Came across this via another brothers website and thought I would share. This is quite the listing put together over the course of I believe 7 years.Like everything else, test all things. Happy hunting...Sites UnseenBy the way, SI to be added shortly ;-)
I emailed and talked to one of those brothers awhile back, it is a well put together website, resource wise, thats great SI will be on their soon.
How can your average Christian or young Christian "test all things" if it's being promoted here ?I looked it over and there's Lots of Emergent Church sites on there and I couldn't exactly call it a smörgåsbord of other sites, because a smörgåsbord or buffet offers palatable dishes that are non-toxic.I just can't see offering this much to all Christians, regardless of their personal discernment or Biblical knowledge level.May as well bring the whole boat load of 'stuff' in here.Sorry guys. I'm compelled to be the reluctant dissenting voice again and that sort of hurts a lot when it comes from a lot.
Anticipated as much and do understand, hence the 'disclaimer' ...Couple of ways of looking at this.Simply from a research standpoint, not unlike any other thing we might do. For instance Annie knowing your own well heeded and maybe 'special' burden for discernment and what that all entails. Just as well, it was appropriately stated elsewhere that even the "discernment ministries need discernment" (paraphrased). To come along side your own caution for a moment, just as Greg mentioned, I too spoke briefly with one of the brothers and to share a bit in condensed form...Let's just say where he might be adverse to the word "sermon" I would likewise be to the word "emergent" and we recognized as much without canceling out everything by unloading the 'bath water'. To do so is far to simplistic. There is as much in common by familiarity to much that takes place here and might I add this percolating thought that has been brewing for awhile...Ever take notice of how an A.W.Tozer seems to get 'claimed' (If I could borrow the sentiment of that word) by practically everybody, cutting across the denomination\\abomination constructs... It's almost uncanny, Anabaptists to Calvinist's, to Methodist's to Presbyterians to ...Am only trying to dig down deeper into the sediment of our souls by taking notice of it in this fashion, nothing more. Neither is this a endorsement whatsoever, you may be just as inclined if it was one's motive, to use whatever 'information' found as fuel for a particular rebuttal, not unlike perusing the UN site to find out just what they are up to.Now the hard part. Are we capable and even willing to listen beyond whatever 'we' might find out of whack and out of place being lovers of 'all these dead guy's' (Am really stretching this to make a point, not disrespect) to recognize just the commonality that much of the 'emergent' is after is nothing less then we? Not a bit strange to find Art Katz, Ravenhill, Sparks, CCEL, Chambers ... shall I go on? One of the brothers made mention of his love for Christian History, something that many here would like to force feed upon the mases for their own good ... :-? Feel compelled far too often having to make a exaggerated explanation for everything, sensing all kinds of hostilities and the cries of "Ecumenicism" and who knows what at the ready. But I believe there is something far more penetrating going on despite all the misunderstandings and confusion.Thank God there is a slowly evolving readiness to shed pretense and it seems in doing so a lot of things get messy and mangled in the process. Right off the bat a dislike of, and I will use the brothers own way of putting it, and may he forgive me for quoting him;I too appreciate our rich heritage in Christ and the great cloud of witnesses that has preceded us. Many of my links come from the "emerging church conversation," a growing mass of folks who are eschewing contemporary consumer Chri$tianity in search of the best from our past. Please surf around, and enjoy yourself!So in just this regard I appreciate your dissenting voice Annie just as much as I had our own Philologos so many years back about Christian Mysticism. It has stayed with me as a hovering warning and coincides with everything that needs to be tested; The whole 'Prophetic' bunch that I have much disdain towards as it is construed largely, yet "wholesale"? Would have to deny scripture to do so. "Healing ministries" ... Ah... scripture? All the weirdness and twisting and contorting ... Jesus as lover, the many, many items we wrestle with and test back to and by Gods word.To get myself in even more hot water...An example, speaking of the realm of 'Mysticism'. Checked out a particular link about "Centering prayer", interesting (as 'history') and yet perhaps not fully grasping it, some questions came up as it seemed to be forwarding both a 'formula' as well as that of the first verse that jumped up;Mat 6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. So I begged off that whole bit and went over to one that I have been much intrigued by in the past and have picked up here and there...Thought this fit well with the whole Jesus as lover... ugh...You dishonor true love by the supposition that it is anxious about such trifles as continually occupy your attention; it goes straight to God in pure simplicity. Satan is transformed into an angel of light; he assumes the beautiful form of a scrupulous love and a tender conscience; but you should know by experience the trouble and danger into which he will lead you by vehement scruples. Everything depends upon your faithfulness in repelling his first advances.Some more out takes;I am rejoiced to find that God has reduced you to a state of weakness. 