The Emerging Church

Several months ago, someone asked if I would write a post about the emerging church, also called “the emergent movement.” My firsthand knowledge of this subject is limited, so I did some research before attempting to write about it.

My first observation is that clearly identifying and defining the emerging church is something like trying to nail Jell-O to the wall. There seems to be no clear-cut statement of doctrine and no real definition of what the emerging church is. The movement appears to be quite fluid and changeable. The best definition that can be given is that there is no real definition. It is difficult to define that which allows God to be anything we feel like making Him. This non-definable characteristic is symptomatic of the “post-modern” era in which we live and the efforts to create a “post-modern” church to “engage the culture.” Some even contend that the emerging church is fading away and will no longer exist by the time it can be defined. See the article, “Farewell Emerging Church, 1989-2010.”

It appears there are a number of common threads that run through the different variations of the emerging church. A short review cannot even begin to scratch the surface, but I have put into writing a brief summary of a few of these. Some of them almost seem contradictory, but even that fits with the elusive definition.

It looks as if there is a desire to reverse the Reformation and to go back into the mysticism, traditions, and doctrines that ultimately caused the Reformation. Not the least of these is a revival of the "Eucharist" and the doctrine of “transubstantiation,” which would have us believe that the once-for-all sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ was really insufficient to save us, and it therefore must be replaced by a continual offering of the actual body and blood of Christ in the form of bread and wine. This is clearly refuted by the teaching of Scripture. “By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God” (Hebrews 10:10-12, NASB). Although this passage was obviously written concerning the Old Testament priests and sacrifices, it has a very valid application to that which was yet future at the time – the mass. The Reformation took place for many reasons, not the least of which was the doctrine of justification by faith alone, apart from good works, on the basis of the finished work of Christ, as presented so clearly in the Scriptures. See the video “Emerging Church: The Road to Rome” by Roger Oakland.

The emerging church is a response to our "post-modern" culture. There is nothing wrong with recognizing the nature of the culture, but there is a huge difference between that and conforming to the culture. Culture should not be allowed to dictate doctrine and practice to the church. The website gotquestions.org offers the following: “Post-modernism can be thought of as a dissolution of ‘cold, hard fact’ in favor of ‘warm, fuzzy subjectivity.’ The emerging / emergent church movement can be thought of the same way. The emerging / emergent church movement falls into line with basic post-modernist thinking — it is about experience over reason, subjectivity over objectivity, spirituality over religion, images over words, outward over inward, feelings over truth. These are reactions to modernism and are thought to be necessary in order to actively engage contemporary culture … the emerging church rejects any standard methodology for doing anything. Therefore, there is a huge range of how far groups take a post-modernist approach to Christianity. Some groups go only a little way in order to impact their community for Christ, and remain biblically sound. Most groups, however, embrace post-modernist thinking, which eventually leads to a very liberal, loose translation of the Bible. This, in turn, lends to liberal doctrine and theology.”

Because experience is valued more highly than reason, truth becomes relative. Once truth is considered to be relative rather than absolute, there can be no sound doctrine, because everything is interpreted according to individual feelings and opinions rather that according to God's holy, unchangeable Word. Some have variously described the doctrine of the emerging church as “absence of the cross,” “no real reference to sin or the need of redemption,” “a move away from theology to a ‘fix the world’ philosophy,” “less theological and more relational emphasis,” etc. (Taken from personal interviews).

After doing some reading on the emerging church, I realized that I had already read and reviewed a book that could serve as a manifesto or a “Bible” for the emergent movement, The Shack, by William Paul Young. As I looked further, I quickly discovered that the connection between the emerging church and The Shack had already been made by many writers.

An article entitled “The Shack’s Cool God,” by David Cloud of Fundamental Baptist Information Service, gives a great deal of insight into the relationship between The Shack and the emerging church. Following are some quotes from that article:

“The emerging church loves to tamper with traditional Bible doctrine and there is no fear of God for doing so!”

“The Shack is about redefining God. Young has said that the book is for those with ‘a longing that God is as kind and loving as we wish he was’ … What he is referring to is the desire on the part of the natural man for a God who loves ‘unconditionally’ and does not require obedience, does not require repentance, does not judge sin, and does not make men feel guilty for what they do.”

