Excellent article in the Review about the "Emerging Church..."

[olger]

THE EMERGENT THEOLOGY: PART II. VOICES OF CONFUSION

by John Jovan Markovic, Andrews University

The Emergent Theology

As indicated in Part I of this series, most Christians assume the Emergents are about new forms of worship, and they pay little attention to Emergent theology. The reality, however, is

different. The Emergents are about changing Christian theology. The issues at stake here are much bigger than merely changing the style of worship. We have already cited Dan Kimball in regard to this issue. We are told that Brad Cecil also had argued back in 1997 that the Emergent Church was not about the generational gap and a new style of worship but “It’s about theology.”1 Richard Rohr, the founder of the Center for Action and Contemplation, an author of many books and a revered speaker among the Emergents, moves a step further: in order to understand the big questions and concepts like love, forgiveness, suffering, death, and grace, Christians need new “software,” that is, a new way of thinking.2

The Emergent Conversation provides a forum to challenge certain doctrines which do not necessarily withstand the biblical scrutiny. For example, I, like the Emergents, also question the doctrine of the eternal suffering in the fires of hell. Yet, I find the Emergent theology disturbing for several reasons. For one, the Emergent theology is becoming less Christ-centered and more Spirit-centered.3 Second, it is shaped and formulated more by personal and cultural experience,

and less by the revealed word of God. The Gospel is being adapted to cultural context. The Gospel–the good news of what Christ had done, what he is doing, and what he will do for

humans to wrench them out of this sinful world–is downplayed into a mere good news of God’s inexhaustible love. Next, the Emergent theology is increasingly–as it continues to emerge–

incorporating Eastern notions of reality and spirituality.

Those Emergents who have emerged far more ahead then others, Brian McLaren and Richard Rohr for example, insist on the “both/and” paradigm of thinking which is supposed to

teach people stop being divisive, critical and judgmental. Rohr is not apologetic about telling Christians they need to learn to think contemplatively. He promotes Eastern monistic mindset.4 On the contrary, I find Christianity to be a rational approach to life and spiritual issues. God

invites people to come before him and reason together with Him. If they are willing and obedient, they will be well, if they resist and rebel, they will be destroyed.5 Paul advises young Timothy to correctly handle the word of truth.6 John instructs his readers to test the spirits in

order to find out whether the spirit(s) in question are from God or not.7 These examples alone

show that in the life of a Christian an “either/or” paradigm is expected, an analytical and rational

approach is advised. There is no need here for a mystic mindset.

1 Tony Jones, The New Christians. Dispatches from the Emergent Frontier (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2008), 47.

Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K. Bolger, Emerging Churches. Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures

(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005), 33.

2 Richard Rohr, The Naked Now. Learning to See as the Mystics See (New York: The Crossroad Publishing Co.,

2009), 12.

3 Throughout this essay the word “Spirit” does not necessarily refer to the Holy Spirit Jesus spoke of in John 14.

4 To learn more about monistic mindset, start with James W. Sire, The Universe Next Door. A Basic Worldview

Catalog, 5th ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2009), ch. 7. Note: previous editions would do fine.

5 Isaiah 1:18; 43:26.

6 2 Tim. 2:15.

7 1 John 4:1.

Nowhere in the Scriptures do we find instructions for learning contemplative mystical exercises in order to be able to achieve a relationship with Jesus Christ. True and real spirituality is experienced through obedience and willingness to live according to the moral standards set by God as revealed in the Scriptures, not set by man, community or the Spirit.

The Emergent Spirituality

Notice that innovations in the Emergent worship like spiritual exercises are introduced to induce spirituality. “Spiritual” or “spirituality” is probably the most favorite concept among the Emergents, and is directly contrasted to “religious” or “religiosity.” I find it puzzling that

spiritual” is antithetical to “religious.” Common sense expects religiosity and spirituality to go

hand in hand. So, why do Emergents contrast the two? Spirituality rather than religiosity, I

surmise, is meant to attract newcomers, estrange the same from the mother base, and then

convert them into the new Emergent Christianity. To better understand what the Emergents mean

by “spiritual,” let us take a look at where the repository of spiritual authority for the Emergents

is.