8-) Your self-love can neither be convinced nor vanquished by any other means, ever finding secret resources and impenetrable retreats in your courage and ingenuity. It was hidden from your eyes, while it fed upon the subtle poison of an apparent generosity, by which you constantly sacrificed yourself for others. God has forced it to cry aloud, to come forth into open day, and display its excessive jealousy. O how painful, but how useful, are these seasons of weakness? While any self-love remains, we are afraid of its being revealed, but so long as the least symptom of it lurks in the most secret recesses of the heart, God pursues it, and by some infinitely merciful blow, forces it into the light. The poison then becomes the remedy; self-love, pushed to extremity, discovers itself in all its deformity by a transport of despair, and disgraces all the refinements, and dissipates the flattering illusions of a whole life. God sets before your eyes your idol, self. You behold it, and cannot turn your eyes away; and as you have no longer power over yourself, you cannot keep the sight from others.Thus to exhibit self-love without its mask is the most mortifying punishment that can be inflicted. We no longer behold it wise, discreet, polite, self-possessed, and courageous in sacrificing itself for others; it is no longer the self-love whose nourishment consisted in the belief that it had need of nothing, and the persuasion that its greatness and generosity deserved a different name. It is the selfishness of a silly child, screaming at the loss of an apple; but it is far more tormenting, for it also weeps from rage that it has wept; it cannot be still, and refuses all comfort, because its venomous character has been detected. It beholds itself foolish, rude, and impertinent, and is forced to look its own frightful countenance in the face. It says with Job: "For the thing which I greatly feared is come upon me, and that which I was afraid of is come unto me." (Job iii. 25.) For precisely that which it most fears is the most necessary means of its destruction.There are two peculiarities of pure faith; it sees God alone under all the imperfect envelopes which conceal Him,[4] and it holds the soul incessantly in suspense. We are kept constantly in the air, without being suffered to touch a foot to solid ground. The comfort of the present instant will be wholly inappropriate to the next; we must let God act with the most perfect freedom, in whatever belongs to Him, and think only of being faithful in all that depends upon ourselves. This momentary dependence, this darkness and this peace of the soul, under the utter uncertainty of the future, is a true martyrdom, which take place silently and without any stir. It is death by a slow fire; and the end comes so imperceptibly and interiorly, that it is often almost as much hidden from the sufferer himself, as from those who are unacquainted with his state. When God removes his gifts from you, He knows how and when to replace them, either by others or by Himself. He can raise up children from the very stones.And just who is this soul? I will be as foolish as possible here and state that this is as exacting as you can get if you would inquire as towhat ticks inside this mere man. If ever there was a better explanation for all my bumbling, stumbling, long -winded, rambling, mangling of words and definitions, failed expressions and articulations... Francois Fenelon, Spiritual Letters hardly would I be able to better convey it than him. I can see why Tozer was so greatly fond of him. If that is to box one in or apply the "mystic" label, so be it, it's really of no consequence whatsoever. I do hope the guard is up high enough to still accept that there is a great deal of problems with this as a construct (Mysticism) and am hard pressed to find just what Fenelon's error might be in that regard. Would of course be open to examining it as it may have alluded me thus far. But I must admit to some moments of hearty inward laughter reading through much of this, it just finds so much of the "Yes, precisely" inwardly.To throw one big wrench into everything, which seems to be often the Lords way when it comes to our locked down creeds and perfect understandings of how everything is going on in His economy...A bit of Bio...Descended from a long line of nobility, Fenelon began his higher studies in Paris about 1672 at Saint-Sulpice seminary. Ordained a priest in 1676, he was appointed director of Nouvelles Catholiques ("New Catholics"), a college for women who instructed converts from French Protestantism. When King Louis XIV heightened the persecution of the Huguenots (French Calvinists) in 1685 by revoking the Edict of Nantes, Fenelon strove to mitigate the harshness of Roman Catholic intolerance by open meetings with the Protestants (1686-87) to present Catholic doctrine in a reasonable light. While unsympathetic to Protestant belief, he equally repudiated forced conversions.Egads! Catholics, an early attempt at "ecunumerism"?... unsympathetic to Protestant belief and yet ...
MeAgain wrote:How can your average Christian or young Christian "test all things" if it's being promoted here ?I looked it over and there's Lots of Emergent Church sites on there and I couldn't exactly call it a smörgåsbord of other sites, because a smörgåsbord or buffet offers palatable dishes that are non-toxic.I just can't see offering this much to all Christians, regardless of their personal discernment or Biblical knowledge level.May as well bring the whole boat load of 'stuff' in here.Sorry guys. I'm compelled to be the reluctant dissenting voice again and that sort of hurts a lot when it comes from a lot.When you subtitle your post "Trouble and foolishness" and "I anticipated as much ..." how are we to even get past that pointer, to read on ?I have cats and kittens ... I don't randomly throw all sorts of things on the floor and say, here.I tried to say it as fearfully as I could above.I'll do my best to get through the rest of the post - because I need to take it in small bites at a time.If I can, I'll post my thoughts after taking it in.Maybe piece meal, point for point, the whole shabang or nothing henceforth.Thanks for your patience.Annie
When you subtitle your post "Trouble and foolishness" and "I anticipated as much ..." how are we to even get past that pointer, to read on ? :-) My trouble dear sister and foolishness ...Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me,... ;-) No knocks there my good friend, hopefully that will become apparent in the small doses ...
