« Wet Blanket Believers | Main | Dawkins' Blind Faith Is Irrational »

August 28, 2009


Very succinctly and clearly stated. What we need to discern is relevant Christianity in the post-modern era and something that isn't Christianity at all but the latest vain deceit that has actually taken form and manifested all throughout the era of the Church, just by another name at various times in Christendom.
Scripture teaches us that the Emergent Church isn't new. Whether it's Socianism, Unitarianism, Gnosticism etc., the hollowness in theology of the segment of emergents that have veered off the path is very similar: to make following Christ have increased appeal to the rest of the world through compromised truth that is not wholly dependent on Christ's atoning sacrifice and propitiaton alone. That is seductive, false religion. It is when one believes the clear and simple gospel message is not sufficient in this day that one has adulterated God's revealed truth. God's truth summarized as follows, "For the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord."

You can download and listen / watch the original Driscoll sermon here:


Some say the Emergent Church movement is dying. Whether that's true or not, the influence continues to seep into churches across this country and world. Consider how many Christians who've read "The Shack" claim their view of God has been changed by it. Consider all the small group studies that are following the liberal teachings of Rob Bell, Brian McLaren, Rick Warren, Joel Osteen, etc. Pastors, Christians and seekers from all denominations are being "fed" emergent ideaology.

What we're seeing is a drifting from the Word to man-centered programs on "How To____" (fill in the blank). On the surface, there is nothing wrong with wanting to improve your life however, when you start de-contructing, twisting and re-imagining the Word of God, the focus changes from Christ to man.


One thought on people's idea of God being changed by the Shack.

Don't assume those changes are all bad, just because the Shack has some bad ideas about God.

For instance, the Shack tries to portray the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And you & I both see problems in how it's done. But if someone was starting with zero concept of any kind of actual relating between the persons of the Trinity, and the Shack sparks them to reconsider it... Well, that might be a good thing. We might not want them to accept the Shack's portrayal, but getting kicked out of a mental rut is good. It's good to start a discussion/study. (Our focus in talking about the Shack should be less on "the Shack gets things wrong" than on contributing thoughtful, Biblical notions into the ensuing discussion.)

Wouldn't you expect that after 2000 years, the Church would have already emerged a long time ago?

McClaren published one of my comments to him on his blog conerning Evangelicals don't like him. I basically said I had nothing against him personally but he doesn't believe in the True Gospel of Substitutionary Atonement. He comes back with a long winded reply saying that there are "many gospels" and if you want to know more about this buy my book.

Concerning the interfaith actions, McClaren is fasting for Ramadan to show his concern for muslims! This guy is tickling people's ears and he and his ilk are dangerous.

Basically he's a freakin apostate!

Les, I heard about the Ramadan thing, and I'm hoping to have a post up about it in the next few days.

I wonder what McLaren plans to do to show his concern for eunuchs.

snip snip

The comments to this entry are closed.