Critics of the Emerging Church
Menu

IN PLAIN SITE

One of the finest Christian websites on the Internet.

 

The Contemporary Church
 

 The Emerging Church

Back to the Emerging Church Menu

or
Back to the Top

KJOS MINISTRIES

About US 

"Christians are people of the faith, clearly set forth in the Word of God, but Christ followers will be people of faith—that is, any faith or religion."
"Christ-follower will say to the world that you believe God is inclusive of those whose way to God is different than the way given to us in His Word."
“‘THERE IS NO RELIGION HIGHER THAN --TRUTH.’… [Truth] must be underlying every world religion… Therefore, that a portion of truth, great or small, is found in every religious and philosophical system …
”“It is through supreme service and sacrifice that we become followers of Christ and earn the right to enter into His kingdom, because we do not enter alone.”
 

"I see many similarities in the United States, and in the Western world at large, to German society in the 1930s. Christians by the carloads rush from one conference to another to learn about community, leadership, small groups, and the like. But I propose that what they are getting isn't training to be good leaders but rather subtle induction to being good followers, lulled to lay aside independent thinking. 'Follow, follow, follow!'" 
(from Out of India by Caryl Matrisciana, pp. 213-216)
 

Charts Index

Transforming the Church

© 2005 by Sarah Leslie. 

From Truth to a New Spirituality

By Berit Kjos - March 10, 2008

Back to the Emerging Church Menu

or
Back to the Top

from Lighthouse Trails Research Project

Back to the Emerging Church Menu

or
Back to the Top

critical of the emerging church
 

Back to the Emerging Church Menu

or
Back to the Top

critical of the emerging church
 

Back to the Emerging Church Menu

or
Back to the Top

Articles on the Emerging Church
 

Back to the Emerging Church Menu

or
Back to the Top

Pastor John MacArthur has written an excellent book

critical of the Emerging Church
 

Back to the Emerging Church Menu

or
Back to the Top

True Discernment

A Critical Review of “A NEW KIND OF CHRISTIAN” by Brian Mclaren

It teaches that the Bible is not the infallible Word of God and that all doctrines and theologies are non-absolute, that we need to approach the Bible “on less defined terms” (p. 56).
It teaches that Christians should not try to judge right from wrong in an absolute sense because all of our understanding of the Bible is colored and conditioned by extra-biblical things such as one’s time and culture. It teaches that the postmodern Christian is one who “relativizes your own modern viewpoint,” thus understanding that everything he believes about the Bible and Christianity is only relative and uncertain (p. 35). It teaches that there is no such thing as “the Christian worldview,” that every doctrinal position, “no matter how resplendent with biblical quotations–can claim to be the ultimate Christian worldview, because every model is at the least limited by the limitations of the contemporary human mind, not to mention the ‘taste in universes’ of that particular age” (pp. 36, 37).
It teaches that people should not ask pastors questions such as, “Do you believe in inerrancy?” or “What’s your position on homosexuality?” because to make them answer such questions is to “cheapen” them and to make them sell themselves (p. 61).
It teaches that it is right for Christians to use pagan practices such as the Native American sweat lodge, peace pipe, dance, dream catcher, and smoke (pp. 26, 74-78).
It teaches that unbelievers and pagans can possibly be saved without personal faith in Christ (p. 92).

 

Back to the Emerging Church Menu

or
Back to the Top

Apologetics Research Resources on religious movements, cults, sects, world religions and related issues

Emerging Church - Methods

Communicate the postmodern message in print
Emerging Church movement leaders are prolific writers. Their books are popular and they are well represented in Christian magazines and journals.
Communicate the message over the internet
Emerging Church websites and blogs abound on the internet.
Communicate the message in institutes of higher learning
Emerging Church leaders can be found on staff at many colleges and seminaries. They are also frequent guest speakers at these institutions.
Conduct seminars around the world
The movement gives high priority to seminars and participants in the movement are expected to attend these.
Form local communities of postmodern believers through "cohorts"
Cohorts are small groups that form over the internet and meet to discuss postmodern ideas. Emergentvillage.com recommends that these cohorts study McLaren's A Generous Orthodoxy together.
Influence the leadership and membership of established churches
Through their published writings, seminars, and websites the movement's ideas are influencing and affecting established churches of every kind.
Establish churches that are dedicated to the ideas and values of the movement
While this has not yet been as successful as they had hoped, a handful of Emerging Church congregations have been established.
Engage in social activism
While Emerging Church leaders sometimes claim the Church should not be linked to any political agenda, most of them are quite tied to a liberal political agenda. (For an idea of the kind of activism emergents are inclined toward, visit the Sojourners website at http://www.sojo.net/ — McLaren is on the board of this organization.)

Emerging Church - Distinctive Teachings and Goals

The world is radically changing and the church must radically change with it
What is needed, they say, is not just a change in methodology. We need a new kind of Christian.
Since the Church has been culture bound for so long we must reexamine and question every belief and practice in the Church, finding new ways to define and express these
Any doctrine or moral standard can be questioned. I
We have no foundation for any beliefs, therefore we cannot know absolute truth
A. Carson points out that emergent postfoundationalism demands that we be God, with all of God’s omniscience, or else forever be condemned to knowing nothing objective for sure.”  Since we cannot know absolute truth, we can only experience what is “true” for our communities.  Truth is only known and validated within communities This implies that truth is culturally relative and that true cross-cultural communication is impossible. Those outside a community must first join a community before they can understand the community’s ideas.
Since we cannot know absolute truth we cannot be dogmatic about doctrine
Emergents see orthodoxy as “generous,” [17] that is, inclusive of many beliefs Christians have historically thought of as aberrant or heretical. Many leading emergents echo McLaren’s refusal to assert Christianity’s superiority to other world religions.
Since we cannot know absolute truth we cannot be dogmatic about moral standards
Absolute stands on issues such as homosexuality are viewed as obsolete. Activities such as drinking, clubbing, watching sexually explicit movies, and using profanities are seen by some emergents as opportunities to show those who are not part of the Christian community that postmodern Christians do not think they are better than them through any false sense of moral superiority. [18]
Since we cannot know absolute truth, dogmatic preaching must give way to a dialogue between people of all beliefs
Emerging Christians do not posture themselves before the world as though they were the light and the world were in darkness. Instead of “preaching” to the “lost” they join in “conversation,” with people of various beliefs. Conservative Evangelicals seem not to be truly welcome to contribute their distinctive content to this conversation since they represent the old, rotting corpse of “modernism.”
Since propositional truth is uncertain, spiritual feeling and social action make up the only reliable substance of Christianity
Emergents consider propositional truth  outmoded.  Postmoderns think and communicate in narratives. [19] Since the pursuit of truth is portrayed as a never ending journey with no solid starting point, they consider the only legitimate measuring rods of Christianity to be experience and good works. Without a solid footing in revealed truth, however, emergents have no firm foundation for knowing which experiences are valid and which works are good (something they do not seem to notice).
To capture a sacred feeling we should reconnect with ancient worship forms
Trappings such as burning candles and events such as silent retreats are popular in the movement. Embracing these premodern forms further breaks their connection with “modern” Christianity.
Since sublime feeling is experienced through outward forms, we should utilize art forms in our worship
Many participants in the movement see appreciating art for art’s sake as a spiritual experience.
Through conversation with them, “outsiders” will become part of our community, and then be able to understand and believe what we teach
The postmodern approach is not to try to persuade people to believe, it is to try to befriend people into joining. This is commonly expressed as Robert Webber does when he says “People in a postmodern world are not persuaded to faith by reason as much as they are moved to faith by participation in God’s earthly community.” [20]
All are welcome to join the “conversation” as long as they behave in a kind and open-minded manner.
Emerging believers reject any posture which hints at exclusivism. Dogmatic Evangelicals, however, are not treated as kindly in the conversation as others are (something many emergents admit).
The ultimate goal is to make the world a better place
The Emerging Church movement envisions a utopia in which the oppressed of the world are free, the poor are no longer impoverished and the environment is clean. This paradise is achieved through social activism. Many emergent leaders think it is selfish folly to live for the return of Christ

