A Warning to Emergent Blogs
This particular post will be a little longer and more in depth than usual. Over these past 8 months I have tried to understand the emergent movement which is difficult seeing they abhor labels and creeds and they are quite articulate in the arena of the philosophical. I have read many emergent blogs and I have participated in several comment sections of about six different blog forums which identify themselves as emergent. There is now a kind of movement within the movement to disassociate with the term emergent which is designed to let everyone know you even reject the label emergent because you happen to be even more free than they are. Great.
Well this week I was commenting on an emergent blog named “Jesus Creed” overseen by a brother named Scot McKnight, a nice and seemingly orthodox believer who has authored several books and speaks at some of these emergent meetings. He is well known throughout emergent-dom. The post was about the rightness of labeling people. What I will share is of the utmost importance, and it cannot get any more serious. Remember this blog is a little more conservative than many of the emergent forums. Below is the transcript of my participation as well as a woman named Vynette and McKnight himself.
Well this week I was commenting on an emergent blog named “Jesus Creed” overseen by a brother named Scot McKnight, a nice and seemingly orthodox believer who has authored several books and speaks at some of these emergent meetings. He is well known throughout emergent-dom. The post was about the rightness of labeling people. What I will share is of the utmost importance, and it cannot get any more serious. Remember this blog is a little more conservative than many of the emergent forums. Below is the transcript of my participation as well as a woman named Vynette and McKnight himself.
****************************
ME - Labels are used, however inaccurately, to describe the theologies that the labelee is purported to espouse. I suppose that they began in the Bible. Evil beasts, slow bellies, the circumcision, enemies of the cross, carnal, dogs, evil workers, the concision, and a few more.
I agree they must be prayerfully tempered and led of the Holy Spirit, but when a man openly teaches, for instance, that Jesus was not born of a virgin he is a heretic (another Biblical label although used many times inaccurately). When a man teaches most of the orthodox doctrines of salvation but is pro-choice and believes homosexual acts are not sinful he is at least a liberal ( a non-Biblical label that at least indicates a problem). Labels have been used as vicious cannonballs to hurt people, but I submit there is a loving informational ministry for them to perhaps “mark” a person’s teachings and to warn that person of his error. The fleshly aspect of labels is the “scalp counting” within the church. The exact balance is very difficult, and I again would submit that we only come forth with a negative label after a complete dialogue with the person to whom we are labeling.
Thanks all you slow bellies! (sorry, satire!)
(one commentor questioned the word heretic)
ME - The word “heretic” is a Biblical word and in the context it refers to someone who teaches things at discord with the core teachings of salvation (i.e. salvation by works). I personally abhor the careless and profuse usage of labels that are not sufficiently documented and in which the personal attack overshadows any legitimate and humble Biblical question. Even in the face of growing rejection of historically accepted salvation particulars we must remain lovingly anchored in our confronting as well as that rarest of all attributes, humility.
McKNIGHT - Henry,
Where do you find “heretic” in the Bible?
ME - The heretic reference is Ti.3:10, but false teachers or false apostles and others can just as easily be interchanged. My point is that there does come a time when certain teachers throughout church history so strayed from Biblical truth that they and their teachings must be humbly labeled.
That does not excuse the misuse and “rush to label” spirit that is prevalent today. Additionally it seems that the labeler many times enjoys a fleshly sense of bravado along with the accolades of his commentors when he is “bold” enough to label someone with a descriptive tag. Rarely have I seen a thoughtful, heavy hearted spirit when someone is labeled, there usually is a joyful dance on his theological grave.
(after several other comments I added this)
ME - One aspect about the label machine is the piling on that is common in the great white throne bolgasphere. If someone happens to see compromise in (for instance) Rick Warren’s approach, many times some blogs become candid camera for everything he does, even if it does not reflect on the issue but is in someway negative about him and can be erroneously used to pile on. Personal shortcomings are used as evidence for doctrinal error.
The recent example of Pastor Haggard’s sad and sinful situation was used by some blogs to prove the unscriptural nature of the mega-church. Did they call for prayer and fasting for him and his family, or did they exhibit an obvious effervescence because one that they disagreed with fell? That, my friends, is sin by any definition. So does that mean that if MacArthur fell morally we could say that Calvinism is somehow disproved? The vicious self righteousness that masquerades as “watchman” ministries is counter-productive to any worthwhile doctrinal correction that is sometimes needed within the loving confines of the church.