“Young’s god is the god of the emerging church. He is cool, loves rock & roll, is non-judgmental, does not exercise wrath toward sin, does not send unbelievers to an eternal fiery hell, does not require repentance and the new birth, puts no obligations on people, doesn’t like traditional Bible churches, does not accept the Bible as the infallible Word of God, and does not mind if the early chapters of the Bible are interpreted as ‘myth.’”

“...The Shack’s god is suspiciously similar to the one described in the books of the more liberal branch of the emerging church …”

“…To believe that the Bible is the infallible Word of God and the sole authority for faith and practice is not to ‘put God in a box.’ It is to honor God by receiving the Scripture for what it claims to be and what it has proven itself to be … To reject the Bible as the infallible Word of God is to launch out upon the stormy waters of subjective mysticism. It allows man to be his own authority and to live as he pleases, which is an objective of both the New Age movement and the emerging church.”

“What is happening is that people who don’t like Bible Christianity, don’t want to obey the Bible, don’t want to feel guilty for their sin, and have rejected the ‘angry’ God of Scripture, are responding enthusiastically to the man-made idol presented in The Shack.”

“Miracles do not prove that something is of God. There is one that the Bible calls ‘the god of this world’ (2 Corinthians 4:4), and he can do miracles and answer prayers … Miracles are not the proof of the truth; the Bible alone is the proof.”

Roger Oakland, author of Faith Undone, said, “For nearly two thousand years, most professing Christians have seen the Bible as the foundation for the Christian faith. The overall view at the Rethink Conference, however, is that Christianity, as we have known it, has run its course and must be replaced…Speakers insisted that Christianity must be re-thought and re-invented if the name of Jesus Christ is going to survive here on planet earth.” (“My Trip to the Rethink Conference,” by Roger Oakland.)

I could write more, but suffice it to say that there have been many good articles and a number of books written concerning the emerging church, and I really have little to add to those. Roger Oakland's website, "Understand the Times," has a number of helpful articles on the emerging church. In addition to the many resources on his website, he has written an excellent book on the subject entitled Faith Undone. Interviews with John MacArthur about the emerging church are found here and here.

The Scriptures are full of warnings and instructions relative to the importance of avoiding false doctrine while preaching and teaching sound doctrine. The standard by which we should measure any church is the standard of truth, based on the Word of God.

“If anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, he is conceited and understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions, and constant friction between men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain” (1 Timothy 6:3-5, NASB).

“…preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths” (2 Timothy 4:2-4, NASB).

“…holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict” (Titus 1:9, NASB).

“But as for you, speak the things which are fitting for sound doctrine” (Titus 2:1).

"But, there are too many hypocrites..."

One of the excuses so frequently offered by unbelievers for not coming to Christ is that “there are too many hypocrites in the church.” Surely no one really thinks such an excuse will stand up at the Great White Throne Judgment. God will not hold anyone accountable for someone else’s sin, and He certainly will not excuse unbelief on the basis of someone else’s hypocrisy.

The truth is that all human beings are hypocrites from time to time. All of us, other than the one perfect man, the God-man, our Savior, The Lord Jesus Christ, are sometimes guilty of saying one thing and doing another. I am actually glad there are hypocrites, and therefore sinners, in the Body of Christ. Otherwise, we would all be left out. I can only express my gratitude that I am a sinner saved by the grace of God instead of a sinner self-condemned in unbelief.

I recently saw a very thought-provoking statement – “When you let a hypocrite stand between you and God, the hypocrite is closer to God than you are.” How true.

God is God and I am not!!

By My Anonymous Friend

You may have heard this statement in the past and this week I was reminded of it again. There are things that happen in life that neither I nor any other human can explain. We can try but we soon reach a brick wall as we seek to understand the ways of God.

For example: A family that we consider our friends has experienced horrific tragedies in the past two years. First a granddaughter drowned tragically. A few months later the grandfather died within just a few months of being diagnosed with a serious illness. Now a few weeks ago, his son, the oldest of the children died suddenly as well. Within the space of two years, three generations of persons in this one family have passed away. I am at a complete loss when trying to understand this.