Brian McLaren
The person most commonly associated with the movement. Former English professor who is now a pastor, traveling speaker, and author of several books. [22] Recognized as one of TIME magazine's "25 Most Influential Evangelicals in America," he serves on the board of the social activist organization, Sojourners. His book, A New Kind of Christian won an award of merit from Christianity Today in 2002. Another of his works, A Generous Orthodoxy, has achieved something akin to Scripture status in the Emerging Church movement. (website at http://www.brianmclaren.net/)
Tony Jones
National Coordinator of Emergent, an organized network of cooperating emerging ministries (http://www.emergentvillage.com/Site/index.htm). He is a doctoral fellow and senior research fellow in practical theology at Princeton Theological Seminary whose books have been highly influential in the movement.
Dan Kimball
Author of several books, including The Emerging Church; Vintage Christianity for New Generations (a Christianity Today best book of 2004). He is the pastor of Vintage Faith Church in Santa Cruz, California. (website at http://www.dankimball.com/vintage_faith/).
Eddie Gibbs
Professor of church growth at the School of Intercultural Studies at Fuller Theological Seminary. Author of several books including Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures (which he coauthored with Ryan Bolger). His book Church Next: Quantum Changes in How We Do Ministry was a Christianity Today best book of 2001. ( website at http://www.fuller.edu/academics/faculty/edmund-gibbs.aspx)
Erwin McManus
Author and speaker who is described on his website as "The lead pastor and Cultural Architect of Mosaic in Los Angeles. Known around the world for its spiritual creativity and cosmopolitan diversity, Mosaic is a community of followers of Jesus Christ committed to live by faith, to be known by love, and to be a voice of hope. Since the early 90's, Erwin has led Mosaic in a pioneering enterprise whose primary focus is to serve the post-modern, post-Western, and post-Christian world."(website at http://www.erwinmcmanus.com/)
Leonard Sweet
Professor at Drew University whose writings are popular in the movement. He sometimes veers very close to New Age concepts in his writings. (see, for example, his online book at http://www.leonardsweet.com/Quantum/index.asp)
Stanley Grenz
Now deceased, former professor of theology who co-authored the influential book, Beyond Foundationalism: Shaping Theology in a Postmodern Context.
John Franke
Professor of theology at Biblical Seminary in Hartfield, PA. Co-author of Beyond Foundationalism: Shaping Theology in a Postmodern Context.
Stanley Hauerwas
Professor of Theological Ethics at Duke Divinity School. Named "America's Best Theologian" in 2001 by TIME magazine. Heavily influenced by postmodern philosophers, he has in turn had a profound affect on the Emerging Church movement. Known to frequently use profanities in his speaking engagements.
Brad Kallenberg
Professor of Religious Studies at University of Dayton. His primary interest is in ethics.
Doug Pagitt
The pastor of Solomon's Porch in Minneapolis. Author of several books who is a recognized leader in the movement. (website at http://pagitt.typepad.com/)
Nancy Murphy
Professor of Christian Philosophy at Fuller Theological Seminary. Her book, Beyond Liberalism and Fundamentalism has influenced many emergent leaders.
Steve Chalke
British Baptist once known for his doctrinal orthodoxy who has embraced the movement, retreating from his former views. His book, The Lost Message of Jesus created great controversy in the UK. [23]
LeRon Shults
Professor of theology at Bethel Seminary. Author of books such as The Postfoundationalist Task of Theology.
Chris Seay
Baptist pastor and author who is collaborating with Brian McLaren on The Voice project, a retelling of the Bible as a collection of stories, poems and songs.
Spencer Burke
Creator of theooze.com., traveling speaker, and author of several books. (website at http://cavepainter.typepad.com/ [also see http://www.theooze.com/about/ourteam.cfm])
Rob Bell
Pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church, in Grandville, Michigan. Author of Velvet Elvis: Repainting the Christian Faith. (website at http://www.mhbcmi.org/findex.html)
Bill Dahl
Freelance writer, social activist, and speaker who frequently contributes articles to various publications and websites. (website at http://theporpoisedivinglife.com/)
Donald Miller
Author of several popular books, including Blue Like Jazz. His works have been highly coveted in the movement, and he is contributing to the Voice project. (website at http://www.donaldmillerwords.com/index.php

Back to the Emerging Church Menu

or
Back to the Top

Practicing Ignatian Examen

Back to the Emerging Church Menu

or
Back to the Top

Fred Hutchison

 

The Seduction of Christianity
by Fred Hutchison

Part 1: The rise of the emerging church

May 18, 2009
Fred Hutchison, RA analyst

Part 1 of this essay deals with the rise of the "emerging church," which is postmodern and heretical. As such, it is a double threat to doctrinally orthodox Christianity.

Part 2, which is coming soon, will describe the watering down of evangelicalism at the mega-churches in a way that has made many of their people worldly, soft, and vulnerable to the seductions of the emerging church. Parts 1 and 2 were originally written as one essay, because the rise of the emerging church cannot be correctly understood apart from the contemporary changes in evangelicalism.

Paving the way for the apostate church

In a period of 30 years (1960–1990) evangelicalism replaced the Protestant mainline denominations as the dominant spiritual force in America. The rapid decline of the mainline denominations and the rapid rise of evangelicalism was a net gain for the spiritual wellbeing of America, because evangelicalism was doctrinally orthodox and the mainline denominations were becoming increasingly modernist. Modernist churches are morally and spiritually worthless.  Just as modernism took over the mainline Protestant churches, postmodernism is now taking over evangelicalism. The evangelical Jonah might be swallowed up by the postmodern whale — that is, swallowed up by the "emerging church." All the gains of biblical doctrine from 1960 to 1990 might be lost.  For this reason, I do not think the apostate church of the end times will be liberal-modernist or backsliding evangelical. I now suspect that the great apostate church warned about in biblical prophecy will be a postmodern institution that grows from what we now know as the emerging church.  The Bible tells us that the apostate church will persecute the true believers in Christ. The emerging church accepts people of almost any religion or heresy, but rejects those who adhere strictly to the Bible and to doctrinal orthodoxy. In a few decades, the emerging church leviathan might persecute the shrunken remnants of doctrinally orthodox evangelicalism.

Seeker-sensitive church vs. emerging church

Friends sometimes ask me, "What is the difference between the 'seeker-sensitive movement' of evangelical mega-churches and 'The Emerging Church,' a.k.a. The 'Emergent' Church?"  I used to think that the emerging church was an extreme version of the seeker-sensitive movement. I now realize that "seeker-sensitive" and "emergent" are very different and that the inability to tell the difference between them is extremely dangerous.  Christians in seeker-sensitive churches have no defenses against the seductions of the emerging church. They are often tempted to read emerging church books. Some of these naive folks are being sucked into the emerging church and are therefore are at risk of becoming apostates and heretics. (More about this in part 2.)  The siren song of the emerging church is particularly strong for those in Generation X or Generation Y who have grown up in a postmodern world. Very strong winds of postmodern deception are blowing at the present time. The deception is spiritual, moral, political, and economic.  If the teachings of the emerging church were known up front, many Christians would run the other way, instead of being slowly seduced. This essay will provide a profile of the nature and teachings of the emerging church.