(I have come across this woman Vynette before and she quotes me from a past confrontation)
VYNETTE - I have been labelled on many blogs and I raise no objection as long as there is a prior full and frank dialogue about the topic in question. The substance of my comments is seldom addressed, however, and this is the typical response I receive:
“Vynette is an obvious heretic and should be immediately banned from comments. She is promoting the spirit of anti christ and the Holy Spirit is grieved.”
There is one commentor on this thread who will recognise these words but how do others feel about these tactics? Are these labels justifiable if a person, such as myself, claims that there is no scriptural evidence for doctrines such as the Miraculous Incarnation and the Trinity?
Should these claims be dismissed out of hand or should they be investigated?
ME - You are referring to me, Vynette, and you openly teach that Jesus was not born of a virgin and that he was not divine. I call you a heretic based upon your denial of the clear teachings of the Word of God, and the Bible declares that anyone that denies the deity of Christ (that he has come in the flesh) is the spirit of anti-christ.
Some blogs have rightfully blocked you from presenting your heresies. I would recommend others do likewise. Jesus, the divine Son of God, stands ready to forgive and save you if you will seek Him. I pray for you.
McKNIGHT - Henry and Vynette,
You are welcome to engage one another on another site, but this post is not about specifics but about labels.
ME - I will respectfully bow out, Scot, but I believe that labels without specifics was the problem. Thank you for the forum.
*******************************
Can you imagine that McKnight said we can engage one another somewhere else, and with that statement reveals the exceedingly serious flaw with the emergent dialogue. They encourage conversation with anyone including the spirit of anti-christ. I really feel bad for people like McKnight who is probably on the conservative wing of the emergent conclave, but even he will not directly confront, much less rebuke, a person who has obviously come under the influence of the spirit of anti-christ. Jim Bublitz of the blog “Old Truths” blocked Vynette as soon as he realized what she was saying and I’m sure she was rebuked and blocked on many sites. But not Jesus Creed and a handful of other emergent leaning blogs I’m familiar with.
Now here is the question, what does the Bible say to do with such people, and do we believe the Bible more than our good intentions? I do not question Brother McKnight’s good intentions, but good intentions can be the enemy of the Word of God. Our hearts and lives should seek to be in concert with the Word of God which is absolute, not our good intentions which are subjective at best and sinful at worst. So let us examine the clear and unmistakable teaching of the New Testament concerning giving platform for serous error.
I Cor.16:22 - If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.
This is referring to those who openly reject the Lord Jesus Christ, not just a person who deals with some doubts.
II Cor.11:4 - For if he that comes preaches another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if you receive another spirit which you have not received, or another gospel which you have not accepted, you seem to give him a place.
II Cor.11:19 - For you suffer fools gladly, seeing yourselves are wise.
This is a rebuke from Paul concerning the Corinthian practice of letting heretics speak. And Paul hits the nail on the head when he sarcastically implies that they allow this discourse because they consider themselves smart. Are you listening emergent?
Gal.1:8-10 - But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that you have received, let him be accursed. For do I now persuade men or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I yet pleased men I should not be the servant of Christ.
A firm rebuke of any believers that would hear a false gospel from a person who God says is accursed. Additionally Paul says if you allow dialogue with them even to please them, you are not the servant of Christ. Strong and clear, no?
Gal.2:4-5 - And because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privately to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage. To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
Paul doesn’t give a forum to false brethren who snuck in without notice. How then can it ever be right to invite false brethren in openly and allow them a place at the dialogue table? The answer - it never is.
Eph.5:10-11 - Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
Again interaction with the works of darkness is confined to rebuke, not dialogue. The works Paul mentions would surely include heretical teachings.
I Tim.1:19,20 - Holding faith and a good conscience, which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck. Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan that they learn not to blaspheme.
Here Paul doesn’t just label, he names the men personally. And instead of dialogue with them, he sends to dialogue with Satan which he prays will lead them to repentance. When was the last time you heard a preacher get up in the pulpit and in his prayer he delivers someone by name unto Satan hoping for their salvation? Today that would be considered hate speech.