A few days ago I got involved in an interesting conversation with a twenty year old sky diver. When he asked me what I did as a career he surmised that I might be "religous" as he put it. I asked him if he was. "No", he said, "I control my own life!" He seemed so convinced. I smiled at him and said, "My friend, you could not be more wrong!" He insisted however. I suggested that he might be stricken with some dread disease or that some foolish driver might hit him on the highway somewhere. I asked him what he would do if his parachute would not open for some reason on one of his sky dives. He dismissed all my potential scenarios and shrugged them off. It seemed he did not really hear me at all. It seemed to me he was being intellectually dishonest and that he simply did not want to believe in a Deity of any sort. No one can truthfully and thoughtfully say that he controls his own life. Many things are beyond our control. I am hopeful that someday he will think more carefully.

So, if we acknowledge that we do not control our own lives all together, how do we cope with the unexplainable and incomprehensible? My conviction is that we ought to be more humble and admit that our knowledge is extremely limited. When I watch our daughter buckle our little granddaughter into her car seat, the baby never asks any questions. She does not ask if there is enough gas in the car, or if the tires are properly inflated. She does not ask if the streets are under construction. She never asks where they are going. She only sits and accepts what her parents plan for her. Sometimes she complains but she never questions! (not yet, anyway).

Am I pressing the analogy too far? Maybe a little bit. The priniciple fits though I think. Compared to the wisdom and sovereignty of God, we are infants. So I draw from this analogy these points:

1. God loves me with a perfect love. It is not His intent or purpose to destroy me or make my life as miserable as possible. That would not be love. My daughter would never deliberately hurt her little girl.

2. God's wisdom is perfect. He knows what I need or do not need. He knows how much I can take. My daughter does not just drive aimlessly about. She has a purpose in mind.

3. The small part of what I do know about God's way of operation is that He has purposes that are beyond my comprehension. My granddaughter is always pleasantly surprised when she figures out she is being taken to "Papa's house", or to her favorite park or pet store.

4. I should never doubt in the darkness what I clearly understood in the light. That is, under pressure my perspective can easily be skewered and distorted. The other day my granddaughter was riding with me and at an intersection she said, "Green!". She did not know that I was waiting for my own green arrow so I could make a left turn. She did not see the whole picture.

5. God's perspective is eternity. Mine is temporal. When my daughter says to her baby, "No more candy", it is for some longer term purpose.

One of my seminary professors used to quote Deuteronomy 29:29 to us at times. Here is how it reads: The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever, that we may observe all the words of this law.

I leave you this week with this additional thought: To the world you might be just one person, but to one person you might be the world!!

Addition to My Review of "The Shack"

Over a year ago, I wrote a review of the very popular book, The Shack. Since that time, the book continues to be widely read among Christians and continues to deceive many people with false doctrine. Recently, I realized I had left out one of the most important points I should have made, so I revised my review and included the following in the section, "An Unbiblical View of Salvation." (Note: My complete review is found here.)

On page 110, “Jesus” makes a statement that is nothing short of heresy. He says, “I am the best way any human can relate to Papa (God the Father) or Sarayu (The Holy Spirit).” What? Jesus says he is the “best” way to God, thereby implying that there are other ways. Such a statement as this is by itself enough to relegate this book to the trash can. The real Jesus of the Bible would never have said such a thing. Instead, He said, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me” (John 16:6, NASB). Notice the use of the word “the” instead of “a” or “the best.” Reducing Jesus to “a” way to God or “the best” way to God robs Him of His deity, His glory, and the value of His redemptive work.

Jesus also said, “…unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins” (John 8:24, NASB). There is no wiggle room in that statement. Jesus did not give people freedom to "sort of" believe in Him but to also make their own way. He is the way. He is the only way. It doesn’t make any difference what anyone thinks or feels about it. If a person believes he can get to God in any other way besides through the Lord Jesus Christ, he is very badly fooled. This truth is further underscored in the Book of Acts. "And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12, NASB).

Organ Donation: The Gift of Life

When my first wife Sue passed away in 2001, I honored her wishes to donate her organs. Following is an excerpt from the book (unpublished) I wrote in the months following her death. I titled the book, Let Her Works Praise Her: A Life that Counted, ©Copyright January 2002. This is taken from Chapter 3, “Giving, Even in Death.”