Local mushrooms

Every local emerging church community is unique. They grow from the grassroots like mushrooms in eccentric, highly individual ways. This means that there can be considerable variety and diversity from one emergent community to another. Some of the mushrooms will give you a belly ache. Some will kill you.  An emergent community at a college campus is bound to be far more radical in its postmodernism than an emergent community in a small town in Iowa.  For these reasons, the general statements I make in this essay about the emerging church refer to a range of behavior. In some cases, one may find only a tendency towards the traits that I describe. In other cases, the behavior and ideas might be far more extreme than what I describe.  The emerging churches lack internal brakes and boundaries. Therefore, they can fly from one extreme to another, and can mutate and metastasize quickly.

Defenseless marshmallows

In spite of the dramatic difference between seeker-sensitive churches and emerging churches, it can sometimes be extraordinarily difficult to tell the difference. In part 2, I will describe the mega-churches that have one foot in the seeker-sensitive movement and one foot in the emerging church.  This is worst of all possible worlds. Seeker-sensitive ministries turn people into defenseless marshmallows. The seduction of great numbers of marshmallow people by the emergent predators can easily take place among the teeming throngs of the mega-churches. This is why the swallowing up of the evangelical Jonah by the postmodern whale can happen within a short period of time.

Two ways to spiritual shipwreck

Those who are spiritually shipwrecked by the seeker-sensitive movement are like those who become obese from eating too much cotton candy. They get too fat to keep watch while steering their "ship," and they founder upon the rocks and shoals.  In contrast, those in the emerging church are like those who are bitten by a poisonous serpent, go blind from the poison, and founder on the rocks.

Postmodernism with a Christian wrapper

A friend said that the emerging church sounds to her like the liberal churches. My response was: "Liberal churches represent modernism with a Christian wrapper. Emerging churches represent postmodernism with a Christian wrapper."  Essay #17 of A Brief history of Conservatism, which I recently published, explains why postmodernism is more poisonous to individuals, families, and cultures than is modernism. Some limp-wristed liberal modernist churches are relatively feeble in their subversion of society. In contrast, the emergents are sometimes filled with demonic energy and a serpent-like craftiness and can destroy the people, the families, the communities, and the culture fairly quickly.  Emerging churches are eager to proclaim that they practice "Christianity for a postmodern age." They are hostile to traditional evangelicalism, which they suppose to be the Christianity of modernism.  In this perception, they greatly err. Churches of liberal theology are modernist. Doctrinally orthodox evangelicals have been at war with modernism for at least a century and a half and have consistently disapproved of liberal modernist churches.  Furthermore, the emerging church is not the Christianity of postmodernism, because it is not Christian and it is not a church. It is a cult and is loaded with heresies. That is why I metaphorically called it a "poisonous serpent."  You don't have to be a Christian to join an emerging church. They are glad to fellowship with Muslims, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, New Agers, pagans, gays, witches, idol worshipers, nature worshipers, sex worshipers, and atheists. However, no doctrinally orthodox evangelicals need apply — unless they keep their mouth shut about biblical authority, and about truth and the moral laws.

Abomination

Leonard Sweet, a founding father of the emerging church, was deeply influenced by Matthew Fox's book The Cosmic Christ. This is Fox's "gospel":  "Mother earth" is being "crucified."  The human psyche is being "resurrected" through mystical spirituality.  The "cosmic christ" is healing "mother earth."  The "messianic spirit" has come to transform mankind.  All religions will become one, as their common roots in the "cosmic christ" are revealed.  There will a one-world government, a utopia, and a sexual paradise on earth.  This blasphemous "gospel" panders to left-wing political agendas, but has nothing to say about the salvation of souls. Emergents are generally indifferent to the eternal salvation of individuals, but are deeply concerned about the redemption of society through the creation of postmodern communities, through Marxist class-warfare politics, and through a "one-world" utopia.

Emergent evangelism, missions, and worship

The "cosmic christ" is now an obsolete term. Some emergents might never have heard of the "cosmic christ." However, several elements of Matthew Fox's "cosmic christ" keep recurring in emergent literature, mainly through books written by the leaders of the movement.  In evangelism and missions, emergents do not tell people to change their religious affiliations or their doctrines. They tell them to adopt a "christ"-oriented "spirituality" through contemplation, meditation, and other spiritual exercises. They tell Muslims to remain Muslims in doctrine and practice, but to meditate on "christ." They make no effort to explain who Christ is according to the Bible. These false "missionaries" and "evangelists" say nothing about how Muslim doctrine might contradict who Jesus Christ is, what he did for our salvation, and what his teachings are. They say nothing about issues of good and evil, or right and wrong.  Emergent "evangelism" to Buddhists and Hindus is just the same. Stay as you are, but meditate on "christ." How about a goddess worshiper, a nature worshiper, an idol worshiper, or a sex worshiper? How about a witch, warlock, or satanist? It is just the same. Stay as you are, but just meditate on "christ," whatever that word may mean to you.  The typical form of "evangelism" practiced by American emergents is to invite the unbeliever to "worship." The unbeliever joins the worship of a "christ" that he does not know and that the emergents have not explained to him. The object is to draw the unbeliever into the emotional and sensory experience of worship, which hopefully will induce him to join the "emergent community." After joining, the new person will hopefully absorb vague impressions about the "christ" by osmosis.  Emerging churches do not teach doctrine, so there is no agreement among them about what they are worshiping when they worship "christ." Many of them reject the virgin birth, the incarnation, the deity of Christ, and the atonement of Christ through his work on the cross. Many of them do not believe in the resurrection of Christ and his ascension into glory. No two emergents seem to agree about what the Trinity is.

Spiritual pornography

The Shack, an essentially emergent book that is popular among both seeker-sensitives and emergents, presents God the Father as a large jolly black woman. (I am not kidding.) God the Son was an affable craftsman from the Middle East. God the Holy Spirit was a small, shiny oriental woman who is semi-transparent. This not just heresy, it is spiritual pornography.  Emergents claim to have "christ-centered worship," but nothing could be further from the truth. When everyone invents their own "christ," people worship a shifting phantom. Some might worship the vile images of spiritual pornography.  We can only know Christ personally through the new birth. We can only understand who he is through the Bible, the creeds, the confessions, the systematic theology of orthodoxy, and good teaching. Once upon a time long ago, all the doctrines pertaining to Christ, his nature, and his works, were explained from the pulpit of evangelical churches. "Christ-centered worship" is the worship of the real Christ by those who know him through the new birth and who have a correct understanding about who he is.