II Tim.2:14-18 - Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit but to the subverting of the hearers. Study to show yourself approved unto God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings, for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as a cancer; of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already, and overthrowing the faith of some.
Again Paul says don’t trust dialogue, trust God’s Word. His prophecy of profane and vain babblings has been fully realized in our generation, and these detestable open forums will, as Paul put it, overthrow the faith of some. I would surmise that there are many people like Vynette who once were evangelical in their beliefs but have now through dialogue become shipwrecked. Can you not understand what God is saying and why, all you emergents, or do you not even care?
II Tim.4:14-15 - Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil, the Lord reward him according to his works. Of whom be aware also, for he has greatly withstood our words.
What was the great evil Alexander did to Paul? He resisted the gospel and probably convinced others to reject Christ. Paul not only did not have a friendly cup of coffee with a warm exchange of ideas, he asked that God would punish him.
Ti.1:15-16 - Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure, but even their mind and conscience is defiled. They profess that they know God, but in their works they deny Him, being abominable and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.
Let me address the Rick Warren doctrine of cooperation with unbelievers and liberal professing Christians to do good works. God says all their so called good works are reprobate, and to God they are abominable and disobedient. Same thing applies to a cooperative dialogue with the same people. Oh the good intentions of man, again, the enemy of the Word of God.
Ti.3:9-11 - But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain. A man that is a heretic after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing hat he that is such is subverted, and sins, being condemned of himself.
If God says quit arguing (striving) about the law, how much more about who Jesus is? The inerrancy of Scripture? The virgin birth? Salvation by grace through faith? And here Paul labels someone who teaches error as a heretic and that not only should we avoid dialogue, we should rebuke him twice and then reject him completely. These verses are the overarching Biblical principle that reveal the unscriptural and destructive nature of the emergent dialogue format.
II Pet.2:1-3 - But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who secretly will bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their shameful ways, by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with false words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingers not; and their damnation is not asleep.
These false teachers came in secretly, today their damnable heresies are gladly welcomed as a viable topic for thoughtful people. And again Peter says this type of teaching will lead many away from Christ. How many people do think someone like Vynette has led away from Jesus? And Mr. McKinght, you are a partaker of her evil deeds. Have you no conscience even about letting the most blatant and obvious heresies go unchallenged and even blocked? Your well meaning attempt to get people to think has become a conduit for the evil one. Do you care?
I Jn.218-19 - Little children, it is the last time: and as you have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
I Jn.4:1-3 - Beloved, believe not every spirit, but test the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know you the Spirit of God; Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God. And every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof you have heard that it should come, and even now already is it in the world.
How can a preacher not only refuse to recognize that spirit, but actually give place to it. Do you think God winks at allowing that spirit on your blogs? Don’t you understand you grieve the precious Holy Spirit which is extremely serious business. God doesn’t care about your good intentions, obedience is better than sacrifice! And the thousands of people who see how you conduct your dialogue begin to emulate that style and in so doing they are poisoned in their faith. We should never converse with the spirit of antichrist no matter how pleasant they are, they are blasphemers. You have become pioneers of shipwrecked faiths. Will you not even consider some of these verses and fast and seek the Lord, or perhaps as Paul said you have become wise in your own eyes.
Jude 4 - For there are certain men crept in secretly, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into uncleanness, and denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Jude 8 - But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.
Jude says that even Michael the Archangel didn’t speak evil of Satan, but rebuked in the name of the Lord. These false brethren speak evil of the Lord Himself, openly and unashamedly on the very blogs that have Jesus' name in them. Only in this generation would that have been tolerated. God must be so impressed by our dialogue about Him, even including those who not only deny Him, but turn His offer of grace into something unclean.
I agree they must be prayerfully tempered and led of the Holy Spirit, but when a man openly teaches, for instance, that Jesus was not born of a virgin he is a heretic (another Biblical label although used many times inaccurately). When a man teaches most of the orthodox doctrines of salvation but is pro-choice and believes homosexual acts are not sinful he is at least a liberal ( a non-Biblical label that at least indicates a problem). Labels have been used as vicious cannonballs to hurt people, but I submit there is a loving informational ministry for them to perhaps “mark” a person’s teachings and to warn that person of his error. The fleshly aspect of labels is the “scalp counting” within the church. The exact balance is very difficult, and I again would submit that we only come forth with a negative label after a complete dialogue with the person to whom we are labeling.
