Emergent Church

[Joseph]

Views anyone?...I find it a very strong apostacy lurking throughout and isidiously corrupting existing church members as well as making false converts, if there is such a thing. Frank Viola, who I have read much of, has teamed up with Leanord Sweet, a supposed proponent of emergent theology, in a book titled 'Jesus Manifesto'. any comments would be appreciated

[Paidion]

Viola's book Pagan Christianity had been read and discussed in other threads on the Theos forums. Personally, I was impressed with many things that were explained in that book. I know little of "the emergent church" as such.

[look2jesus]

I find it a very strong apostacy lurking throughout and isidiously corrupting existing church members as well as making false converts, if there is such a thing.

Joseph,

Are you referring to the "Emergent Church" generally? It might be good if you could be more specific about what it is about the emergent church you find to be apostasy and insidiously corrupting.

Thanks,
l2j

[mattrose]

The emergent church is too broad a movement, it seems, to make blanket statements. Like most movements, there is surely good and bad within it.

[Joseph]

Well, take Rob Bells book 'Love Wins' for example, in which the idea that there is no hell and that it was wrong for Jesus to have died for our sins since God is so kind and loving he would have just saved us regardless, is propogated. The book 'The Shack' has raised quit a bit of dissent also in many 'evangelical' circles.

[charleswest]

Well, take Rob Bells book 'Love Wins' for example, in which the idea that there is no hell and that it was wrong for Jesus to have died for our sins since God is so kind and loving he would have just saved us regardless, is propogated. The book 'The Shack' has raised quit a bit of dissent also in many 'evangelical' circles.

Hmmm... would we be surprised if we were to find Rob Bell to be co-located in the same "camp" as Mr. Camping?

It is the camp of Self, and I-ME...

Luke 21:8
And He said: “Take heed that you not be deceived. For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am He,’ and, ‘The time has drawn near.’ Therefore do not go after them.

[look2jesus]

Joseph,

I have not read either "Love Wins" or "The Shack". I have followed some of the controversy about Rob Bell's new book and listened to a radio "debate" with him as a guest on the Premier Radio show "Unbelievable" with Justin Brierly. I would be surprised to find that what you say is being propagated by Rob Bell in "Love Wins" is, in fact, actually being propagated there. My suspicion is that you have heard these reports from others that you feel are trustworthy and, perhaps, you have not read the pertinent statements for yourself. The "read" I get, especially after listening to the man, is that he asks a lot of provoking questions which might appear to attack the "status quo"--think, "traditional view of hell"--without actually saying what it is he believes to be the truth on the matter. In other words, he seems to want to open up the discussion to include other possibilities regarding the fate of the wicked without saying where he stands, though he does seem to favor a more compassionate view of God, according to how he sees it, than what the tradional view would make Him out to be (assuming that it turns out that the traditional view is in error).

As you may know, if you've followed this site at all, there are a few alterative views of hell to that of the tradional one that are held by evangelical (born again) Christians. Personally, I have not delved into the matter to the degree that I would feel comfortable arguing for any one particular view, but there are, it seems to me, very valid points raised by those who hold them and I think it is worthwhile to try and understand where the different camps are coming from and why they see things the way they do and so be able to come to a better understanding of one's own views on the matter.

I find it a very strong apostacy lurking throughout and isidiously corrupting existing church members as well as making false converts...

You used the word aposta[s]y, but I think the term you are trying to describe would be, more properly, heresy.

Merriam/Webster
her•e•sy \ˈher-ə-sē\ noun
plural her•e•sies
[Middle English heresie, from Old French, from Late Latin haeresis, from Late Greek hairesis, from Greek, action of taking, choice, sect, from hairein to take]
(13th century)
1 a : adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma
b : denial of a revealed truth by a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church
c : an opinion or doctrine contrary to church dogma
2 a : dissent or deviation from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice
b : an opinion, doctrine, or practice contrary to the truth or to generally accepted beliefs or standards

But I would caution you about throwing that word around too hastily. My own view of heresy falls most in line with 2b of the definition above. I think that most Christians that hold differing views of hell do so because they don't believe that the tradional view is the truth, not because of personal bias.