Emergent ecumenicism

What is the point of Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus meditating on an undefined "Christ," while they stay the same in their traditional religions?  Emergents teach that all religions emerged from exactly the same deep spiritual currents.  Matthew Fox called these deep currents "the cosmic christ." His claim that all religions have the same spiritual roots can easily be refuted by historians and theologians. Emergents believe this myth, nevertheless. They want so badly to believe that the world is spiritually one that they will swallow the most fantastic conceptions.  Emergents who are unfamiliar with Matthew Fox and the "cosmic christ" sometimes fall back on New Age teachers of comparative religions — like the late Joseph Campbell, who went to great lengths to try to find a common spirituality that preceded and supported all religions. His book The Hero with a thousand faces is one example. Campbell looked to pagan myths as the common basis of all religions — which is even more absurd than Matthew Fox's theory about the "cosmic christ."  Emergents who like metaphysics favor Ken Wilbur's far-fetched theory of how everything is gradually becoming one through mystical forces of "wholeness." One aspect of Wilbur's model is his thesis of a progressive historical increase in the "level of consciousness" and the increasing depth of spirituality throughout the world. However, a better case can be made that contemporary spirituality is shallow compared to ancient spirituality. Wilbur's theory flies in the face of the chronic spiritual shallowness of the New Age movement, over which he has had an influence. Rob Bell, an emergent leader and founding pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church, recommends Wilbur in his emergent book A Velvet Elvis.  Those who have a taste for legendary yarns, mysteries, and action thrillers might favor Dan Brown, the author of The da Vinci Code. Brown claims that Gnosticism was an ancient universal religion that preceded all other religions — and that the early church was gnostic. These assertions roll three lies into one.  1) Gnosticism was a religion for a small initiated elite and therefore could not have been a universal religion for the masses of people.  2) Manuscripts of a mature Gnosticism did not appear until the second century, long after all the books of the New Testament were written. Therefore, Gnosticism could not have preceded Christianity, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, or a half-dozen eastern religions.  3) Gnosticism was a second-century heresy against a well-established, doctrinally orthodox Christianity. Mr. Brown wants us to believe the exact opposite — that the doctrinal orthodoxy of the Nicene Creed (4th century) is a heretical revision of an original Gnostic Christianity. Preposterous. Only in a postmodern age that is ignorant of history and that reinvents its own history could such humbug pass the laugh test.  The apologists of The da Vinci Code argued that it was a harmless literary diversion. It was not harmless, because it provided a Gnostic substitute for the fading "cosmic christ" of Matthew Fox. Emergents have a remarkable facility for seizing upon postmodern fads and making them their own.  Emergents longing for utopia sometimes hate the Bible because it contradicts their hopeful historical myths and their one-world ecumenical hopes. The Bible describes a lost, fallen, and divided world filled with false "christs" and false religions that are leading the multitudes to destruction. The Bible proclaims that not only is the world not evolving towards a utopia, there will be spiritual apostasy, tribulation, and apocalypse at the end of the age.  Before we complete our consideration of the "cosmic christ" and emergent ecumenicism, let us take a quick look at the dangers from the occult.

Things that go bump in the night

What is to stop an emergent in worship or spiritual meditation from tapping into a false Christ? Nothing. What is to stop him from communing with a demon and thinking the demon is the spirit of Christ? Nothing.  The unchurched and the person of another religion are unlikely to have accurate knowledge of the real Christ. He does not have the Holy Spirit of Truth dwelling in him to keep him from danger, as a born-again Christian does. Therefore, there is a risk that emergent evangelism will destroy its converts by escorting them unprotected into a labyrinth of occult darkness.  I had a friend who was an assistant to the late Dr. J.B. Rhine, (1895–1980). Rhine was once the leading American parapsychologist. My friend's job was to scientifically investigate haunted houses. I asked him if he had concluded that the "things that go bump in the night" involve some kind of being that is really out there. He said, "Yes, I think that something is out there. However, whatever it is, it is not your friend. Leave it alone and do not play with fire." My friend played with fire and got burned. His hellish depressions led to his untimely death.  I feel that the use of mystical spirituality by emergents to contact an unknown and undefined "christ" is like going into a haunted house at night to get in touch with — we know not what. Many emergents will surely get burned and be deceived.

Experience is all

In a television interview with Bill Moyers, Joseph Campbell said, "I don't think people are seeking the meaning of life, I think they are seeking the experience of being alive."   This statement might be true of an excitable 13-year-old girl, but it is certainly not true of the typical 40-year-old. By age 40, most people are disillusioned with mere experience when experience is cut off from meaning. The desire to know the meaning of life has always been universal to mankind.  In the movie Razor's Edge (1949), a defrocked priest said to Larry, a seeker of truth, "The questions you are asking have always been asked by mankind." Larry responded, "That might mean that men can't help but ask them." The ex-priest answered, "You are smarter than I thought."  The emergent church is not a seeker of truth like Larry, but has sided with the truth-impaired Joseph Campbell, who used the experience-central approach of the 13-year- old girl. Dan Kimball, an emergent leader, wrote in The Emerging Church that 1) experience influences behavior, and 2) behavior influences what you believe. This is quite true, if you are an excitable 13-year-old girl. If one is permanently trapped in the emotional immaturity of early adolescence, the emerging church must seem like a trip to Disney World.  Furthermore, Kimball's formula is false: Experience may or may not lead to actions. Moreover, if an experience is divorced from truth and meaning, it might lead to evil actions or foolish actions. In contrast, an experience that vindicates a true principle might well lead to a good outcome. However, an experience purely for the sake of experience can easily lead to dangerous delusions and painful disillusionments.  Furthermore, actions may or may not lead to beliefs. However, if they do lead to beliefs, they could lead to either true or false beliefs. In such cases, one will tend to look at the quick payoffs of an action to determine what lesson to take from it. If the payoffs of evil actions are profitable, they could lead to justifications for criminality. Kimball's formula — experience, then action, then beliefs — is a road that leads to destruction.  The most dangerous aspect of Kimball's formula is that it tempts people to say, "I had a beautiful experience. What I am doing is true to that experience. Therefore, what I am doing is right."    I knew a college kid who used very similar words to justify having sex with his girlfriend. I wonder if Kimball's books are popular at fraternity "animal houses." The difference between the drunken louts and emergents is that the louts will laugh while they are quoting Kimball. A kid who drinks himself blind is not quite as deceived as Kimball and his followers at the emerging church.

Worship equals feelings

Emergents make the experience of worship central to their service. I agree that worship should have a more central place in Protestantism, but I disagree that the experience of worship should be central.  The emergents have emphasized the sensory aspect of worship with cantles, incense, beautiful colors, stained glass, beautiful music, etc. This sensory experience is enhanced by the drama and symbols of the liturgy. These are good things in themselves. I agree that emergent "worship" is aesthetically superior to the ugly and banal "seeker-sensitive" worship. However, the seeker-sensitives are worshiping God. The emergents are not.  The pursuit of aesthetic and sensory experience need not have anything to do with worshiping God. When I go to an art museum and a symphony orchestra, and round out the day with a meal at a gourmet restaurant, I have enjoyed aesthetic and sensory experience. But it has little to do with worship.  I would actually prefer that Christian worship be made beautiful again like it was before the horrid invasion of the seeker-sensitives made worship noisy and ugly. But I would not have this happen at the expense of not understanding who we are worshiping or why. I would rather go to heaven amidst the howling din of the "music" of the ugly seeker-sensitives than go to hell amidst the esthetic beauty of the perfumed emergents.