Thanks all you slow bellies! (sorry, satire!)
(one commentor questioned the word heretic)
ME - The word “heretic” is a Biblical word and in the context it refers to someone who teaches things at discord with the core teachings of salvation (i.e. salvation by works). I personally abhor the careless and profuse usage of labels that are not sufficiently documented and in which the personal attack overshadows any legitimate and humble Biblical question. Even in the face of growing rejection of historically accepted salvation particulars we must remain lovingly anchored in our confronting as well as that rarest of all attributes, humility.
McKNIGHT - Henry,
Where do you find “heretic” in the Bible?
ME - The heretic reference is Ti.3:10, but false teachers or false apostles and others can just as easily be interchanged. My point is that there does come a time when certain teachers throughout church history so strayed from Biblical truth that they and their teachings must be humbly labeled.
That does not excuse the misuse and “rush to label” spirit that is prevalent today. Additionally it seems that the labeler many times enjoys a fleshly sense of bravado along with the accolades of his commentors when he is “bold” enough to label someone with a descriptive tag. Rarely have I seen a thoughtful, heavy hearted spirit when someone is labeled, there usually is a joyful dance on his theological grave.
(after several other comments I added this)
ME - One aspect about the label machine is the piling on that is common in the great white throne bolgasphere. If someone happens to see compromise in (for instance) Rick Warren’s approach, many times some blogs become candid camera for everything he does, even if it does not reflect on the issue but is in someway negative about him and can be erroneously used to pile on. Personal shortcomings are used as evidence for doctrinal error.
The recent example of Pastor Haggard’s sad and sinful situation was used by some blogs to prove the unscriptural nature of the mega-church. Did they call for prayer and fasting for him and his family, or did they exhibit an obvious effervescence because one that they disagreed with fell? That, my friends, is sin by any definition. So does that mean that if MacArthur fell morally we could say that Calvinism is somehow disproved? The vicious self righteousness that masquerades as “watchman” ministries is counter-productive to any worthwhile doctrinal correction that is sometimes needed within the loving confines of the church.
(I have come across this woman Vynette before and she quotes me from a past confrontation)
VYNETTE - I have been labelled on many blogs and I raise no objection as long as there is a prior full and frank dialogue about the topic in question. The substance of my comments is seldom addressed, however, and this is the typical response I receive:
“Vynette is an obvious heretic and should be immediately banned from comments. She is promoting the spirit of anti christ and the Holy Spirit is grieved.”
There is one commentor on this thread who will recognise these words but how do others feel about these tactics? Are these labels justifiable if a person, such as myself, claims that there is no scriptural evidence for doctrines such as the Miraculous Incarnation and the Trinity?
Should these claims be dismissed out of hand or should they be investigated?
ME - You are referring to me, Vynette, and you openly teach that Jesus was not born of a virgin and that he was not divine. I call you a heretic based upon your denial of the clear teachings of the Word of God, and the Bible declares that anyone that denies the deity of Christ (that he has come in the flesh) is the spirit of anti-christ.
Some blogs have rightfully blocked you from presenting your heresies. I would recommend others do likewise. Jesus, the divine Son of God, stands ready to forgive and save you if you will seek Him. I pray for you.
McKNIGHT - Henry and Vynette,
You are welcome to engage one another on another site, but this post is not about specifics but about labels.
ME - I will respectfully bow out, Scot, but I believe that labels without specifics was the problem. Thank you for the forum.
*******************************
Can you imagine that McKnight said we can engage one another somewhere else, and with that statement reveals the exceedingly serious flaw with the emergent dialogue. They encourage conversation with anyone including the spirit of anti-christ. I really feel bad for people like McKnight who is probably on the conservative wing of the emergent conclave, but even he will not directly confront, much less rebuke, a person who has obviously come under the influence of the spirit of anti-christ. Jim Bublitz of the blog “Old Truths” blocked Vynette as soon as he realized what she was saying and I’m sure she was rebuked and blocked on many sites. But not Jesus Creed and a handful of other emergent leaning blogs I’m familiar with.