Sue spent her life giving to others. She determined a long time ago that there was no reason to stop giving if her earthly life ended while she was still young enough that someone else could use her organs. Her thinking was “I won’t need them anymore.” Accordingly, she signed a donor card and placed it on the back of her driver’s license. She specified that the organs would be used for transplant only – not research.

I did not realize that even if someone signs a donor card, the family can overrule the wishes of the person who has died. I would never have considered not carrying out her wishes, so I did not hesitate to sign the papers that were necessary for the organ transplant process to begin. This was the first thing I had to take care of after I was informed that she had passed away, and even though paperwork was the last thing I wanted to deal with at that time, I fully understood that time was of the essence…

I never before really knew anything about the process of organ transplantation and all the logistics that go with it. Prospective recipients are required to always be within two hours of the appropriate hospital. As soon as the papers are signed, the whole process swings into action. Tissue-typing is done, and appropriate recipients are admitted to their hospitals, a surgical room in the donor’s hospital must be made available, and teams of doctors are flown in. It makes good sense, but it was a new revelation to me that the doctors who are scheduled to implant the organs are the same ones who are flown in to take the organs from the donor. That is a most logical procedure, but it is the kind of thing one never thinks about until it becomes a reality.

All of this takes time. Sue’s body was kept functioning for twenty-eight hours after her death in order to incubate the organs. During that time – from Friday at 12:55 P.M. until late Saturday afternoon – she was kept in the Neuro-CCU unit...

Late on Saturday night, I received a call at the motel from the transplant nurse. She informed me that the surgery was over and gave me a general rundown of where the organs had gone and who, in general terms, would receive them. One team of doctors had come from USC Medical Center, another from Stanford Medical Center, and at least one more came from somewhere in Wisconsin.

About four weeks later, I received the following letter from the California Transplant Donor Network:

Dear Mr. Livesay:

I would like to express my deepest sympathy to you and your family for the loss of your wife, Susan. I can only imagine how difficult these last few weeks have been for you and your family. My hope is that your decision to help others, through donation, can bring a sense of peace and comfort to each of you. I would like to share with you the outcome of your generous gift.

A 60 year-old woman from the San Diego area had suffered from chronic lung disease and had been waiting for a lung transplant for over a year and a half. She is a widowed mother of two daughters, and her disease had left her disabled. Both of Susan’s lungs were able to be transplanted into this woman, and her condition after surgery was listed as good.

Susan’s liver was successfully transplanted into a 57 year-old man from the San Francisco area. He works as a computer analyst, is married, and has one daughter. He had suffered from liver disease for several years, and had been waiting for a new liver since June of 1997. Thanks to Susan’s generous gift of life, his wait is now over. He was reported to have good liver function after his surgery.

Two fortunate people were the recipients of Susan’s kidneys. The right kidney was transplanted into a 58 year-old woman from Central California who had been on the waiting list since April of 1990. She is married and has no children. The kidney was a little slow to “wake up” after surgery, but it’s function is expected to improve.

A 53 year-old man had been waiting for a second chance since July of 1998. His kidneys had been damaged due to diabetes, and this made working as a foundry supervisor difficult. He is married and lives in the state of Wisconsin, and is reportedly doing well after his transplant.

As we discussed in the hospital, Susan’s pancreas and heart were not able to be transplanted due to her age and decreased organ function. However, her left cornea was transplanted into a 74 year-old woman from the San Francisco Bay Area. The right cornea was not able to be transplanted.

As you can see, your family’s decision for organ donation has touched the lives of many ill and dying patients, as well as their families. On their behalf, please accept our condolences as well as our gratitude for these most humanitarian gifts…

Sincerely,

____ ________, RN, Transplant Coordinator

There is a certain good feeling that comes from knowing that some of Sue’s organs live on in the bodies of others, improving the quality of their lives. I also have to admit that there is a certain strange feeling about it. She is gone, but parts of her physical body live on. I pray the Lord will not only use these transplanted organs to improve the lives of the recipients but that each and every recipient will come to know the Lord Jesus Christ through this experience if they do not already know Him.