Emergents and left-wing politics

According to Matthew Fox, Jesus of Nazareth was not "The Christ," but a man who possessed the "cosmic christ." He tells us that Buddha, Confucius, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King had the "cosmic christ." Oprah Winfrey thinks that Barack Obama is "the one" — i.e., he has the "cosmic christ." The "cosmic christs" of the 21st century are all destined to be left of center politically, because most emergents are politically left-wing.  All men everywhere have a little of the "cosmic christ," or so we are told. Through spiritual exercises and mystical spirituality, anyone can obtain "christ consciousness" and tap into this deep current of spirituality that supposedly underlies all religions.  Although contemporary emergents no longer use the words "cosmic christ" and "christ consciousness," they do a lot of contemplation, meditation, and mystical spiritual exercises to come into an experience with an undefined, but universal "christ."  The old dream of progressives and left-wingers of a utopia and a one-world government that is to be achieved through "deep ecumenicism" is still alive. "Deep ecumenicism" occurs when the people of all religions discover that the deep spiritual springs of their religions are identical to that of all other religions. At least, that is what the left-wing emergents are hoping for. Therefore, do not be surprised when the leftists rush towards the emerging church. Dozens of Hollywood stars are both far-left politically and emergents spiritually.  Every time you hear a putative evangelical leader making left-wing statements, do some research to find out if they consort with emergent leaders. The names Tony Campolo, Jim Wallis, and Richard Foster come immediately to mind. The painful reality is that a number of evangelical leaders who are not the leaders of the emerging church have been substantially influenced by emergent ideas. Doctrinal orthodoxy conflicts with some of the political and moral stances of such men. If you hear one of them talking about "social justice," an idea that came from Marxism, or if you see one adopt a pro-gay or pro-feminist stance, it is not because they are going modernist like the liberal churches — it is because they are going post-modern and emergent.  The bad boys of Generation X and Generation Y love the emerging church. As a dividend to the coming paradise, there will be a sexual paradise. The sacredness of all sex will be proclaimed and moral judgments about any sexual practices will not be tolerated. That goes for adultery, promiscuity, bigamy, concubinage, prostitution, kinky sex, and homosexual perversions. There is something disgusting about an aging emergent leader with a pony tail talking about the glory of sex to Generation X and Y guys who are already hyper-sexualized.  I can't wait to get my hands on statistics on divorce, abortion, and venereal disease among emergents. I wager that the unchurched generally tend to be more traditional, moderate, and regular in their sexual habits than emergents. When religion goes bad, it becomes Satan's playground.

Is the emerging church pagan?

The emerging church welcomes pagans. In addition, it has a few characteristics that are reminiscent of paganism.  What a local emerging church community believes might shift from month to month and year to year. All the emergents emphasize that they must change with the times. At the same time, they insist, like good postmoderns, that they will not be subject to any authority outside their emergent community concerning Truth and Morality. They will not tolerate evangelicals saying that certain things are sinful based on biblical authority.  However, they do seek for a contingent, temporary, and contemporary "truth" from their local emergent community. In like manner, tribal pagan religion emanates from the campfires of the tribe. Both paganism and the emerging church are grassroots, bottom-up affairs.  Through a process of conversation and consensus-building, each emergent church community decides what is to be true for them — at least, what is true for this month. The process by which emergents use to find the truth of the month is very different from the process of pagan shamanism.

How do they do it?

Give the devil his due. The process for reaching consensus in an emergent community is very sophisticated. It is no easy task for a community to take the place of God in determining what is right and wrong for the community. Therefore, they have a very ingenious way of playing God.  Emergent communities follow the brilliant techniques of the late M. Scott Peck for transforming informal groups into organic living entities. Every person in the group becomes an organic living part of the entity. Peck's organic entities are counterfeits for the "body of Christ" — which is to say, the church. That is why emergents insist on calling their local cults "emerging churches." However, Peck's techniques work fine with a group of atheists or a group of Satanists.  M. Scott Peck warns that one "evil" person in the group could scuttle the birth of the organic entity. How does he define "evil"? Such a person is "divisive" in the sense that he contradicts the core principles of the group which is in the process of formation. What if an outspoken, doctrinally orthodox Christian were in such a group? Would the others regard him as "divisive" — that is to say, "evil"? Yes. They would throw him out.
Emergents have absolute tolerance for brazen falsehoods, if the falsehoods are sincerely believed and are in harmony with the consensus of the group. They have an absolute intolerance for truth if it flies in the face of emergent group-think. In such an upside down world, the craziest ideas can be affirmed and the greatest evil can be praised.  What is the emergent process of discovering the truth of the month? It begins with an extended conversation among the leaders and continues as an open public conversation of the members. The conversation continues until consensus is reached. Consensus can come fairly quickly for an organic group. In contrast, decisions come very slowly, if at all, for the discredited feminist "consensus management" — a business fad of 15 or 20 years ago. Thus, emergent organic groups can do easily what eluded the business leaders.  The group-think that is possible for an emerging church community can be incredibly tight and astonishingly up-to-date. Such unity, combined with rapid change, can be a formidable power. We saw some of this unity combined with rapid change in the Obama campaign.  Whereas the real body of Christ enhances the individual, the emerging church turns individuals into programmed zombie cultists. The sophistication of the process makes people eager to throw away their individuality and become groupies. The emerging church is a soul-destroying cult of the communal type.

The historicity of emergent theology

The grassroots tribal approach for finding truth used by emerging communities has been translated into the historicism of doctrine by ostensibly evangelical scholars. Their misbegotten work has been accepted by purportedly evangelical seminaries and purportedly evangelical publishing houses. To make a long story short, the historicist scholars think that doctrines have welled up from local cultures at different times and places. Therefore, we are told that there is no unchanging doctrinal orthodoxy over the centuries. The doctrine of the atonement is currently under siege by scholars who assert that the meaning of the atonement has changed over time. I recently wrote an essay that demonstrated that the doctrine of the atonement has never changed. What the first century Jewish church believed about the atonement was identical to what the Greek and Roman fathers of the church believed. Starting with the Nicene Creed, all the great creeds and confessions affirmed the same truth.  The historicist "scholars" cherry picked the facts and played bait and switch games to support to their speculative conclusions. The played a con game. Yet they have fooled a handful of evangelical seminaries and publishing houses such as Intervarsity Press, Zondervan, and Christianity Today.  Prestigious evangelical leaders are every bit as vulnerable to seduction by the postmodern emergent movement as are ordinary Christians. The meltdown of evangelicalism is both top down and bottom up.

Contemplative prayer

One of the most amazing things about the emergents is that they have revived ancient spiritual exercises called "contemplative prayer" or "mystical prayer." I have read all the authors recommended by the emergents — namely, Thomas a Kempis, Meister Eckhart, John of the Cross, St. Theresa of Avila, Thomas Merton, and Thomas Aquinas. The objective of the contemplatives is "union with God," a goal with which I am in accord. However, I reject the Catholic contemplative idea of "deification," which is a heresy.  Contemplative prayer has been a blessing to me and was complementary to my doctrinally orthodox convictions. Then, to my horror, most of the folks I knew practicing contemplative prayer fell of the cliff into shocking heresies.  I have never been a Catholic, nor could ever be one on doctrinal grounds. However, I once had a considerable number of contemplative friends, most of whom happened to be Catholic. Most of these Catholic contemplatives went over the cliff to New Age heresy. Most of these practiced left-wing politics, some were pro-gay, and some were radical feminists of the kind who cannot accept a male gender for God.  Father Thomas Keating, a Trappist monk who was the national leader of the Catholic centering prayer movement, went over to New Age heresy and drew the entire American centering prayer movement with him. A Catholic contemplative prayer chat room I was part of went New Age and all of them accepted the heresy of "deification." They kicked me out because I remained doctrinally orthodox and pointedly said that "deification" is a heresy. However, they welcomed Buddhists and New Agers.  Some trappist monks in the monasteries have become Buddhist. Some went gay. I have met several such ruined monks.  Until the Catholic church can distance itself from New Age follies that followed in the wake of Vatican II, I suggest to my Catholic friends that they avoid contemplative prayer.