What characterizes the Emergent theology is its emphasis on catholicity, orthodoxy, and

“embodied theology.” The last point is important. The “embodied theology” says that the Spirit

which is present in the Emergent community is the one who is shaping and formulating Christian

theology. To be spiritual is to have a spiritual experience. If community members would have

such experiences that would indeed indicate that the Spirit is present in the community. In other

words, what manifests in the lives of the community members is the work of the Spirit. Hence,

an Emergent would feel free to write, “God speaks to us out of our own culture and the stuff of

our own lives, no less so than God speaks to us in the canon of Holy Scripture.”8 Hence, Bruce

Sanguin, an author and a minister, could say that when he presides “at the wedding of a gay or

lesbian couple,” he can “experience it as the ‘new thing’ God is doing in our day and age.”9

The “embodied theology” emerges when each member brings to the meeting his or her

own story, his or her own theological understanding of a biblical text. It is out of these individual

insights that the “big story” of God emerges. Therefore, the Work of the Spirit, embodied in the

community, equals or in some cases supersedes the written Word of God.10 This take of theology

is not far from the old traditional argument that it is the Church which reserves the right to

interpret the Scriptures.

The Emergents claim that the Bible alone is not a sufficient guide for contemporary

living, and that there is more to divine authority than what the Bible alone offers.11 It is not

uncommon to read, “Sola scriptura also tends to downplay the role of God’s Spirit in shaping the

direction of the church.”12 This shift of the repository of spiritual authority from the biblical text

to the Spirit is problematic. It encourages the masses to rely on subjective experience rather than

on the objective and reliable written word.

8 See Karen Ward, “The Emerging Church and Communal Theology,” in Listening to the Beliefs of Emerging

Churches. Five Perspectives, Robert Webber, ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007), 162.

9 Bruce Sanguin, The Emerging Church. A Model for Change and a Map for Renewal (Kelowna, BC, Canada:

CopperHouse, 2008), 138.

10 Ray S. Anderson, An Emergent Theology for Emerging Churches (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books, 2006), chs. 3

and 8; Sanguin, The Emerging Church. This theme, that the Bible alone does not suffice as a spiritual guide and a

criteria weaves throughout many other works published by the Emergents and non-Emergents as well.

11 See McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2004), ch.10; Doug Pagitt, “The Emerging

Church and Embodied Theology,” in Listening to the Beliefs of Emerging Churches, 119-143.

12 Will Samson, “The End of Reinvention. Mission Beyond Market Adoption Cycles,” in An Emergent Manifesto of

Hope Doug Pagitt and Tony Jones, eds. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2007), 156.

In the physical absence of Jesus Christ, the Bible remains the most reliable spiritual

guide. According to Jesus (see John 14), the task of the Holy Spirit is to lead people into a deeper

understanding of the Truth, that is, the work of Jesus Christ, as it is recorded in the written word

of God. The Holy Spirit speaks for and testifies about Jesus Christ, the incarnate Creator God. If

per chance the spirit we claim is at work in our lives takes the focus of our attention away from

Jesus and the written Word of God, toward anyone or anything else, then the spirit in question is

definitely not the Holy Spirit. The intention of the Holy Spirit is not to draw sinners to self but to

lead them to Jesus Christ. “Test the spirits to see whether they are from God,” says Apostle John,

“because many false prophets have gone out into the world.”13 The Emergents are forgetting one

simple but essential point of the Gospel and of biblical Christianity—It’s really all about Jesus

Christ, not about us, not even about the Spirit.

The Concept of Emerging and the Kingdom of God

The often-used metaphor about the Emergent church is the emerging growth on the forest

floor. According to Jones, the movement began emerged in the 1990s, spontaneously so to speak.

“A new church is emerging from the compost of Christendom,” says he.14 The public also came

to believe that the “emerging” of a new Christianity started in the 1990s. I have, however, come

across works which more or less called for and disseminated the idea of a new emerging church

as far back as the 1970s.15 Whether Tony Jones, Brad Cecil and the founding Group of Twenty

was aware of these works I cannot say, but the notion of new emerging Christianity was born

much earlier than the 1990s. As early as the 1960s, some Christian leaders recognized that

Christianity at all levels, in academia, in ecclesia and in the public, is undergoing fundamental

changes and that new approaches were necessary to recapture the attention of the masses.16