Although the letter implied that the decision to donate these organs was mine and the family’s, in reality, it was not my gift to these people – it was her gift, and ultimately it was the Lord’s gift. Sue would not have had it any other way, and I would certainly not have denied her the privilege of giving this gift.

In so many ways, what was true of Abel is also true of Sue. Abel continued to have a positive testimony after his death. “By faith Abel offered to God a better sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained the testimony that he was righteous, God testifying about his gifts, and through faith, though he is dead, he still speaks” (Hebrews 11:4). Sue is still giving today in many ways, and this is a very specific way as her organs give improved quality of life and health to others.

A couple of years later, I was contacted by the recipient of Sue’s liver. This was not a simple process, because all such contacts must go through the California Transplant Donor Network. At first there is no direct contact, and the donor network gets permission from the other party before contact is allowed.

The man who received her liver was a retired military officer and a decorated war hero. He was genuinely appreciative of the gift of life, and quality of life, that Sue had given him. He made it a tradition to contact me each year on the anniversary of Sue’s death, and I very much appreciated that. When that did not happen last summer, I wondered why, but I got busy with other things and neglected to try and contact him. A few days ago, I sent him an email, and I was saddened to receive the following email from his wife:

Hi Mr. Livesay:

It's with great sorrow that I have to tell you that my husband Clark passed away last February. I tried to contact you, but I could not locate your e-mail address. I was hoping that you would write Clark one day.

It was the saddest day of my life when he died. We were married for 44 years and had a great life together. He was in the hospital at Stanford for two weeks. The doctors tried everything possible to save him, but at the end it was not enough. They even put him on the list for another liver transplant. Eventually all his organs shut down and there was nothing else they could do for him.

I want to thank you for the extra eight wonderful years we had due to your generosity. He appreciated every minute he was given and he did a lot of good.

Fondly,

Ursula

In a later email she said, "Clark was such an inspiration to many people. A decorated war veteran, he never once complained about his fate in life. He insisted on looking ahead and making every day count. I have accepted his death, however, my heart will be broken forever.”

I could only wish that Sue’s liver would have lasted longer for him, but as we all know, life is very uncertain from day to day, and we can thank the Lord for what we have been given. I regret never having met him face to face, but there is certainly nothing we can do to change the past. It is a blessing to know that he, his wife, and the rest of his family were blessed by Sue's gift.

This experience leads me to encourage everyone, young or old, to become organ donors. Very many people die waiting for organs that never become available. While we recognize that God is ultimately in control, it is wise to make ourselves available to Him in every way possible. Being an organ donor can certainly be a blessing, not only to the recipients, but also to the donor’s family.

Blogging and Basketball

For the past few months, since mid-November, I have found it difficult to add very many posts to my blog because of the time commitment involved in coaching basketball. Our season came to an end last Saturday night as the Lady Warriors lost in the second round of the CIF Southern Section Playoffs.

What a game! We fell behind by as many as 14 points early, trailed by 12 at halftime, and were still down by 8 at the beginning of the fourth quarter. It was still 8 with three minutes to play, but the girls did not quit and made quite a comeback, closing the lead to three with 5.9 seconds to play. The only problem was that the best player on the other team (Avalon, from Catalina Island) had two free throws coming, and we knew that if she made even one of them, the game was over. After both free throws were missed, we came down court, got the ball to one of our guards, who had not made a basket the entire game, and everyone in the gym held their collective breath as she shot a three-pointer, the clock expired with the ball in the air, and it banked in to tie the game. This was the first time we had been tied since 0-0.

The game went overtime, and we just could not quite get it done, and we ended up losing by 5 points. Nevertheless, it was a game that was a great deal of fun. Those kinds of games make coaching enjoyable, but they also give coaches lots of gray hairs.

Now that the dust has settled, I may find I have more time to post articles on my blog. We’ll see.

Biblical Discernment

Charles Spurgeon once said, “Discernment is not knowing the difference between right and wrong. It is knowing the difference between right and almost right.”

Biblical discernment is sorely lacking today, because there is a lack of biblical knowledge. Often, study of the Scriptures has sadly been replaced by "how-to" seminars and feel-good books. When human opinion replaces God's Word, the result can only be a mess.

For a thoroughly biblical, yet brief, treatment of this subject, go to "The Watchman's Bagpipes," here.