Historical and modern vulnerabilities

The 14th century Rhineland mystic Meister Eckhart fell into the heresy of pantheism. Pseudo-Denys was a Neoplatonic mystic of the Eastern church in the 6th century. He introduced the idea of "deification." His Neoplatonism is an exotic form of pantheism. Many Roman Catholic monks followed his mode of contemplation. For these reasons, many Catholic mystics down through the centuries have been prone to the heresies of pantheism, neoplatonism, and deification. A Catholic spiritual director should not launch a novice into contemplative prayer until he has first explained why these three things are heresies.  Seeker-sensitive evangelicals are vulnerable to emergent mysticism for different reasons. Seeker-sensitive pandering breeds a fuzzy narcissism, and the mystical prayer of emergents puts the emphasis on feelings and sensory experiences. The feelings- oriented narcissist will turn contemplative prayer away from God and into spiritual navel-gazing.  Seeker-sensitives are often vague on doctrine, and are just as incompetent as post-Vatican II Catholics are in recognizing heresy. I therefore recommend that those going to seeker-sensitive churches abstain from contemplative prayer.

Narcissism and relativism

Narcissism and a relativism, are characteristic traits of postmodernism. If one is essentially postmodern at heart, he is an easy mark for the emergent church.  Postmodernism is essentially a rebellion against reason and transcendent truth. The two kinds of people who cannot be reached by reason are narcissists and a certain kind of radical relativist. The narcissist is too self-absorbed to rise up beyond himself into the sphere of reason. Postmodern relativism will require a little more explanation. 

Nietzsche and postmodern relativism

Friederich Nietzsche (1844–1900), the father of postmodernism, created a new kind of radical relativism.  In philosophy, there is a horizontal axis and a vertical axis. At one pole of the horizontal axis, the realist says, "Things are really out there." At the other pole of the axis, the idealist says, "Things are out there only if man is conscious of them." The vertical axis has metaphysical realism at one pole, and nominalism at the other. The metaphysical realist says, "Metaphysical truth and universal truth really exist and maintain their existence independently of whether we acknowledge them." The nominalist says. "Such universals exist only in the human mind."  Doctrinally orthodox Christianity is realist on both vertical and horizontal axes. Reason cannot flourish apart from the same dual realism. Therefore, Christianity and reason are allies that are arrayed against postmodernism and irrationality.   Nietzsche's early career was devoted to proving that all metaphysical realism is a fraud. He claimed that the philosophers had no grounds for a metaphysical realm. He saw them as con-men who were motivated by hubris and who invented new realms to dazzle their followers and gain power. He began his attack against the philosopher Plato and slowly worked his way to an attack on Christianity.  Modernism began in the 18th century with skepticism about metaphysics. Postmodern began in the 19th century with Nietzsche's fierce and bitter war against metaphysics. However, in due time, Nietzsche also turned against both the idealists and the nominalists and brought all four poles of philosophy to destruction.  Into this great void came nihilism and Nietzsche's postmodernism. I have dealt with 19th century nihilism in another essay. Nietzsche's postmodernism was a combination of  radical narcissism and radical relativism. Radical narcissism is "solipsism" — notion that I am everything that exists. Unlike the idealist who says, "Things are out there if man is conscious of them," the solipsist says, "Things are out there if I will them to be out there."  Radical relativism holds that there is no authority outside myself for truth, morals, or values. The radical narcissism and radical relativism of postmodernism cannot be reached by an appeal to reason, as we shall see below in "talking to a postmodern."  The moral of the story is that one's independent powers of reason must be stripped away in order for one to be absorbed by postmodernism, including the postmodern emerging church community.

Talking to a postmodern

A postmodern friend of mine said to me, "When a court or a legislature declares a gay union to be a marriage, it is a marriage no matter what your religion says."  I attempted to bypass his ideology and his bias against Christianity with an appeal to reason. I pointed out that if a court declared that a dog is a cat, the dog would not turn into a cat. The dog would remain a dog. In like manner, if a court declares a gay union is a marriage that would not turn it into a marriage. It would remain a gay union.  Why do these labels matter? Each species has its own label so we can tell them apart. If some class of things has a unique nature, it is part of a species. The unique nature is what philosophers call "the thing in itself."  Marriage and gay unions do not have the same essential nature. Therefore, they are different species. Each species must have its own label to avoid confusion about the "thing in itself." Rational thought and communication are destroyed when someone arbitrarily switches the labels. When a court decrees that a gay union is a marriage it switches the labels.  My friend answered, "When a court or a legislature declares a gay union to be a marriage, it is a marriage no matter what your religion says." None of my concepts had penetrated his solipsism or radical relativism. Reason and logic bounced off his postmodern armor like a pea from a peashooter bouncing off a tank. His repetition of his opening line was Niezschean. "It is so because I say it is so."  I told him that he is postmodern and therefore is immune to an appeal to reason. Therefore, an authentic conversation is impossible.

Deprogramming emergents

The cult deprogrammer who specializes in emergents will not be able to appeal to reason, just as I could not reason with my postmodern friend. The way the gospel was once preached to pagans might have more success. The pagans are not rational and worship idols. My friend worships the idol of himself. Emergents worship the tribal idols of their cult.  How do we inoculate young people from falling into the emerging church? 1) We start teaching them the fundamentals of the doctrinal orthodoxy of Christianity; and 2) We introduce them to metaphysical realism in philosophy and theology in the hopes they will develop their powers of independent reason.

© Fred Hutchison
 

Back to the Emerging Church Menu

or
Back to the Top

                        
Concerned Nazarenes

“Emerging Theology” Is An Oxymoron
Comments on Jon Middendorf’s  Emerging Theology” M7 Conference Session Audio
(“Jon Middendorf is a pastor at OKC First Church of the Nazarene, specifically overseeing the Kaleo Community congregation there.)
by Sandy Simpson, 5/8/09
(from their website @ http://concernednazarenes.org/page9.php)

It is very important to start this article by pointing out that (1) the term “Emerging Theology” is oxymoronic and (2) a better term for what Middendorf is repeating from the teachings of Brian McLaren, Leonard Sweet, Eddie Gibbs, Ryan Bolger and many other Emergents should have been called “Emerging Beliefs” or “Emerging Orthopraxy”.

The reason the term “Emerging Theology” is an oxymoron is that true Biblical Theology is not “emerging” but continuing. The true body of Christ is not making up new “theologies” to suit the times or postmodern thought. Postmodernism has its origins in a Satanic worldview practiced by the devil himself. In fact we need to reeducate people to think Biblically, objectively and to believe in objective truth. The Church is to hold to the teachings of Jesus Christ, the Apostles and Prophets in the written Word of God (2 Thes. 2:15), which makes up true Theology. We are not to add (Pr. 30:6), subtract (Rev. 22:18-19), go beyond (1 Cor. 4:6) or run ahead of the written Word (2 John 1:9). But that is exactly what Emerging Church (EC) leaders are doing, including Middendorf. Read my article on how the Emerging Church is teaching against some of the core doctrines of the Church and adding things that the Bible does not teach or promote. Middendorf bought into the EC paradigm and recommends a number of their materials in this session. So right from the outset, beginning with the title of Middendorf’s M7 session, his teaching is unbiblical.