This is all I care about my friend - this is our burden for ALL of His Sheep ... that we would not feed HIS SHEEP anything except what we ALL will be JUDGED BY.When WE stand before JESUS, on Judgment Day, HE will ask us ALL, "WHAT DID YOU DO WITH "MY WORD" and MY SPIRIT OF TRUTH ? Where did you graze ? And WHY ?"All Excerpts Below -DIAPRAX Goes to Seminary By Paul Proctor The goal of Diaprax in the church is to rid the flock of its pesky and divisive hang-ups and habits that impede unity and change – personal convictions and restrained behaviors that are based on Biblical truth rather than political correctness, pragmatism and personal taste. Diaprax is a truth-silencing technique that covertly promotes humanist ideals and a reciprocating brotherly love known in the Greek as 'phileo' through imagery (arts/media) and conversation (opinion/dialog) at the expense of the more Godly, obedient, self-sacrificing, truthful and unworldly 'love-your-enemy' kind of love called 'agape' – the kind of love that drove the Apostle Paul to speak the bitter truth about sinful man from the chains of a dark and lonely prison; the kind of love that caused Stephen to cry out: "lay not this sin to their charge" as the angry crowd stoned him to death for his cutting words of conviction; and what moved the Lord Jesus Himself to say as He hung on a cross for the sins of the world: "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."Those who GO along to GET along, the cowardly essence of Diaprax, are rewarded with the 'phileo' love of tolerance and flattery. Those who courageously challenge the consensus are shamed, ridiculed or rejected for their 'hateful' attitude', 'mean-spiritedness' and 'ungodly' disruption of the group's 'purpose-driven' unity.Facilitators of Diaprax always minimize the importance of scriptural knowledge (facts) and didactic teaching (lectures) in order to successfully seduce their subjects into group participation with un-offensive human interaction, superficial edutainment, non-threatening worshiptainment and dialectic 'team-building' techniques. Diaprax doesn’t teach anyone anything except how to THINK, FEEL and EXPERIENCE what everyone else is thinking, feeling and experiencing. The only thing learned by Diaprax is the process itself. What Diaprax is REALLY all about is unlearning your core values – letting go of anything that keeps you from moving toward the new paradigm of global harmony. It's about turning one's ears from the Ancient of Days to the latest noise on the street for spiritual guidance and direction.You see, carnal Christians led by consensus are more likely to FEEL secure in their group-led opinions and actions knowing they're not alone in them, even if they are unbiblical. But unfortunately, many today have made consensus their conscience in order to avoid any personal responsibility or accountability for sin. http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/2002/proctor/diaprax.htm DIAPRAX - the strive toward 'consensus'.diaprax = (dialectic + praxis). The dialectic requires everyone using it to willingly question any absolute, prior established fact, or position. Praxis requires everyone to personally experience dialectic behavior in a facilitated, 'group-think' environment where everyone participates.Diaprax deceives not only the innocent but also the "wise" and establishes them all on its godless structure. Major Christian ministries are being seduced as they incorporate new management techniques based on diaprax to help them market their ministry. Anyone who complains when they see this happening is identified as a "resistor to change." The "watchman at the gate" must be neutralized if diaprax is to remain undetected. There are many discerning Christians who are troubled and grieved when they come under ministries that facilitate and dialogue God's Word instead of preach it. They hear the Word of God (content) but sense something drastically wrong with how it is being presented or applied in ministry (structure). Because content always builds upon structure, when the content of God's Word is built upon the structure of diaprax, eventually only those scriptures that promote and sustain human relationship building will be accentuated, and those verses that might get in the way of ministry "growth" will be either overlooked, trivialized, or reinterpreted. Instead of instructing us to know, trust, and obey the Word of God, today there is an emphasis on thinking and feeling about how we can modify or redefine the Word of God to further human relationships. Sunday School material is using diaprax to help Christians relate with themselves and the world, asking students to focus on what they think about or how they fell about God's Word. This is something Jesus Christ Himself never did nor asked anyone else to do, but something Satan always does and asks everyone to do. The structure of the dialectic, with its THESIS, ANTITHESIS, SYNTHESIS phases, is used by socio-psychologists to represent different facets of society (traditional, transitional, transformational; or capitalist, anarchist, socialist). The structure can also represent how we respond or think when dealing with problems in our lives (thesis: obey rules and trust in facts; antithesis: follow feelings; or synthesis: justify behavior through reasoning skills). THESIS can represent your original position on any issue — to obey facts, to believe "it is always