After a lot of thinking and research, I started to think about how to identify the signs of postmodern influences and/or indicators that your own fellowship may be integrating leanings toward the Emergent Church movement. Sadly, I have to confess that a lot of this is based on personal observation and reports from brethren in my immediate fellowship whom I trust. But here are 6 signs ranging from obvious to subtle:
1. Use of material by questionable authors and groups
e.g., Rob Bell's NOOMA videos, Brian McLaren, Doug Pagett
2. The exclusivity of Christ questioned and denied in favor of semi-agnosticism
The following is a conversation I had with a “christian” friend who had been serving as a missionary in communist China:
Friend: “Ben, you seem to have a habit of demonising non-Christian beliefs.”
Me: “Well, Jesus certainly wasn't lying when he said 'I am the truth, the light and the way'...”
“That's just one interpretation.”
“I think the text can speak for itself, actually.”
“But that's just it. I personally think there's a lot that we Christians can learns from the truths found in other religions.”
“You're joking.”
“No, I honestly believe that.”
“So you have no qualms with the possibility that God could be angry with what you have to say about him even though you also claim to know him as a Christian? How would you feel if I said things about your wife that were completely false, and after you confronted me, I simply said 'whatever, people can believe what they see'?”
“But God's not like that. I personally like to think that god is big enough for us to choose what we'd like to believe about him.”
3. Synergistic “Reader Response” as a hermeneutic is favored over objective, historical-grammatical exegesis.
How many time has you sat in a small-group Bible study where you open your bible and rather than do a proper exegetical study, the emphasis is “What does this verse say to you?”, during you all share and hopefully can come up with an interpretation the whole group can agree on? Check iut this video: [url=http://youtube.com/watch?v=zPjZY2UBtjw ]The "What Does the Verse Say to You?" Game
2Pe 1:16 We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
2Pe 1:17 For he received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."
2Pe 1:18 We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.
2Pe 1:19 And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.
2Pe 1:20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation.
2Pe 1:21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
No word of scripture ever came forth from subjective interpretation, and hence neither should it be
read.
4. “Relevance” and “Acceptability” are seen as the keys to effective evangelization and discipleship.
Rather than basing evangelistic and discipleship efforts upon the systematic study of how the bible itself defines sin, grace and ultimately the gospel, one can no longer “give it as it is”, but must tailor the content of the message in such a way that it becomes palatable and inoffensive. This does not mean we are blind to the culture; had Hudson Taylor refused to study the Chinese language, customs, religions and society, he would have easily come across as a wild-eyed imperialistic westerner regarless of how faithful and uncompromising he was with his message. Where the line is drawn is when we allow the changing trends and fashions of a fallen society dictate the content of a message that applies to all peopleregardless of race, gender, sex and culture.
2Ti 4:1 In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge:
2Ti 4:2 Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage--with great patience and careful instruction.
2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
2Ti 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
2Ti 4:5 But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry.
5. Discussion and dialogue prefferred over rebuke and correction
Sadly, in todays postmodern age of relativism and political correctness, one of the worst things you can say to a person is “you’re wrong.” A lot of leaders fall into the trap of being so driven to please people that they lack the conviction present and defend biblical truth upfront and instead say “let’s side our differences and just get along” or “how ‘bout we all sit down and discuss our ideas, and hopefully we’ll all learn something together”. That’s not what God has called us to do as a church. The whole book of Titus makes it clear: we encourage those walking in truth, and we refute those in error using the Word of God as our basis.
Titus 2:15 These, then, are the things you should teach. Encourage and rebuke with all authority. Do not let anyone despise you.
6. Syncretism rather than thesis/antithesis as the preferred method of problem solving when it comes to opposing parties.
Following from point #5, when it comes to problem solving, the preferred course of direction when facing a conflict between two opposing parties is to find a middle ground wherein both sides can find commonality and further conflict be avoided. When both sides are combined, the eventual outcome will be that both sides share a common overall truth OR both concepts are false.
Truth be told, this form of reasoning actually has it's roots in eastern, not biblical, worldview, specifically the yin-yang theory of taoism: opposites exists not as seperate entities in direct conflict where one has to prevail over the other, but rather as two halves of a single whole from which an objective truth can be drawn.