Now here is the question, what does the Bible say to do with such people, and do we believe the Bible more than our good intentions? I do not question Brother McKnight’s good intentions, but good intentions can be the enemy of the Word of God. Our hearts and lives should seek to be in concert with the Word of God which is absolute, not our good intentions which are subjective at best and sinful at worst. So let us examine the clear and unmistakable teaching of the New Testament concerning giving platform for serous error.
I Cor.16:22 - If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.
This is referring to those who openly reject the Lord Jesus Christ, not just a person who deals with some doubts.
II Cor.11:4 - For if he that comes preaches another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if you receive another spirit which you have not received, or another gospel which you have not accepted, you seem to give him a place.
II Cor.11:19 - For you suffer fools gladly, seeing yourselves are wise.
This is a rebuke from Paul concerning the Corinthian practice of letting heretics speak. And Paul hits the nail on the head when he sarcastically implies that they allow this discourse because they consider themselves smart. Are you listening emergent?
Gal.1:8-10 - But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that you have received, let him be accursed. For do I now persuade men or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I yet pleased men I should not be the servant of Christ.
A firm rebuke of any believers that would hear a false gospel from a person who God says is accursed. Additionally Paul says if you allow dialogue with them even to please them, you are not the servant of Christ. Strong and clear, no?
Gal.2:4-5 - And because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privately to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage. To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
Paul doesn’t give a forum to false brethren who snuck in without notice. How then can it ever be right to invite false brethren in openly and allow them a place at the dialogue table? The answer - it never is.
Eph.5:10-11 - Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
Again interaction with the works of darkness is confined to rebuke, not dialogue. The works Paul mentions would surely include heretical teachings.
I Tim.1:19,20 - Holding faith and a good conscience, which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck. Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan that they learn not to blaspheme.
Here Paul doesn’t just label, he names the men personally. And instead of dialogue with them, he sends to dialogue with Satan which he prays will lead them to repentance. When was the last time you heard a preacher get up in the pulpit and in his prayer he delivers someone by name unto Satan hoping for their salvation? Today that would be considered hate speech.
II Tim.2:14-18 - Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit but to the subverting of the hearers. Study to show yourself approved unto God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings, for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as a cancer; of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already, and overthrowing the faith of some.
Again Paul says don’t trust dialogue, trust God’s Word. His prophecy of profane and vain babblings has been fully realized in our generation, and these detestable open forums will, as Paul put it, overthrow the faith of some. I would surmise that there are many people like Vynette who once were evangelical in their beliefs but have now through dialogue become shipwrecked. Can you not understand what God is saying and why, all you emergents, or do you not even care?
II Tim.4:14-15 - Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil, the Lord reward him according to his works. Of whom be aware also, for he has greatly withstood our words.
What was the great evil Alexander did to Paul? He resisted the gospel and probably convinced others to reject Christ. Paul not only did not have a friendly cup of coffee with a warm exchange of ideas, he asked that God would punish him.
Ti.1:15-16 - Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure, but even their mind and conscience is defiled. They profess that they know God, but in their works they deny Him, being abominable and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.
Let me address the Rick Warren doctrine of cooperation with unbelievers and liberal professing Christians to do good works. God says all their so called good works are reprobate, and to God they are abominable and disobedient. Same thing applies to a cooperative dialogue with the same people. Oh the good intentions of man, again, the enemy of the Word of God.
Ti.3:9-11 - But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain. A man that is a heretic after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing hat he that is such is subverted, and sins, being condemned of himself.
If God says quit arguing (striving) about the law, how much more about who Jesus is? The inerrancy of Scripture? The virgin birth? Salvation by grace through faith? And here Paul labels someone who teaches error as a heretic and that not only should we avoid dialogue, we should rebuke him twice and then reject him completely. These verses are the overarching Biblical principle that reveal the unscriptural and destructive nature of the emergent dialogue format.
II Pet.2:1-3 - But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who secretly will bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their shameful ways, by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with false words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingers not; and their damnation is not asleep.