wrong to lie." ANTITHESIS is then an obverse or different position on the same issue — to follow feelings, to believe that "It is all right to lie to get out of a bad situation." SYNTHESIS thus represents a compromise, the finding of unity despite diverse positions to resolve a common issue — to rationally justify behavior, to believe "It is ok to lie providing it is justifiable in light of the situation, beneficial to others, and doesn't hurt anybody." YOU, A ROOM FULL OF PEOPLE, A FACILITATOR, AND DIAPRAX While sitting in a room with other people, you can classify yourself, first person or "me," as THESIS, everyone else, not first person or "not me," as ANTITHESIS, and what everyone has in common, including yourself, first person and not first person "us," as SYNTHESIS. Therefore THESIS is what you believe is true for yourself. ANTITHESIS is what everyone else believes is true for themselves. And SYNTHESIS is what you and others can rationally come to agree upon that is generally true for everyone.God's Word does three things that interfere with or prevent diaprax: 1) It presents truth external from all cultures, truth that could not be known without a direct revelation from God. 2) It condemns the idolatry that all cultures practice. We all have at one time or another worshiped the works of our own hands and mind, and 3) It transforms that which is good in all cultures, such as giving a glass of water to someone who is thirsty, but it is now done in the name of the creator and savior of the world, Jesus Christ. It is not possible to serve God and diaprax at the same time. The one who tries it ends up serving diaprax, not God. This is why the Ten Commandments, prayer lead by an authority figure, and Bible reading were removed from the local schools across the nation. God was declared "dangerous" by the highest court of our land because He stood in the way of global, New Age tolerance. He had to be removed before "multicultural activities," "self-esteem," and "human-reasoning skills" could successfully be used to shape the minds of the next generation so they depend upon socio-psychologists as the high priest of the New Diaprax Age. CHRISTIAN INSTITUTIONS ARE BUILDING UPON DIAPRAX Unfortunately many Christian institutions are using diaprax to develop human relations within the fellowship of believers. The result is not an increasing focus, dependence upon, and respect for the Creator through faith and obedience, but an increasing focus, dependence upon, and respect for the creation (human-cosmos relationship building) through questioning and speculative reasoning or higher-order thinking skills (the Babylon syndrome). The structure being used to promote this satanic agenda within Christian institutions, even by ministers and youth leaders, is diaprax. Deliberately covering up this use of "humanistic reasoning skills" with selected affective scriptures, which is being done, only makes it more seductive to the undiscerning Christian. ANTITHESIS—"ENVIRONMENT CONTROL/RELATIONSHIP BUILDING" thesis—negation of negation—the right to say no to preset rules and standards. antithesis—conflict—the environment where obverse values are experienced. synthesis—mediation—all willing to seek "common ground" for group cohesion. [consensus] The feeling of the fear of rejection or alienation if one does not participate in compromise, is so great, once cannot refuse to participate in it. PHASE THREE: The "Relationship Building Environment" phase, through repetition (remediation), eventually becomes the habitualized process of LIFE-LONG LEARNING. This final phase (SYNTHESIS) contains the three sub-phases of "determination" (thesis), "necessitation" or necessity (antithesis), and "causation" (synthesis). This final phase is referred to as "freedom" by John Dewey and "practicality" by the transformational Marxist Jurgen Habermas. SYNTHESIS—LIFE-LONG LEARNING—THE DESIRED OUTCOME thesis—determination—to always live in the process and to propagate it where it is not known or used, always looking of a new point of view in others. antithesis—necessitation—always probing another person's definition to expose their lack of self-determination and to "help" them think for themselves. synthesis—causation—always helping others to be rational, to accept compromise as a way of life and to be adaptable in a "rapidly changing world." THE ENVIRONMENT OF DIAPRAX 1. The group environment must be "open-ended," where established norms or preset standards are set aside by the person or group so all participating can more easily explore and discover new experiences together. 2. It must be "non-directive," where rules and preset standards are not presented by the leader or encouraged by the group that might stand in the way of the person or group exploring and discovering new experiences together. 3. It must be "adverse to any closed philosophical viewpoint," where rules and pre set standards are not respected by all participating when they prevent the person or group from exploring and discovering new experiences together. 4. The group environment must be social in nature. 5. It must use a social issue that the group has differing opinions or viewpoints about. 