Keep up the good work here, Steve, sharing the truth of the Bible and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. No matter how many heretics try to change such truth; they will be found out and exposed - first through the efforts of the faithful; and, even more importantly, by the plumbline of Scripture that will always refute their errors.

God bless you!
Christine

"Us vs. Them" Mentality?

My daughter bought a book for me entitled "UnChristian - What A New Generation Really Thinks About Christianity...And Why It Matters."

Go here for some customer reviews and comments. Some of the comments agree with the reviewer, while others do a great job countering what is said in the book affirming reviews.

When I saw the names "Brian McLaren" and "Rick Warren" along with dozens of others whom I've never heard of listed on the back cover, I knew immediately that this book must be the handiwork of the liberal-emergent-homosexual-behavior-no-need-to-repent left side of the Christian worldview spectrum.

I am not saying that nothing good can be learned from this book. There are some good points to be found. However, here is a brief list of what was missing from the "Mark's story" (below) portion of the chapter:

1. No need for repentance for sin was mentioned.
2. The cross of Christ and His death and resurrection for salvation was never mentioned.
3. Not one mention of Jesus' admonition that we must be born again.
4. Not one mention of the fact that many former homosexuals who have been born again in Christ are now free from the bondage of homosexual behavior.
5. The claim that there aren't any "appropriate" ministries for homosexuals (code words that ex-gay ministries are not good)

Maybe one or all of these are covered elsewhere in the book. I haven't read it all yet. Of course, I couldn't resist going right to the chapter titled, "Antihomosexual." Here's how it starts out:

Many people in the gay community don't seem to have issues with Jesus but rather with those claiming to represent him today. It's very much an "us-versus-them" mentality, as if a war has been declared. Of course each side thinks the other fired the opening shot.
- Peter, 34

Next, there is a conversation between a Christian named David and his homosexual friend, Mark.

One day, Mark asked David, "So, David, do you still think I am going to hell because I am gay?"

David apparently was caught off guard. He stumbled in his response. The author intends to return to that conversation later in the chapter.

Next, we get "re-educated" through the author's view of what our "new perception" should be. He discusses things like:

1. Judging and berating gays. (Of course, the infamous Phelps "God hates fags" group (which is unchristian), is mentioned; but the writer makes it sound like all Biblical Christians believe this way.)

2. What do you believe?
3. Clearing the air.
4. Shifting values.
5. Confronting change.
6. Changing Loyalties. (Including a chart that shows outsiders and young churchgoers holding similar lack of concern about homosexuality. The chart showed percentages of those concerned about homosexual lifestyles and concern about political efforts of homosexual activists. Unfortunately, there was no reference to view regarding this chart.)
7. Biblical responses.
a. Acknowledging the complexity.
b. Opening doors with conversations.
c. Treating other Christians with respect.
d. Having the right perspective.
e. Expressing concern for kids.
f. Having compassion.

Then, we come back to Mark's Story.

"So, David, do you still think I am going to hell because I am gay?"

"Well...I don't know what I said before. I am sorry if I said you were going to hell because you are gay. Here is what I believe. It all comes down to what you do with Jesus. I believe he was the Son of God. Not everyone believes that, but I would give anything for you to see the reality of Jesus. His life gives my life meaning and purpose. He can do the same for you."

I paused to let that sink in and thought about leaving it at that, but I ventured gently into the heart of Mark's question.

"No one goes to heaven for what they do or don't do. That's the message of Jesus. Every human sins, and we all deserve hell for that. But Jesus freely offers everyone his grace. I know it's not an easy part of Christian theology, but yes, I believe homosexual behavior is a sin, but it's no different than any other sin, no different than if I sleep with someone other than my wife or even have a momentary sexual fantasy. God created sexuality, so it is good, but it can be expressed in wrong ways. Every one of us, gay or straight, or whatever, expresses sexuality in broken ways."

I glanced around, glad that the restaurant was virtually empty. Mark was looking at me intently. He did not seem particularly happy.

"You know what, though, I would give anything to see you come to know Jesus. I really would. I would die for that. Everything hinges on what you decide about Jesus."

I reached for my coffee again. My habit was to launch into long-winded answers with Mark (which was probably one reason why he had gotten mixed messages from our past conversations). But this time I felt that I had made my point.

"David, here is what you need to know about my life," Mark began. "I was incredibly lonely. I hated myself. I could not figure out what was wrong with me, and it was eating me alive. I almost dropped out of school. It was awful. I know guys who have committed suicide because of the deep conflicts that exist between who they are and what religion says is right and wrong."

"I don't think I had any idea what you went through, Mark," I said. "I am sorry I wasn't a better friend for you through all of that."

The waitress came up to the table to refill our drinks, and our conversation shifted to a new topic.

I wish I could tell you that Mark changed that night. I know that my views about homosexuals did.

Christian friends, what is your reaction to this encounter? What was good and/or bad about it?

The next section in the same chapter is about "changing the perceptions" and presents quotes from various people.

Of course, the typical accusation is listed that churches are guilty of "spewing venom."

I don't know about anyone else reading this, but I have never attended a Christian church here in California that ever spewed venom on this issue. The pastors tell the truth regarding what the Bible says about homosexual behavior being sinful, but always share the forgiveness available through repentance at the cross of Christ for salvation of any one's soul. What is more compassionate than that?

I want to wait until others have a chance to respond to the David and Mark story before I comment on it further.

However, I just happened to receive the following quote this morning regarding the importance of repentance in born again believers. It was shared via email from one of my message board members named Sothenes:

"III. Although repentance is not to be rested in, as any satisfaction for sin, or any cause of the pardon thereof,[5] which is the act of God's free grace in Christ,[6] yet it is of such necessity to all sinners, that *none may expect pardon without it*.[7]"

[7] LUK 13:3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. ACT 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: 31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

-Chapter XV, Of Repentance Unto Life, Westminster Confession of Faith

"15. Repentance Unto Life Repentance is the fruit of the gospel at work in the lives of believers enabling them to see their sins as hateful and to forsake them turning to God. While repentance is not meritorious, *it is the necessary means by which sins are forgiven*. Repentance is to be made for individual sins in particular confessing them privately to God and publicly as appropriate to those wronged."

-A Summary of the Westminster Confession of Faith by Reverend Roy R. Bennett