My research leads me to conclude that the idea of Christianity “emerging” through time

is directly linked with their understanding of what the kingdom of God is and when the kingdom

of God is to be fully realized. It should be noted that the theme of the kingdom of God is central

to the Emerging church. Much emphasis is placed on joining God’s “community,” here and

now.17 Much emphasis is placed on channeling church and personal resources to the making of

the kingdom of God here and now. It is a good and well-intended idea that sounds Christian. Yet,

while the Emergents are making much of Jesus’ words “the kingdom of God is at hand,” they say

nothing about Jesus’ teaching that the final realization of the kingdom of God is in the future,

after the second coming of Jesus, this time as the King of Kings. Moreover, the making of the

kingdom of God is primarily the work of Jesus Christ himself. The Holy Spirit leads people back

to Jesus Christ, the Savior of humanity and the King of Kings. Second, the final realization of

that kingdom necessitates first of all actual and final destruction of evil and sin from the

universe–an event that is yet to take place in the future. That a final destruction of evil and sin,

that is, of Satan, his demons, and unrepentant sinners, is to take place soon is not a pleasant

theme for the Emergents.

13 1 John 4:1, NIV.

14 Jones, The New Christians, 7.

15 See Bruce Larson and Ralph Osborne, The Emerging Church (Waco, TX: Word, Inc., 1970), and Ronald J.

Wilkins, The Emerging Church (Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown Co. Publ., 1975).

16 The history and origins of the idea of “the emerging church” requires far more space than allowed here, but the

reader should be aware of the issue.

17 See Brian D. McLaren, The Secret Message of Jesus (Nashville: W Publishing Group, 2006); Steve Chalke and

Alan Mann, The Lost Message of Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2003; Anderson, An Emergent Theology for

Emerging Churches, ch. 5.

It is rare to find a discussion of a need to abandon sin and a sinful lifestyle in order to

enter into the kingdom of God. For the Emergents, the kingdom of God is in the process of

spiritual re-formation (notice the hyphenation), a spiritual evolution, here and now, as we speak.

Accordingly, this spiritual re-formation, that is, this spiritual “emerging,” or “spiritual

formation,” is the work of the Spirit, and is a process that has been going on for centuries, and

will continue on for centuries to come. McLaren states that humanity as a whole is spiritually reforming

toward the day when all humanity will finally become the Kingdom of God, when the

kingdom of this world will become the kingdom of the Lord.18 This teaching is troublesome on

several levels: it misinforms the people about the true nature of the kingdom of God. It fails to

warn people of the importance of seeking repentance and Jesus’ grace, today. It lulls people into

a false sense of security and hope that God, an “inexhaustible” love, will never carry out divine

justice. It teaches that both sin and death are part of one and the same ongoing redemptive

process. This emergent attitude toward human predicament resonates New Ageism, the Baha’i

teachings, Eastern monistic notions, and so forth. It is utopian. It is non-biblical.

The Emergent Attitude toward History

The Emergents are fond of going back to “ancient” or “vintage” Christianity. The

“ancient-vintage” refers to the writings of the Church Fathers, not to the writings of the Apostles

and the biblical prophets, as some may assume. The Patristic teachings and the monastic way of

life are being served as new model of spirituality. This adulation of Patristic theology and the

insistence that God’s community lives in the so-called Age of the Spirit for the last 2,000 years,

necessitates an argument that the origins of the Church are to be found in the first-century church

of Antioch rather than in the first-century church of Jerusalem.19 This may appear as a new

revelation to some; however, it is not a new truth but a new repackaging of an old supersession

doctrine arguing for a radical discontinuity between Judaism and Christianity. I find this

development to be disheartening. The old Patristic argument that the church replaced the

synagogue was the major component of a two millennia-long ecclesiastical hatred and contempt

of Jews and Judaism, a direct precursor to modern antisemitism.20 Contrary to their insistence on

tolerance and elimination of all forms of prejudice and bigotry, the Emergents are suggesting a

walk down the same path of contempt and religious hatred.

Though I find the work of Phyllis Tickle and Diana Butler Bass quite informative, their

histories are highly skewed toward proving the “emergence” of Christianity during the last 2000

18 McLaren, The Secret Message of Jesus, ch. 21.

19 Anderson argues there is no historical continuity between the first-century church in Jerusalem (Peter, James and

other “traditionalists”) and the first-century church on Antioch (Paul). Christianity, according to him, started in

Antioch, not in Jerusalem; with a new revelation through the Spirit to Paul, and not with Peter, James, John and the

other original apostles.

