December 23, 2008
The other morning my wife and I were glancing through the mail when she asked me what Bible "The Voice" was. I said I didn't know, so we read the fine print. It was listed in a Christian Supply store flyer. It turns out to be a New Testament translation utilizing some of the leading voices of the emergent church, and its target audience is "twenty somethings" and others.
Immediately the alarm bells go off! Who are the emergent church voices and what theology do they subscribe to?
According to Wikipedia, the emerging church (sometimes referred to as the emergent movement) is a Christian movement of the late 20th and early 21st century that crosses a number of theological boundaries. What those involved mostly agree upon is that they are disillusioned with the organized and institutional church and support the deconstruction of modern Christian worship, modern evangelism and the nature of modern Christian community.
They are looking for new and innovative ways to worship, and among other things, occasionally incorporate mysticism. Also, while many evangelicals emphasize eternal salvation, most in the emerging church emphasis the here and now, and the need to create a kingdom of Heaven on Earth.
Additionally, here are some specific doctrinal issues they take exception to:
· Emphasizing the letter of Paul while ignoring the Gospels of Jesus.
· Condemning homosexuality and abortion.
· The Bible as absolute.
· Traditional translations of the Bible vs. more modern versions dealing with the issues of our day.
Let's stop here and address some of this stuff. First of all, the emergent church's emphasis on the here and now to create Heaven on Earth is nothing new. It's just another form of the amillenial/post-millenial doctrine of the social gospel. The driving force behind the introduction of the social gospel was the eschatological, or end times, views of those involved. Nearly all were amillenial or post-millenial. The former believe that they are living in a symbolic 1000 year time period in which Christ was ruling from Heaven, satan was bound, and they are God's workers appointed to bring about a kingdom on earth worthy of Christ. Post-millenialists also believed they were in the millenium, and their goal was to restore the earth to its Eden-like state in order for Christ to return from Heaven to rule over His earthly kingdom. Amazing!! What translation are they reading?!!
This shameful social gospel not only promotes "another gospel", it helps prepare a kingdom contrary to the teachings of scripture. Philippians 3:20 says, "For our citizenship is in Heaven, from whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ....." He will return from Heaven (John 14:3) to "rapture", or catch, those who believe in Him (His bride) up into the clouds and take them to Heaven (I Thesselonians 4:17). The kingdom that remains on the earth will be the kingdom of the anti-Christ until the Lord's triumphant return and subsequent 1000 year reign (Revelation 20).
Also consistent with its amellenial/post-millenial beginnings, the efforts of the emerging or social gospel are earthbound in their attempted restoration of the Kingdom of God.
Eugene Peterson has infiltrated that heresy into his "Message Bible", "God didn't go to all the trouble of sending His Son merely to point an accusing finger, telling the world how bad it was. He came to help, to put the world right again." (A perversion of John 3:17).
Bob Bell, in his book, Velvet Elvis, reflects the "fix the earth" eschatology of nearly all emergent church leaders. "Salvation is the entire universe being brought back into harmony with its maker. This has huge implications for how people present the message of Jesus. Yes, Jesus can come into our hearts. But we can join a movement that is wide and as big as the universe itself. Rocks and trees and birds and swamps and ecosystems. God's desire is to restore all of it....the goal isn't escaping this world, but making this world the kind of place God can come to. And God is re-making us into the kind of people who can do this kind of work."
Where do they get this stuff?! It certainly is NOT consistent with the teachings of Jesus.
Now, let's touch on a few of the other issues they take exception to:
Concerning the letters of Paul - Most social/emergent folks don't like them because of their clarity toward issues that are being debated today. (Marriage, sexuality, etc.) I remember a time back in the 70's when I had a discussion with a Lutheran pastor about how literal we should look at scripture. His comment, which I've never forgotten, was that "Many of Paul's teachings are outdated today. We need to move into more modern teaching." Blasphemy!! (And this was thirty years ago!!) My response simply was, "Where do you draw the line? What guidelines do we use when picking and choosing?" No answer is necessary.
In dealing with homosexuality and abortion - I know these two issues are front-and-center constantly, but they have become the leading topics of division in the church today. As for the emergents, they support gay marriage and the homosexual lifestyle. In an article just released in the December 15th Newsweek Magazine, the author(s) do their best to justify gay marriage through the use of scripture.
Let me quote you one small excerpt.
"The Bible does condemn gay male sex in a handful of passages. Twice Leviticus refers to sex between men as an "abomination" (KJV), but these are throw-away lines in a a peculiar text given over to codes for living in the ancient Jewish world." It goes on to say, "Our modern understanding of the world has surpassed its prescriptions."
Can you imagine? I can only refer to 2 Timothy 4:3-4, "For a time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths." (NIV)
In wrapping up in this article, except for the "obscure" passages in Leviticus, no other specific scripture is mentioned. Somehow they missed Romans 1:26-27 and Jude 7, just to name a few, that specifically point to the sin of homosexuality. I mourn for these folks and need to pray for them.
I could go on and on, but you get the picture. Simply put, the emerging church movement of today is distorting and/or altering the very words that we Christians hold as divinely inspired. Let's look at 1 John 2:24. It says, "See that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father."(NIV)
In closing, I just want to say that some parts of scripture are difficult for me because they go against my sinful nature. But that doesn't give me the right to change or alter it to fit my lifestyle. Can you imagine? "The Bible According to Red"? Heaven forbid!!!
I know that many out there think of folks like me as an "old wineskin", and at my age I even qualify as a "dear one". No matter! I will not, nor will I stand by quietly and watch our Lord's purposes being distorted by anyone. I pray that each of you also will hold on to the truths of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
Until next time,
Red