These false teachers came in secretly, today their damnable heresies are gladly welcomed as a viable topic for thoughtful people. And again Peter says this type of teaching will lead many away from Christ. How many people do think someone like Vynette has led away from Jesus? And Mr. McKinght, you are a partaker of her evil deeds. Have you no conscience even about letting the most blatant and obvious heresies go unchallenged and even blocked? Your well meaning attempt to get people to think has become a conduit for the evil one. Do you care?
I Jn.218-19 - Little children, it is the last time: and as you have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
I Jn.4:1-3 - Beloved, believe not every spirit, but test the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know you the Spirit of God; Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God. And every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof you have heard that it should come, and even now already is it in the world.
How can a preacher not only refuse to recognize that spirit, but actually give place to it. Do you think God winks at allowing that spirit on your blogs? Don’t you understand you grieve the precious Holy Spirit which is extremely serious business. God doesn’t care about your good intentions, obedience is better than sacrifice! And the thousands of people who see how you conduct your dialogue begin to emulate that style and in so doing they are poisoned in their faith. We should never converse with the spirit of antichrist no matter how pleasant they are, they are blasphemers. You have become pioneers of shipwrecked faiths. Will you not even consider some of these verses and fast and seek the Lord, or perhaps as Paul said you have become wise in your own eyes.
Jude 4 - For there are certain men crept in secretly, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into uncleanness, and denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Jude 8 - But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.
Jude says that even Michael the Archangel didn’t speak evil of Satan, but rebuked in the name of the Lord. These false brethren speak evil of the Lord Himself, openly and unashamedly on the very blogs that have Jesus' name in them. Only in this generation would that have been tolerated. God must be so impressed by our dialogue about Him, even including those who not only deny Him, but turn His offer of grace into something unclean.
***************************************
I believe God has spoken clearly and forcefully about the kind of dialogue that allows Satan to teach his heresies. I do not believe that most of the emergent blogs set out to accommodate these false teachers, but without any discernment and any accountability that is exactly what transpires throughout the emergent blogasphere. I implore men like McKnight who is well respected by many to take a hard look at some policing on his site. It seems that a cranky orthodox believer is more likely to get blocked than a friendly spirit of antichrist. And, yes, I label them as God has. Not in a haughty spirit, but Jesus the Christ has so mercifully and graciously extended His salvation to me, I will never give space to any spirits that blaspheme and the Scriptures commands all of us to silence their evil teachings. If we cannot agree on that, well, we have nothing else to dialogue about in a forum which facilitates false and heretical teachings. I do not wish to pick a fight, neither do I wish to be melodramatic, but the core of the faith is at stake and the faith of probably millions will now be affected. Will Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Moonies, and the Church of Satan be allowed to participate in the future?
And as you might notice the number of people who visit my blogs is miniscule compared to some of the emergent blogs, so I am officially a nobody and an unprofitable servant. But if God can speak through a donkey, so let it be with me, all for His glory alone. Amen.
And as you might notice the number of people who visit my blogs is miniscule compared to some of the emergent blogs, so I am officially a nobody and an unprofitable servant. But if God can speak through a donkey, so let it be with me, all for His glory alone. Amen.
Posts
4 comments:
why don't you judge a religion based on there doctrine?
i know i can explain what i believe from the bible using many many scriptures.
can you?
Nicely done Rick. Any time we try to say there are no labels we are actually saying there are no absolutes. That sounds so warm and fuzzy to the apostates and the heretics out there because, even if they say otherwise, the fact that we pronounce God's judgment on them from His Word they cannot stand that. God is Judge, not us, so we must be very careful in telling the truth to these people by only using God's Word in context and by the Holy Spirit.
In Christ
Mike Ratliff
Amen! And Amen! Keep up the good work. These are perilous times we are in. Yours is a voice crying out in a parched and wasted land.
Rich
God is a Sovereign God and the good news is that all that the Father has given to the Son will come to Him - they will respond to the message. So there will be none of the Chosen that will NOT respond because of a "less than perfect" presentation of the gospel message - the tragedy are those who think that they are saved because they responded to a "felt-need" message or accepted Christ for the wrong reasons - those that are not responding to make Him Lord of their life - as the "church" becomes more and more filled with false converts, it is no wonder that the Spirit does not move and that revival does not take place.
Post a Comment