The book 'The Shack' has raised quit a bit of dissent also in many 'evangelical' circles.

I'm not sure if causing dissent is necessarily a bad thing, if you're dissenting from a view which you believe to be in error. The key is, I think, to stay humble, and to reason these things out in a loving and respectful manner, and to remain teachable. To label someone a heretic without directly addressing his arguments does not accomplish the goal of finding out the truth.

These are just some of my observations. If you can post direct quotes from Rob Bell or from "The Shack" that show more conclusively that he or the other author is/are in error, that would be most helpful. Thanks, brother.

l2j

[Ian]

and that it was wrong for Jesus to have died for our sins

I doubt very much whether Rob Bell has said this. I`m sure that Jesus` atoning work on the cross would be a base position for him too. What he appears to be questioning is "who has He successfully done that work for?"

[TK]

I agree with L2J and Ian on this one--

I seriously doubt that Rob Bell said that it was "wrong" for Jesus to have died for sins. That sounds like a statement taken out of context, which is never fair to the speaker.

Sometimes is it necessary and proper to challeng the status quo. Believe me, my views on many things pertaining to theology are very different today (and more correct, I dare say) than 10 years ago. But I had to expose myself to different teachers than what I was hearing, like Steve G and others.

I am sure there are certain things about the "Emergent Church" that might rub people (or me) the wrong way. Some people might be offended, for example, of churches that are now meeting in bars. But that's too bad. the question is, are lost people being saved?

The "traditional" church, in my opinion, really isnt getting the job done. They do a a great job of taking care of themselves, having their Bible studies and cookouts, etc. But I believe "emergent" churches are more outreach focused-- i.e. reaching those who have traditionally been unreached.

Of course I am generalizing greatly-- and I may be defining emergent church improperly. But that is the sense I get when I hear the word emergent chruch-- non-traditional and outreach minded.

TK

[Joseph]

The following is from Bell’s October 2009 sermon I will say it again, and again, and again:

It’s interesting how many traditions (pause) When you read the great enlightened ones; meditation, centering prayer, reflection—in every tradition you can find the mystics—and what’s always at the heart of the spiritual lives, the everyday lives of the great ones was always a period of time.

Whether it’s prayers, chanting, meditation, reflection, study—whatever you call it—what is it essentially; it’s taking time to breathe. Because when you’ve been breathing, (slight pause) in a proper sort of way, you’re far better equipped to handle what life throws your way.

Bell has never affirmed the Protestant principle of sola Scriptura.

Rob Bell, Velvet Elvis, 67–68: “It wasn’t until the 300s that what we know as the sixty-six books of the Bible were actually agreed upon as the ‘Bible’. This is part of the problem with continually insisting that one of the absolutes of the Christian faith must be a belief that “Scripture alone” is our guide. It sounds nice, but it is not true. In reaction to abuses by the church, a group of believers during a time called the Reformation claimed that we only need the authority of the Bible. But the problem is that we got the Bible from the church voting on what the Bible even is. So when I affirm the Bible as God’s Word, in the same breath I have to affirm that when those people voted, God was somehow present, guiding them to do what they did. When people say that all we need is the Bible, it is simply not true. In affirming the Bible as inspired, I also have to affirm the Spirit who I believe was inspiring those people to choose those books.”

Rob Bell, Interview with Lisa Miller (March 2011): “I think it’s a great passage because the things in life that matter take incredible intention. And I think it’s a passage ultimately about intention and the power of devoting yourself to something and to somebody. . . . Jesus—I think—is speaking of all the different ways that we lose the plot of what it means to be human. So there was a very real, political climate that He lived in and a number of people said, ‘The thing we are to do as faithful people of God, we are to pick up swords and we are to fight the Romans.’ And He’s like, ‘Okay, the sword thing? We’ve tried that. Let’s reclaim what it means to be a light to the world.’ And He takes them all the way back into their history, which was a narrow way, so I think it works.”

Excerpts like those and many others only reiterate the point that Rob Bell’s gospel is completely antithetical to the true gospel of historic Christianity.