20 Scholarship on the history of hatred and contempt of Jews and Judaism, that is, the history of antisemitism, clearly

shows that a “straight line” can be drawn between the ecclesiastical contempt and hatred of Jews and Judaism and

the Holocaust. Those who truly aim to educate young generations that antisemitism and racism in all its forms is not

Biblical, evil, and is destructive, ought to shun any theology which resonates the replacement theory. A substantive

scholarship exists in support of this link between ecclesiastical contempt for Judaism and Jews and antisemitism. For

more on the history of the contempt of Jews and Judaism see my “The Ecclesiastical Roots of the Holocaust: From

the Adversus Judaeos Tradition to the Holocaust,” in Thinking in the Shadow of Hell. The Impact of the Holocaust

on Theology and Jewish-Christian Relations, Jacques B. Doukhan, ed. (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University

Press, 2002), 3-27.

years.21 Their work borders revisionism of Church history. In fact, Church history was both

progressive and full of false teachings and apostasy, full of corruption and abuse of ecclesiastical

powers. The pogroms and inquisitions were hallmarks of the Church which opposed search for

truth. Also, it is not uncommon for the Emergents to bash Protestantism for religious warfare,

colonialism, and other evils of modernity of the last 500 years. On the contrary, it was the

Protestants who stood up to the inquisitorial and oppressive medieval Church. It was the

Protestants who played a major role in the overthrow of ecclesiastical and monarchial

absolutism, and it is they who contributed to the development of a constitutional model of

governance which influenced England, the American colonists, and the rest of the world.

Another example of misinterpretation of history is their insistence that changes brought

about by the cultural shift from modernity to postmodernity demand that everything must change

in Christian worship and in Christian theology.22 Much indeed has changed in the last century or

so, but those changes are related to modernization. Nothing, however, has changed when it

comes to human nature and the human predicament. People are still selfish, greedy, violent, and

still face suffering and death. Sin is still here. What changed is how we humans handle our

affairs, not how we should handle our sinful nature. Humans have for centuries tried to resolve

the puzzle of human predicament, and all human approaches—be they monistic, monastic,

pantheistic, gnostic, deistic, Catholic,23 Protestant or Emergent, they all have failed or are failing.

The only reliable way out is the blueprint Jesus Christ left behind. The truth about Jesus’ grace

and the moral standard of the kingdom of God has been revealed to us through the revelation of

Yahweh and Jesus Christ, and is recorded in the Bible. It remains constant and certain. The

Emergents, like true postmodernists, repeatedly tell the public that we cannot be certain about the

Truth, and that we cannot apply it universally. Unfortunately, the public bought this argument.

Indeed, there is no certainty in the systems of beliefs construed by human agents. But we can be

certain in the biblical message.

Conclusion

What choices do young people have today? Where do they go to satisfy their spiritual

thirst? The most reasonable and time-tested alternative is: Go back to the Book, go back to Jesus

Christ. He has the water of life. He is the Way. Educate yourself in the Word of God, educate

yourself in general. Use your brains, use your mind. Do not fall for mystical and subjective

experiences. Do not fall for deceptive slogans like, “It’s Really All about God,” because, It’s

Really All about Jesus Christ. You thought the two are the same! Not necessarily. I am reluctant

to entertain the thought, which I express with great hesitation and gentleness: “Are these

Emergent voices we hear actually the voices of the apocalyptic Babylon?

21 See Phyllis Tickle, The Great Emergence. How Christianity Is Changing and Why (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker

Books, 2008) and Diana Butler Bass, A People’s History of Christianity. The Other Side of the Story (New York:

HarperCollins Publ., 2009).

22 See Leonard Sweet, SoulTsunami. Sink or Swim in New Millennium Culture (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan,

1999; Brian D. McLaren, Everything Must Change. Jesus, Global Crisis, and a Revolution of Hope (Nashville:

Thomas Nelson, 2007).

23 Here I refer to the teachings of the medieval Church that the salvation comes only through the sacraments

dispensed by the church.

[abelisle]

Sivart,

It's a shame you don't live in NYC. I could introduce you to Samir and others like him at Faith House who know what the emergent church is all about and who reach out to others in love through their social activities and brotherly love for each other.