This is most prevalent when a church has chosen to not take a stand on all theological issues that it may encounter, thus leading to abounding doctrinal confusion and uncertainty (e.g., Calvism/Arminianism, gender roles in the church, eschatology, etc) wherein such issues are marginalized to being irrelevant to the “flow” of the church, or worse, willful ignorance becomes the norm.
What this kind of thinking openly denies the fact that we already do have a source of objctive knowledge from which we can test all things – THE BIBLE.
According to John Macarthur:
So the main contributor to this lack of discernment has been the weakening of doctrinal clarity and conviction in the name of unity, in the name of mystical experience, and so forth. And as I said, the liberals couldn't sell us their theology so they sold us their hermeneutics, relationships, love, unity, mystical experience and we buy in to that and we'll end up with the same chaos. Everybody talking about heaven ain't going there. And everybody talking about Jesus, Charismatics, neo‑orthodox, Roman Catholics and everybody else, don't necessarily know Him.There's a second contributor, and I at least have to get two of these this morning. And this builds on it, and I want you to follow this. I don't want to get too philosophical for you here. The second is this, a failure to be antithetical, a failure to be antithetical. You say, "What do you mean by that?" I mean to be black and white. In debate, in argument, in theology, we talk about thesis and antithesis, a thesis is some truth that's laid down or some idea that's laid down or some concept that's laid down, and here is the opposing concept...black and white, thesis, antithesis. We have to think antithetically.
We live in a culture that some say thinks on what you could call a continuum. In other words, there's no black/white. There's no right/ wrong, true/false, good/bad, there's just this long continuum of relative shades of gray. And everybody sort of is on their on there somewhere. Religion is subjective, spiritual experience is subjective. But listen, biblical preaching is not relative, it is not subjective, it is absolute, it is sharply black and white, it is pointedly antithetical to error. And I'm not trying to defend myself, I'm just dealing with the text here. But I tell you, the criticism that comes back to me all the time is, "You are so strong on doctrine." I don't know what else to be because that is the nature of truth, the truth divides and sets itself against error. We must think antithetically. You hear a thesis, and you must look at an antithesis, the opposite and test it. And it's absolute, truth is absolute, therefore it rubs people the wrong way. It hits them with conviction.
Since worldly thinking pollutes the minds of most church goers, and worldly thinking is this big gray area, nothing is really black and white, nothing is really right and wrong...I was listening the other day to a guy, driving in the car, to Barbara DeAngelis on talk radio. And this lady was calling in and she was telling about a relationship she's having with a man whom she wasn't married to and she was living and she...and this counselor said, "Well, it's got to be right for you, it's got to be right for you, there's really nothing that's right or wrong, it just has to be right for you." That's the continuum. And that's the kind of stuff that we're continually being sold. So we have a culture growing up with continuum kind of thinking, that things are not black and white they're just different shades of gray. Black and white preaching, teaching from Scripture is seen as offensive and fanatical. But in the Bible, antithesis is crucial, discernment is essential. And the Bible just lays things down black and white. I mean, just follow this thought. From the Garden of Eden with its two trees, one allowed and one forbidden, to the eternal destiny of the human being, in heaven or hell, the Bible sets forth two and only two ways, God's way and all other ways. People are said to be saved or lost. They belong to God's people or Satan's people. There is the mount of blessing and the mount of cursing. There is the narrow way and the broad way. There is eternal life and eternal destruction. There are those who are against us and those who are with us. There are those within the Kingdom, those without the Kingdom. There is life and death, truth and falsehood, good and bad, light and darkness, kingdom of God, kingdom of Satan, love, hatred, spiritual wisdom, wisdom of the world. Christ is said to be the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father but by Him, He is the only name under the sky by which one may be saved. Everything in Scripture is absolute. It is basic to divine revelation.
[url=http://www.gty.org/Resources/Transcripts/52-32]A Call for Discernment[/url]
What I find disturbing about the above list is that even those who come from fellowships where people have had no exposure to, let alone knowledge of the Emergent Church (specifaccly those from international fellowships) are picking up it's characteristic traits. What we have here is more than just a trend picked up by seeing demonstrated examples. If people can get on the bandwagon of a questionable doctrine or theology without any prior exposure or knowledge of it, then it means that this is not a solely man-made invention, but instead reflects a common deception on the part of Satan himself.