6. It must use a social issue that all participants can come to consensus, or group- feeling about regarding a possible solution. READ THE BOOK - http://www.professionalserve.com/doublespeak/diapraxC.htmThe Emerging/Emergent Church [Etc.] and their use of "Diaprax" To achieve this end, any teaching and practices of biblical churches must first be vilified and exorcised. This is done through the process of Thesis/Antithesis (the Hegelian Dialectic). Orthodox biblical Christianity and its doctrines, the Thesis, are presented as being stodgy, boring, misspent energy, misapplied methodology, and frankly, evil. The new Antithesis is then presented, excesses pulled randomly out of the hat of modern culture while being careful to sound “balanced” in presenting those antithetical excesses as if nothing is written in stone and things are in a constant state of flux. The intended audience of 20/30somethings is then led to a middle point or to a point which Leonard Sweet mistakenly calls "oxymoronic". The ideas of the leaderhip of this movement can now present themselves as those who hold a “balanced” view, when in actuality it is often nowhere near ANY kind of balance. This is when the process of “praxis” or consensus kicks in. The audience is then allowed to express their opinion, to come to consensus or praxis, as long as it does not stray too far away from the center “balance” which belongs to the leadership. Sadly, many have observed in this process, as in other cults, that if too many questions are asked, the person is then suppressed and an attempt is made to “reprogram” them. If they are unwilling to come to praxis with everyone else, they are then told to leave or ostracized and demonized. This process is EXACTLY what cults do, what the Third Wave and Word-Faith churches do, what YWAM does, and is also what forms the basis for this "new" Emerging Church. The whole structure of the Emerging Church, as defined by the Eastern mystical teachings of it's leaderhip elite, is geared around a diaprax model. Those who buy into it assume they are hearing the truth, when in fact they are signing off on the half truths and outright lies of heretics and false teachers in the movement. By signing off, I mean that literally in many cases, as many of these churches, following the advice of Rick Warren and others, are having their adherents sign their discernment rights away in “convenants”. The dumbing down of America and the world is nowhere quite as evident as in the Emerging Church. Emergers are not taught to think for themselves, but to come to praxis. This is all done in a non-judgmental atmosphere (as long as you don’t fundamentally disagree!). Since we already live in a generation that has learned to discern on the basis of feelings rather than the intellect used to study the Bible with the help of the Holy Spirit, the false teachers of this movement are free to “put one over” on the Christian public. But many Emergent teachers are simply parroting the thinking of their leadership who apparently ARE allowed to use their brains to come up with schemes to empower and enrich themselves at the expense of stupefied Christian masses that follow them. Though this movement is built on an evolutionary model of Christianity, with the notion that we as Christians have somehow evolved to a higher spiritual plane, the fact is this movement is the tail end of a devolution of the Faith, the falling away spoken of by Paul, the Apostasy. http://achristianjourney.blogs.com/achristianjourney/discernment_heresy/index.htmlhttp://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/emergingdiaprax.htmlhttp://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/mclarenperfectdiaprax.htmlQuotes:Scripture That Warns Against Falling Before Dialectical Praxis:No One Can Participate in Dialectical Praxis and Keep Their Faith in God -“When praxis became a part of the intellectuals’ dialectic toy, major social changes began to appear in our nation… No one can participate in diaprax and keep their faith in God.” –Dr. Dean Gotcher, The Dialectic and Praxis and the End of the Ages, p. 5. The Apostle Paul warns Timothy About the Antithesis of What is Falsely Named Knowledge -“O Timothy, the trust (the trust or deposit entrusted to you) guard, turning away from-going out of the way from-profane empty talking and antithesis of falsely named knowledge (in other words, knowledge which is not knowledge), which some offering (professing, laying claim to, making themselves out as experts in), concerning the faith have departed from (missed the mark, deviated, failed). Grace be with you, Amen." 1 Timothy 6:20,21. (Greek, the actual Greek word “antithesis” is used here in these verses.)Two generations have now been raised in dialectical praxis.Attack on the Call of Christ, and the Breach With "The Word"Dialectical Praxis Can Appear in Unexpected TerrainMinistries can pick up dialectical praxis in academic training where it is rife, and train its ministry workers in its principles. A man does not have to go through higher education to imbibe of diaprax. He can easily learn it from others at a ministry-or, off the street. And then, dialectical praxis, implemented by the agents of this ministry, can use these techniques to silence dissent in churches they operate. Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Mat 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. 2Pe 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. 2Ti 4:1-3 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; Preach THE WORD; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. 1Jo 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.