As to your questions, ignorance breeds fear and fear in turn breeds arrogant resistance to anything else other than what they(those who attack the idea of the emergent church) know and believe.

God has his sheep out there in many different folds and they aren't all labeled "Adventist."

Alex

[SivartM]

The Gospel is being adapted to cultural context.

[SivartM]

Sivart,

It's a shame you don't live in NYC. I could introduce you to Samir and others like him at Faith House who know what the emergent church is all about and who reach out to others in love through their social activities and brotherly love for each other.

If I ever go to NYC, I'll take you up on that.

[karl]

Quote:

Therefore, the Work of the Spirit, embodied in the community, equals or in some cases supersedes the written Word of God. This take of theology is not far from the old traditional argument that it is the Church which reserves the right to interpret the Scriptures.

The Emergents claim that the Bible alone is not a sufficient guide for contemporary living, and that there is more to divine authority than what the Bible alone offers. It is not uncommon to read, “Sola scriptura also tends to downplay the role of God’s Spirit in shaping the direction of the church.”

Change that old Hymn lyric from "We are standing on Holy Ground" to "We are standing on shaky ground."

[Guest]

Sivart,

It's a shame you don't live in NYC. I could introduce you to Samir and others like him at Faith House who know what the emergent church is all about and who reach out to others in love through their social activities and brotherly love for each other.

As to your questions, ignorance breeds fear and fear in turn breeds arrogant resistance to anything else other than what they(those who attack the idea of the emergent church) know and believe.

God has his sheep out there in many different folds and they aren't all labeled "Adventist."

Alex

*sigh*

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: olger

The Gospel is being adapted to cultural context.

Yeeeah... that's what Paul did too. If the culture can't understand the gospel, guess what? They won't care.

Quote:

The Gospel–the good news of what Christ had done, what he is doing, and what he will do for

humans to wrench them out of this sinful world–is downplayed into a mere good news of God’s inexhaustible love.

"Mere"?

Quote:

Rohr is not apologetic about telling Christians they need to learn to think contemplatively.

I thought that Christian meditation was supposed to be contemplative, as opposed to Eastern meditation which was not.

Quote:

On the contrary, I find Christianity to be a rational approach to life and spiritual issues. God

invites people to come before him and reason together with Him.

I thought rationalism was supposed to be bad and take away from faith in God. I thought that the emergent church was supposed to be pandering to rational postmodernism.

Quote:

If they are willing and obedient, they will be well, if they resist and rebel, they will be destroyed.

What a delightful thought. I'm sure that it will make people want to read the Bible. Of course, if they did, they might run into those annoying verses about how "God is love" and stuff.

Quote:

These examples alone

show that in the life of a Christian an “either/or” paradigm is expected, an analytical and rational

approach is advised. There is no need here for a mystic mindset

Yes, no need for prayer. That's just not rational.

Quote:

True and real spirituality is experienced through obedience and willingness to live according to the moral standards set by God as revealed in the Scriptures, not set by man, community or the Spirit.

I thought the Spirit inspired the Bible.

Quote:

The Emergents are forgetting one

simple but essential point of the Gospel and of biblical Christianity—It’s really all about Jesus

Christ, not about us, not even about the Spirit.

Which emergents are ignoring Jesus?

Quote:

It is rare to find a discussion of a need to abandon sin and a sinful lifestyle in order to

enter into the kingdom of God.

I wonder how I manage to come across such "rare" discussions so often...

Quote:

Do not fall for deceptive slogans like, “It’s Really All about God,” because, It’s

Really All about Jesus Christ. You thought the two are the same! Not necessarily.

This is just disturbing. Jesus Christ is not the same as God? It's NOT all about God?

SM, You're sounding like Chubby Checker!

[Guest]

The only ignorance about the emerging church seems to be coming from those who are pushing it. Prayer and Bible study does not breed ignorance.

Reading something like the Urantia book, and thinking it is new light,....well....

2Tim 2:15 Study to show yourself approved unto God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

1Jn 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

[olger]

Samir Selmanovic, an Emergent Church leader, was a speaker at NIC 2008 and 2009. Selmanovic’s elevation of human experience is carefully connected to his devaluation of the Bible. As expressed in his writings, “A biblical worldview in the recent past meant clinging to the maps at any cost. People are done with such idolatry…our Scriptures have spoken to us, and our lives ought to speak back. That's how we love our religions, not only by studying the itineraries of the Bible, but by adding our own.” http://www.faithhousemanhattan.org/ [ under “Your Religion IS Changing”…Feb 1, 2010]

In the same article, Selmanovic also describes Shamanism as having certain advantages over other religions.