Synopsis: There was no theology presented in this lecture, per se. The overriding theme was that the EC wants to help Christians “find God in the world” and for them to “look like Jesus”. Sounds good but what does that mean? Does that mean going back to Roman Catholic liturgy and the Eucharist which Middendorf promotes? Does it mean incorporating mystical and New Age practices into the churches? Does that look like Jesus? I think not.

The tactic of any cultic groups is to isolate and indoctrinate. Middendorf is using both those techniques to secure followers in the Nazarene denomination for the Emerging Church. He uses isolation in two major ways. He first isolates by not allowing true “conversation” even though that is the stated goal of the EC. He does not want to listen to true criticism of the movement and subtly, and not so subtly, puts dissenters down by using terms like those with “ugly questions” and those who “carve and manipulate” people. It is clear, from his teachings in this session and others, that he is not able to argue his case with clarity and in fact claims in this session “it feels funny to be the person up here trying to nail down then what we mean when we say emerging or emergent theology”. Maybe because he never really defines any theology in this session and the EC has no real definitions on where they stand because that would necessarily alienate people. He further isolates people by getting them involved in a close relationship with another EC church and the Roman Catholic Church (RCC), which is not even Biblical Christianity at all. So all the people following the Middendorf model are put in close personal contact with others who are exchanging the same views over and over again while claiming they are having an open conversation. But if dissent is not allowed then it can never be a true conversation but rather indoctrination. This is what is interesting because while the EC advocates claim their movement is about orthopraxy it is really about repeating the same tired teachings of the EC over and over again until people accept the false ideas, which is classic brainwashing. So while claiming to not have an emphasis on doctrine, it is just the opposite. The emphasis is always on the false teachings of the movement restated, and when you try to change the belief system of people you are teaching doctrine, pure and simple, no matter what you call it. No, they are not about Biblical doctrine; they are about repeating false doctrines endlessly.

2Pe 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.

1 Tim. 6: 3-5 If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, he is conceited and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain.

Middendorf is not being a watchman for the sheep of the Nazarene denomination but is instead guiding false teachers and false doctrines into the Nazarene churches and making excuses for them while pretending it will do no harm.

Ga 2:4-5 This matter arose because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you.

ze 33:6 But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet to warn the people and the sword comes and takes the life of one of them, that man will be taken away because of his sin, but I will hold the watchman accountable for his blood.’

The Following is from the transcript of the M7 session:

Here are the 9 core practices of emerging churches in the book Middendorf is referencing:.
1. Identifying with Jesus (and his way of life
2. Transforming secular space (overcoming the secular/sacred split)
3. Living as community (not strangers in proximity at a church service)
4. Welcoming the stranger (radical and gentle hospitality that is inclusive)
5. Serving with generosity (not serving the institution called "church," but people)
6. Participating as producers (not widgets in the church program)
7. Creating as created beings (this is a great chapter!)
8. Leading as a body (beyond control and the CEO model of leadership)
9. Merging ancient and contemporary spiritualities.



 

Back to the Emerging Church Menu

or
Back to the Top

THE EMERGING CHURCH:
THE 21ST CENTURY FACE OF NEW EVANGELICALISM
Sep/17/09 07:24 Filed in: Emerging Church
September 17, 2009 (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article) -
(The following article is taken from “What is the Emerging Church”, available from Way of Life Literature. 485 pages, $19.95)
 

The emerging church is simply the twenty-first century face of New Evangelicalism.

Andy Crouch calls the emerging church “post-evangelicalism.” He says:

“The emerging movement is a protest against much of evangelicalism as currently practiced. It is post-evangelical in the way that neo-evangelicalism (in the 1950s) was post-fundamentalist. It would not be unfair to call it postmodern evangelicalism” (“The Emergent Mystique,” Christianity Today, Nov. 2004).

The late Robert Webber also observed the association between the emerging church and the neo-evangelicalism of the 1940s and 1950s. He taught that the emerging church is the latest of four movements that have occurred within evangelicalism since 1946, the first being neo-evangelicalism.

“The new or neo-evangelicalism, as it was first called, broke away from its roots in the fundamentalism of the first half of the century. The new evangelicalism regarded fundamentalism as ‘anti-intellectual, anti-social action, and anti-ecumenical.’ Influential leaders called for engagement with philosophy and the intellectual ideas of the day, to the recovery of a robust involvement with social issues, and to a new form of ecumenical cooperation, especially in evangelism. ... The new evangelical theology distanced itself from fundamentalist biblicism ... They wanted to spar with the best, engage secularists and liberals on their own turf, and create institutions of higher learning that would command respect” (Listening to the Beliefs of Emerging Churches, p. 11).

The intimate association between New Evangelicalism and the emerging church is witnessed by Christianity Today. This magazine was founded by Billy Graham and his friends in 1956 as a mouthpiece for the New Evangelical movement. Today it is a mouthpiece for the emerging church. A section of their web site, called “The Emergence of Emergent,” is dedicated to it, and they have published many positive articles dealing with it, including several by Brian McLaren. Marshall Shelley, vice president of Christianity Today, said of Spencer Burke’s An Heretic’s Guide to Eternity, which is foreworded by McLaren: “Spencer is a winsome walking companion for those who find traditional dogma too narrow. It’s a thoughtful conversation” (http://www.spencerburke.com/pdf/presskit.pdf).

The emerging church is the natural progression of New Evangelicalism. Let’s go back a half century and consider some of its history.

The founders of New Evangelicalism grew up in fundamentalist homes as the fundamentalist-modernist controversy of the first half of the twentieth century was winding down. They were the proverbial new generation. “And also all that generation were gathered unto their fathers: and there arose another generation after them, which knew not the LORD, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel” (Judges 2:10).

In the first half of the 20th century, evangelicalism in America was largely synonymous with fundamentalism. George Marsden (Reforming Fundamentalism) says, “There was not a practical distinction between fundamentalist and evangelical: the words were interchangeable” (p. 48). When the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) was formed in 1942, for example, participants included such fundamentalist leaders as Bob Jones, Sr., John R. Rice, Charles Woodbridge, Harry Ironside, and David Otis Fuller.

By the mid-1950s, though, a clear break between separatist fundamentalists and non-separatist evangelicals occurred. This was occasioned largely by the ecumenical evangelism of Billy Graham. The separatists dropped out of the NAE. The terms evangelicalism and fundamentalism began “to refer to two different movements” (William Martin, A Prophet with Honor, p. 224).

The sons and grandsons of the old-time evangelical-fundamentalist preachers determined to create a “New Evangelicalism.” They would not be fighters; they would be diplomats, positive in their emphasis rather than militant. They would not be restricted by a separationist mentality.

The very influential Harold Ockenga claimed to have coined the term “new evangelical” in 1948. He was pastor of Park Street Church in Boston, founder of the National Association of Evangelicals, co-founder and first president of Fuller Seminary, first president of the World Evangelical Fellowship, president of Gordon College, on the board of directors for the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, chairman of the Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, and one-time editor of Christianity Today.

