The Narrow Path Ministries

hey you guys
I am new here and scanned some of the topics from years past on books like the shack etc, emergent type leaders...... Are you guys STILL feeling so positive about these things /people ?
Geno

I read "The Shack," "Love Wins," "Blue Like Jazz," and a few of MacClaren's books, out of curiosity, but do not consider myself to be very conversant in the Emergent Church distinctives. I am not sure if there is a set of beliefs common to all those who identify with the movement.

I seldom read much of any author without finding something with which I disagree, and these books were no exception. On the other hand, I did not get the impression that these authors loved the Lord less than I do, or less than other authors I have read, but with whom I disagree.

I don't speak for everyone at this forum, because it is a very eclectic group, including people from many theological and denominational perspectives, but I think, in general, most of us are more inclined to judge a Christian brother by his life than by his opinions. Not that opinions don't matter (we debate them here all the time!), but there are few opinions that are essential to true Christian fellowship—unless we start constructing barriers besides those that God has erected.

I think most of us here are willing to hear out a brother with whom we disagree without insisting that he come around to our position on very many issues. If I find in a man a devotion to Christ and love for God, exhibited in a life of grace-induced obedience and loving service to others, I tend to count him a brother upon no further qualifications. That doesn't mean, however, that I would not enjoy convincing him of all of my personal opinions!

Thanks, Steve.
So do you support Bell ? Would you recommend a new convert to go to his church ? What about Rick Warren ? Do you see him as a good Christian leader ?
Geno

I am not sure I would recommend either of their churches—but not because I have any first-hand knowledge of them. I have heard enough about Rick's church to make me want to recommend something else. I have heard very little about Rob's.

I'm not huge into the emergent movement, but it does intrigue me.

I just thought I'd mention that Francis Chan is not really part of the emergent church, as far as I know. From what I know about him, he is a neo-Calvinist, and recently wrote a book defending the traditional view of hell. A leader in the emergent church probably would not fit that kind of description. I'm not saying that all emergent leaders are non-Calvinist or doubt the traditional view of hell, but I'd suspect that an overwhelming majority of them probably do. (Mark Driscoll was originally part of the emerging church but later dropped out to appear more "conservative" and Calvinistic-- part of his definition of conservatism includes holding onto eternal conscious torment tooth and nail... since he has said that all who doubt it are 'liberals').

I like Rob Bell... I read his books Velvet Elvis and Love Wins. I think they were good, although I may not have said everything the exact same way he did. Bell is more of a poet than an expository preacher. He likes to get people thinking, but doesn't spend much time answering questions conclusively. I guess that's part of the "post-modern" stream... leaving biblical questions open-ended and up for interpretation ambiguously.

This gets me thinking... perhaps in the coming days or weeks I'll post some of my thoughts on postmodernism and biblical interpretation.

I think most of these guys/books have something good to offer. Some of Bell's videos provoke good thought. I liked The Shack. I've generally liked most of the stuff I've read from Brian McLaren. I happen to think Rick Warren is a very solid representative for Christ (I certainly would rather have him representing Christianity on CNN than Joel Osteen!).

I think it is important to read people with an eye for edifying thoughts. I used to read stuff just hunting for heresy. That's a pretty miserable mindset.

I think it is important to read people with an eye for edifying thoughts. I used to read stuff just hunting for heresy. That's a pretty miserable mindset.

Amen Matt...amen

I think it is important to read people with an eye for edifying thoughts. I used to read stuff just hunting for heresy. That's a pretty miserable mindset.

What...... defending the faith ,protecting the new convert from false doctrine is miserable ?

heygeno wrote:What...... defending the faith ,protecting the new convert from false doctrine is miserable ?

You think the best way to 'defend the faith' and 'protect the new convert from false doctrine' is to read every book before they read it and point out all the errors? Or do you think that the best way to 'defend and protect' is to not let them read certain authors at all? If the answer to either of those questions is 'yes' then that mindset is probably just as dangerous as anything they'll read.

We defend the faith and protect the new convert not by pointing out the bad, but by pointing out the good. We focus so much on the real thing, that we recognize counterfeits right away. That way, they'll be able to read a book that has a mixture of good and bad thoughts (aka, pretty much every book in the world!) and have enough discernment to separate things themselves... and cling to what is good!

It is important to defend young Christians from dangerous doctrines. The best method of protecting them may be, as Matt suggests, to teach them to be biblically discerning believers, rather than to try to catalogue every view and every teacher which we anticipate they may encounter. Also, what constitutes a dangerous doctrine would require some consideration.

It is also important to defend Christian leaders from unjust condemnation (1 Tim.5:19). Leaders who sin should be publicly rebuked (1 Tim.5:20), but we must be careful in making up novel definitions of the word "sin." I believe that sin can be defined as disobedience to the commands of Christ, and Christians who commit such sins, if unrepentant, should be subjected to church discipline. People sometimes want to discipline church leaders, not for definable sins committed, but for speaking contrary to the accepted orthodoxy of whatever group they may favor.

When we define orthodoxy, we need to distinguish between doctrines that are negotiable (that is, a person can be wrong on them without endangering his walk with God), and those that are non-negotiable. The latter would include any teaching which, if believed, would damage one's relationship with God. If we do not make this distinction, we will simply assume that all beliefs contrary to our own are off limits to other believers—which will necessarily require us to disfellowship all Christians of other denominations from our own—as well as many in our own denominations.