Help yourself, Travis.

[SivartM]

(Are you really that young? I still suspect you are pulling a fast one)

[olger]

(Are you really that young? I still suspect you are pulling a fast one)

Good call Coasp. One word. Coaching.

[SivartM]

Samir Selmanovic, an Emergent Church leader, was a speaker at NIC 2008 and 2009. Selmanovic’s elevation of human experience is carefully connected to his devaluation of the Bible. As expressed in his writings, “A biblical worldview in the recent past meant clinging to the maps at any cost. People are done with such idolatry…our Scriptures have spoken to us, and our lives ought to speak back. That's how we love our religions, not only by studying the itineraries of the Bible, but by adding our own.” http://www.faithhousemanhattan.org/ [ under “Your Religion IS Changing”…Feb 1, 2010]

In the same article, Selmanovic also describes Shamanism as having certain advantages over other religions.

Help yourself, Travis.

[olger]

Mark my words Travis, when the dung hits the propeller, these liberal social workers will not be standing side to side with you.

It's 90% truth and one part error that makes it dangerous. It's not about 'helping the poor' or connecting with God. That's just the trapping which gets you caught up in the rest of the doctrine. We have a mandate to deliver the 3 Angels message, which is what is being sacrificed by this tidal wave of liberalism. Why? Because it's not 'nice'.

[karl]

We have a mandate to deliver the 3 Angels message, which is what is being sacrificed by this tidal wave of liberalism. Why? Because it's not 'nice'.

And because it doesn't kowtow to existing cultural milieu. True Christianity creates a new culture of new men and women who have been transformed by the power of Christ. Come OUT of her, my people.

The "emerging" church is actually submerging. We need to be immersed in Christ - not in the culture.

[Tom Wetmore]

Since even emergents have trouble defining the emerging church, it's interesting how people outside the movement are so sure of what it's about.

You are absolutely correct! I have read a fair bit about this topic including a number of Brian McLaren's books (The church he founded is a mile from my house...) and a number of other prominent thought leaders in this "movement". Ultimately it is more about a paradigm shift in thinking about and practicing faith. To describe it as a movement is to misunderstand it. It is not a singular thing. It is many things to many people. It is more a mental orientation toward religion and seeking meaning, purpose and relevance from faith.

I find the author's conclusion wonderfully (quite possibly unwittingly) ironic:

Quote:

To fulfill their mission, Adventists should stop playing follow the leader after the postmodern reformation of Evangelicalism and become the leaders of a biblical reformation by following Scripture alone and generating an alternate ecumenical movement.

In personal and theological faithfulness to Scripture, Adventists should be creative in finding ways to penetrate all cultures with the complete biblical history of love and salvation. After all, God called His remnant church to play the leading role in the final chapter of the great controversy between good and evil.

The challenge the author describes is basically for Adventists to get on board with the essential idea at the core of the emergent church. The only subtle distinction is for Adventists to develop what amounts to the Adventist brand of emerging church. That is of course the Adventist way. We take what other denominations or movements are doing and saying and putting our brand label on it, claiming it as our own as if it is uniquely ours and somehow very distinctive and different. It's not. And we aren't.

[Guest]

Mark my words Travis, when the dung hits the propeller, these liberal social workers will not be standing side to side with you.

It's 90% truth and one part error that makes it dangerous. It's not about 'helping the poor' or connecting with God. That's just the trapping which gets you caught up in the rest of the doctrine. We have a mandate to deliver the 3 Angels message, which is what is being sacrificed by this tidal wave of liberalism. Why? Because it's not 'nice'.

You have said a lot in only a few words. And all of it so true. AMEN.

[karl]

Quote:

To fulfill their mission, Adventists should stop playing follow the leader after the postmodern reformation of Evangelicalism and become the leaders of a biblical reformation by following Scripture alone and generating an alternate ecumenical movement.

That is of course the Adventist way. We take what other denominations or movements are doing and saying and putting our brand label on it, claiming it as our own as if it is uniquely ours and somehow very distinctive and different. It's not. And we aren't.

[olger]

I appreciate that.

[Guest]

Me too.