Following is how Ockenga defined New Evangelicalism:

“Neo-evangelicalism was born in 1948 in connection with a convocation address which I gave in the Civic Auditorium in Pasadena. While reaffirming the theological view of fundamentalism, this address REPUDIATED ITS ECCLESIOLOGY AND ITS SOCIAL THEORY. The ringing call for A REPUDIATION OF SEPARATISM AND THE SUMMONS TO SOCIAL INVOLVEMENT received a hearty response from many evangelicals. The name caught on and spokesmen such as Drs. Harold Lindsell, Carl F.H. Henry, Edward Carnell, and Gleason Archer supported this viewpoint. We had no intention of launching a movement, but found that the emphasis attracted widespread support and exercised great influence. Neo-evangelicalism... DIFFERENT FROM FUNDAMENTALISM IN ITS REPUDIATION OF SEPARATISM AND ITS DETERMINATION TO ENGAGE ITSELF IN THE THEOLOGICAL DIALOGUE OF THE DAY. IT HAD A NEW EMPHASIS UPON THE APPLICATION OF THE GOSPEL TO THE SOCIOLOGICAL, POLITICAL, AND ECONOMIC AREAS OF LIFE. Neo-evangelicals emphasized the restatement of Christian theology in accordance with the need of the times, the REENGAGEMENT IN THE THEOLOGICAL DEBATE, THE RECAPTURE OF DENOMINATIONAL LEADERSHIP, AND THE REEXAMINATION OF THEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS SUCH AS THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN, THE UNIVERSALITY OF THE FLOOD, GOD'S METHOD OF CREATION, AND OTHERS.” (Harold J. Ockenga, foreword to The Battle for the Bible by Harold Lindsell).

Regardless of who coined the term “New Evangelical,” it is certain that it described the mood of positivism and non-militancy that characterized that generation.

Ockenga and the new generation of evangelicals determined to abandon a militant Bible stance. Instead, they would pursue dialogue, intellectualism, non-judgmentalism, and appeasement. They refused to leave the denominations, even though they were permeated with theological modernism, determining to change things from within. The New Evangelical would dialogue with those who teach error. The New Evangelical would meet the proud humanist and the haughty liberal on their own turf with human scholarship rather than follow the humble path of being counted a fool for Christ’s sake by standing simply upon the Bible. New Evangelical leaders also determined to start a “rethinking process” whereby the old paths were to be continually reassessed in light of new goals, methods, and ideology.

New Evangelicalism further called for a social aspect to the gospel -- “a new emphasis upon the application of the gospel to the sociological, political, and economic areas of life” (Ockenga, foreword to the Battle for the Bible).

New Evangelicalism rejected the old traditional standards of separation from the world, and the result has been the strange rock & roll Christian culture.

In 1978, Richard Quebedeux wrote The Worldly Evangelicals, documenting the dramatic changes that were already occurring within evangelicalism a mere thirty years after the onslaught of the spirit of “Newism.” He said:

“Evolutionary theory, in a theistic context, is now taken for granted by many evangelical scientists. ... Biblical criticism has now made inroads in almost all evangelical colleges and seminaries. In fact, a few evangelical biblical scholars actually stand to the left of their liberal counterparts on some points. ... it is becoming more and more difficult to recruit young pastors who have not been deeply influenced both by biblical criticism and by the behavioral sciences. ... Prior to the 60s, virtually all the seminaries and colleges associated with the neo-evangelicals and their descendants adhered to the total inerrancy understanding of biblical authority (at least they did not vocally express opposition to it). But it is a well-known fact that a large number, if not most, of the colleges and seminaries in question now have faculty who no longer believe in total inerrancy. ... The position affirming that Scripture is inerrant or infallible in its teaching on matters of faith and conduct, but not necessarily in all its assertions concerning history and the cosmos, is gradually becoming ascendant among the most highly respected evangelical theologians. ... Indeed, the new theological heroes of the evangelical left are Karl Barth, Emil Brunner, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer... Clearly and undisputedly, the evangelical left is far closer to Bonhoeffer, Brunner, and Barth than to Hodges and Warfield on the inspiration and authority of Scripture” (The Worldly Evangelicals, pp. 15, 30, 88, 100).

Quebedeaux observed that “the wider culture has had a profound impact on the evangelical movement as a whole” (p. 115). Though Quebedeaux didn’t make the connection, this is a direct result of the repudiation of separation. He said:

“In the course of establishing their respectability in the eyes of the wider society, the evangelicals have become harder and harder to distinguish from other people. Upward social mobility has made the old revivalistic taboos dysfunctional. ... the COCKTAILS became increasingly difficult to refuse. Evangelical young people LEARNED HOW TO DANCE AND OPENLY ‘GROOVED’ ON ROCK MUSIC. ... And evangelical magazines and newspapers began REVIEWING PLAYS AND MOVIES. ... The Gallup Poll is correct in asserting that born-again Christians ‘believe in a strict moral code.’ BUT THAT STRICTNESS HAS BEEN CONSIDERABLY MODIFIED DURING THE LAST FEW YEARS … DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE are becoming more frequent and acceptable among evangelicals of all ages, even in some of their more conservative churches. … Some evangelical women are taking advantage of ABORTION on demand. Many younger evangelicals occasionally use PROFANITY in their speech and writing . . . Some of the recent evangelical sex-technique books assume that their readers peruse and view PORNOGRAPHY on occasion, and they do. Finally, in 1976 there emerged a fellowship and information organization for practicing evangelical LESBIANS AND GAY MEN and their sympathizers. There is probably just as high a percentage of gays in the evangelical movement as in the wider society. Some of them are now coming out of the closet, distributing well-articulated literature, and demanding to be recognized and affirmed by the evangelical community at large. ... It is profoundly significant that evangelicals, even the more conservative among them, have ACCEPTED THE ROCK MODE. This acceptance, obviously, indicates a further chapter in the death of self-denial and world rejection among them. ... When young people were converted in the Jesus movement, many of them simply did not give up their former habits, practices, and cultural attitudes--DRINKING, SMOKING, AND CHARACTERISTIC DRESS AND LANGUAGE. ... Young evangelicals drink, but so do conservative evangelicals like Hal Lindsey and John Warwick Montgomery (who is a member of the International Wine and Food Society). ... But EVEN MARIJUANA, now virtually legal in some areas of the United States, is not as forbidden among young evangelicals as it once was. A few of them, particularly the intellectuals, do smoke it on occasion...” (The Worldly Evangelicals, pp. 14, 16, 17, 118, 119).

When light associates with darkness, when truth associates with error, the result is always the corruption of light and truth. “Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners” (1 Cor. 15:33), and, “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump” (1 Cor. 5:6; Gal. 5:9).

Quebedeaux observed that evangelicals were fluid in their doctrinal convictions, moving toward “the left”:

“In the present ‘identity confusion’ among evangelicals, MANY ARE IN TRANSITION, moving from one stance to another (GENERALLY FROM RIGHT TO CENTER OR LEFT)” (The Worldly Evangelicals, p. 27).

Over the past 30 years since Quebedeaux published The Worldly Evangelicals, the apostasy within evangelicalism has continued to spread and exercise its corrupt leaven in countless ways.

It is obvious that the emerging church is not something new. It is just another wrinkle in New Evangelicalism’s deeply compromised history and the latest wrinkle of end-time apostasy.

Those who reject “separatism” feel that they are only rejecting “extremism,” but in reality they are rejecting the God-ordained means of protection from spiritual pollution.

(For more about this see our books What Is the Emerging Church and New Evangelicalism: Its History, Characteristics, and Fruit, available from Way of Life Literature.)


 

Back to the Emerging Church Menu

or
Back to the Top