Hello all!Mike Morrell here, and its good to be here. MeAgain, I registered in part to respond to your feelings of unease about the contents of the links on my website, http://zoecarnate.com. Having said that, I don't really know where to begin. Like you, I grew up in fundamentalist Christianity, where all "i's" were dotted and all "t's" crossed just so. Sure, the labels changed--for awhile it was "Southern Baptist," then "Pentecostal," and then "Calvinist/Presbyterian," but the spirit of intolerance and exclusivity remained the same. Finally, after my third dose of denominational Christianity I had to ask: "Are you kidding? Are you really willing to divide over ____?" For some it was Predestination, for others, speaking in tongues. But for all, it represented these dear brothers and sisters in Christ willing to divide from one another even though Christ accepts them all, just as they are. I could no longer bide by such denominationalizing, and so I embarked on a quest to know Jesus Christ in simplicity. I didn't care if my brothers and sisters used to be Catholic or Protestant or Mormon...the hunger for more of the Lord drove us. I ended up in an http://atlantasaints.com, where I've been for the past seven years, and my wife and I will soon be moving to help start http://raleighdurhamsaints.com. As to the emerging church conversation...many of us--in house churches and otherwise, including brethren who actively enjoy "sermons"--have been asking questions about what it means to be a faithful follower of Jesus Christ in our postmodern context. We have seen how modernism--influenced as it was by the "enlightenment" and rationalism--buried many of the importan truths from Scripture and our heritage as the church. We are discovering Jesus and His beloved community afresh, and talking and blogging about it. This doesn't look uniform, sister--it can be quite messy. I don't agre 100% with what everyone linked on my site is saying--with nearly 5,000 sites, that would be impossible! But I do trust the Holy Spirit, and the heart of Jesus that beats within them. Together we're asking important questions, and seeking the mind of Christ on matters that resonate deeply with us. I hope you can afford us the grace to make mistakes, as we discover anew the One in Whom we live, move and have our being.
Glad you dropped in Mike, a warm welcome brother.
Hello Mike Morrell.I've just spent the evening on http://www.spiritual-research-network.com/ and http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/ and perusing the plethora of good articles I might add to "Where is this all leading to ?" .I tried to go to your two links in your second paragraph but to no avail.Not all house churches are Emergent BTW. House Churches have been around since the very first Fellowship of believers ... but The Emerging Church is just another "new thing".I have just a few questions for you Mike.When Jesus asked Peter, "Do you Love Me ?" and then commanded "FEED MY LAMBS" and then twice said "FEED MY SHEEP" .... what in your opinion was Peter to "Feed" them ?Also -W.W.J.D ? - Comes to mind at the same time.You said: "seeking the mind of Christ on matters that resonate deeply with us" .... Am I wrong here in thinking that that is what our Bibles and The Spirit of Truth and Prayer were given us for ?Or must we wade through the plethora to seek the "mind of Christ" ?I've read more Classic Authors lately stressing the Absolute Necessity of Sound Doctrine - and it's left me with - that no "testimony" on earth will ever dissuade me from the Utmost Responsibility Before God that Any & all of us hold, who get on the Internet and start hashing out Stuff to The Body of Christ.It would be one thing if, as you say, you hope I - "can afford you all the grace to make mistakes, as you all discover anew the One in Whom you all live, move and have our being." ..... if you did it in your own house Church ... and "Searched for Truth" as an individual first .... but to pour out the contents of everything under the sun for the Lambs and the Sheep is not Scriptural at all. Especially as you at least realize and stated - "this can be quite messy" .... yes it is - for the lambs and sheep who venture there, it surely is and what I fear most.If you want "grace to make mistakes" - that is something that one does with the Lord BEFORE they go into the "Ministry" ... if that is what posting nearly 5,000 sites IS .... but the "plethora" is over the top and I'm afraid that the Lord is the One you'll need the Grace from and not I. We'll be praying for you.Annie
Hi Annie,Let me try to respond to your questions one at a time. I've just spent the evening on http://www.spiritual-research-network.com...I'm very familiar with the folks at 'Slice and it is my opinion that the consistent tone there is quite shrill and embittered...I may not care for The Purpose-Driven Life but I don't think it was penned by Lucifer. I think the spirit of our Enemy is more evident in endlessly divisive disputes. Not all house churches are Emergent BTW. House Churches have been around since the very first Fellowship of believers ... but The Emerging Church is just another "new thing".Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. My house church, for instance (Sorry those links didn't work--try http://atlantasaints.com and http://raleighdurhamsaints.com ), would likely not "self-define" as 'emerging,' nor does it need to. But even though the essence of who we are is grounded in the peculiar genius of Jesus and His earliest apprentices (eg, in the NT) doesn't mean that we aren't in a "new day" doing a "new thing." That's how the Holy Spirit that I encounter in Scripture tends to operate. When Jesus asked Peter, "Do you Love Me ?" and then commanded "FEED MY LAMBS" and then twice said "FEED MY SHEEP" .... what in your opinion was Peter to "Feed" them ?Peter was to feed them Jesus Christ...the One whom we are seated with in heavenly places, whom we eat and drink in our human spirits. We do this through a variety of ways--songs, hymns, spiritual songs, moments of stillness in interior divine fellowship; encountering Christ in the face of the poor. Also in discussing and exploring things that are meaningful to our faith communities in our local context.You said: "seeking the mind of Christ on matters that resonate deeply with us" .... Am I wrong here in thinking that that is what our Bibles and The Spirit of Truth and Prayer were given us for ?Of course. John Wesley, when describing how me make spiritual decisions seeking Christ, suggested we in fact utilize four areas--some people call this the Wesleyan Quadrilateral:Scripture, Experience, Reason and Tradition (this last one also translated "Church history" or "Community")I think that this is an honest appraisal, even if some well-meaning folks want to shout "Sola Scriptura." We do not read our Bibles in a vacuum. I've read more Classic Authors lately stressing the Absolute Necessity of Sound Doctrine First of all, which classic authors? I read many classic authors, like Julian of Norwich, Jeanne Guyon, Francois Fenelon, George Fox and earlier still. I love them. I read Catholics and Quakers and Anabaptists and Waldensians. But I find that I have to discern, to eat the meat but spit out the bones. And more often than not, one of the chief "bones" of contention is this matter you address, concerning "sound doctrine."That poor phrase has been used and abused so much over the past 20 centuries--it's been a wax nose that anyone can melt and make a Gumby out of. I think it is helpful to do a thorough narrative reconstruction of the New Testament story, which reveals what Paul and Jude and others have in mind.In brief, it seems that two heresies were in mind:One, the heresy of adding to the simple reality of Christ's life-giving indwelling, as though grace-empowered trust in God weren't enough. When people tried to tell people "do not taste, do not handle, do not touch" they were crossing a line and putting something in place of organic simplicity in Christ. In short, legalism. Now I'm about as far from Roman Catholic as you can get, but if I want to walk a labyrinth or make the sign of the cross as a way to worship or connect with God (and I understand that I don't *have* to), I don't think its anyone's place to tell me I can't. To me that sounds an awful lot like "do not taste, do not handle, do not touch" to me. Secondly, the first-century church planters (particularly John) were concerned with a nascent form of gnosticism. Now--contrary to what the contemporary mystic-phobes are trying to tell us--gnosticism was not unique in desiring a direct connection to God; this was common enough in orthodox Christianity--John was the biggest proponent of the felt-presence of God in Scripture! No, the gnostics tried to limit who could experience koinonia, or divine fellowship, based on arcane knowledge. Additionally they were dualists, always wanting to divide the sacred from the secular, the holy from the profane, the "physical" from the "spiritual." Jesus' spirituality, by contrast, is earthy and proclaims heaven-come-to-earth.In short, I think that the two false doctrines warned against in Scripture were legalism and dualism--doctrines espoused, ironically, by an alarmingly increasing amount of conservative Christians today.- and it's left me with - that no "testimony" on earth will ever dissuade me from the Utmost Responsibility Before God that Any & all of us hold, who get on the Internet and start hashing out Stuff to The Body of Christ.I agree. It _is_ a grave responsibility. But not one that causes us to squelch diversity. I mean, look at Sermon Index! Do you know how many different theologies are represented here? A ton! A solely rationalist approach would have most of these brothers and sisters condemned, but apparently someone here appreciates the diversity of it all; they're willing to engage someone they might disagree with to find the greater fragrance of Christ Who transcends our "lower level" doctrinal disagreements. Anyway, back to my responsibility as a "cyber-shepherd" of sorts. Believe it or not I take this in all sobreity. To you, 5,000 links may seem like a lot and that the sheer volume means I'm letting "everything under the sun" in for folks to choke on. To this I can only say, do a Google search for "Christian sites" or "Christianity." You will get tens of millions of sites or greater! I will put my sites up against the millions any day. :-)Different things grieve different people. What grieves my spirit is when Christians decide they are Americans first, and promote taking up the sword in war. When Christians are the ones calling for war, discrimination, hatred and exclusion, its time for me to think of something else to call myself. Anyway Annie, I always appreciate prayers, so please do. No imprecatory prayer though, please. :-P And know, sister, that though I am young and I might express myself differently than you do, we have a lot in common--a passion for reality and belief in core convictions of Jesus' divinity and love for humanity. I look forward to your response...
Hello Mike,I take it that you had not read the post that was just above your first on here, on Diaprax and Consensus. The two sites I gave you are not "shrill".If you are not aware of what Rick Warren is engaged in, and knew an ounce about a coming world religion, I 'think' you may see the demonic in it all after a while yourself. That is if you believe we are on the heels of such a thing as a global religion. Actually, more than on the heels.It's being ushered as we speak as the forming religion of Babylon, by using this melting pot method, that you find no harm in.We cannot have Scriptural Unity at the expense of Truth. No where in the New Testament will you find that espoused. Quite the contrary. It will be because of Truth that Christians are brought into Churches to be persecuted and killed.When you or anyone else say or insinuate, that there is no concrete absolutes of Biblical Truth called Sound Doctrine and that we must taste a little here and there .... that's where we shall always differ.I have "a passion" for Biblical Truth ... that I am not ashamed of ... and "reality" can only be based upon that finding of The Biblical Truth.I have never prayed an "imprecatory" prayer towards anyone on this forum. Again, just the opposite. But if you have time to look at least at pages 1 and 3 of the thread link I've given in my first post to you, you may see my mind a little clearer.If you study Paul, "disputes" have been from the beginning and will continue until the end.The whole ballgame of these last days is Truth against Error and vice versa. The whole showdown of the Last Days is over THE TRUTH.Though I quote others in my posts, I am Sola-Scriptura and here I stand.You've thrown out the word "Doctrine" in your discourse, but the New Testament hasn't.I'm sorry that I am so dogmatic ... but it's taken almost 30 years to get that way. I LOVE HIS WORD AND ONLY THOSE THINGS THAT CAN BE PROVED UNEQUIVACABLY BY IT. :-) A Smile, so you know I'm not yelling.David said, "I hate every false way".Jesus (Who IS 'The Truth' and not just 'in-part') - Paul, Jude, Peter, James, may have even said what David said, a wee bit rougher.Apolgetics is fun, because only True Truth can set you free. You should try it for a year or until the Lord returns. Sorry we don't agree, but I sure do love humanity and it's Creator.I don't even kill bugs, so believe me, my prayers will not "harm" you or anyone else I've met here.Take care.Annie :-)
Hi Annie,I was just kidding about the imprecatory prayer comment. Honest. I know you mean me love and no harm. The same is true from me.I was wondering if you'd care to engage what I was saying about the specific false teachers and false teachings in New Testament times. I think knowing Scripture is important, and context is everything. If we can find out specifically what the New Testament false doctrines were and who the NT false teachers are (and I think we can--scholarship and narrative reconstruction are available to us), then we know what the "Biblical" false teachings are. Period. We can't take these verses out of context to apply to whomever or whatever we don't like if we're going for "Sola Scriptura." So, whenever you have a gnostic dualist come up to you or someone trying to get you to observe strict first century Palestinian Judaism instead of having full liberty in Christ's more culturally universal reign--well, you have a leg to stand on. Otherwise, with _any_ contemporary false teaching, you don't.On the other hand! Maybe Scripture is a core part of our heritage and identity, and maybe we as the church are given (in that very Scripture) a mandate to "bind and loose" spiritually in every era. If this is the case, then an engaged, prayerful community guided by the Holy Spirit could carefully discern the times, and things that might be spiritually harmful for God's children today. I think that this in fact is more what you are trying to do, but you can't acknowledge your process because it would give "points" to the "emergers" that have made you so fearful. Strict fidelity to tradition or faithful innovation. You can't have it both ways.I consciously choose the latter, and--with the Scriptures warning of distractions from purity of devotion to the Living Christ before me and my church--we have discovered today's false teachings.They are (in brief)--militarism, unbridled consumerism, therapeutic narcissism and the loudest heresy in all of Scripture--a lack of love. We still have dualists and legalists too, I think.I promise I will never try a "melting pot" method of compromise with these above sins. I oppose the Iraq war and all wars as being anti-Christ, I try to encourage people not to shop at Wal-Mart or other places that do not respect their workers and manufacturers, I try to not be as self-absorbed as the bombardment of advertising wants me to be. In my church I encourage my brothers and sisters to not see everything as "either/or" dualistic, and I always attempt to let love start at home.If these Christian virtues don't strike you as such, it might be because much of contemporary Christianity has just become religious, using pious (even "biblical") language to evade reality and engagement with everyday life in our current context. But don't you see, that's just what Jesus and His apprentices did! They lived, animated by God...they didn't indoctrinate themselves, they just listened to the voice of the Spirit and shined forth in all their love and beauty. Even when they were hunted down and killed, they refused to hate.
Mike, You wrote all of that to justify "Sites Unseen" ?That 'was' the only topic of this thread. I'm not confused in the slightest by 'what' you wrote, but in 'why' and in what context does it apply to or excuse this "plethora", as it's been called.Your list of heresies is Far too short, even for Ireaneus' day, when he wrote "Against Heresies" - and within the last 3 years alone, we've almost doubled the amount of them out there and more than likely is the cause of the "plethora" of new ministries also.I'd prefer to drop the subject of your Website now (twice is a rule) and just enjoy whatever many days the Lord allows me on earth, feasting off of Biblical Truth alone.All His Best to you and yours.Annie
OK sister, consider it dropped. :-) There are those will will enjoy Sites Unseen as a resource for those who are following Jesus beyond the camp of religion, and there are those who will see it is a ticker-tape recorder of the latest red-hot heresies. I hope that the latter can forgive Sermon Index's happy place there, and the former can continue to recieve edification.
Wow! What a paper!
Orm --- no funny face for this post.
These little battles seriously need to be taken to PM. I can't get through a post and read it with leasuire without a fight breaking out. I mean seriously..
Alas yes--I agree. Battles over such things are tiresome. I've added 200 links to [url=http://zoecarnate.com]the site
Oh...what does PM mean?
"private message"
:)
Ah, that makes sense.
This discussion is locked.
