Dangers of Emerging Church Theology EDITED
TRAMPOLINE THEOLOGY - There are no absolutes
An Emerging Church pastor argues that the doctrines of Christianity should be thought of as the “springs” that hold up the trampoline on which we jump and live in Christ. The springs are not the main point; they merely facilitate the greater goal of “us finding our lives in God” (25).
QUOTE
- What if tomorrow someone digs up definitive proof that Jesus had a real, earthly, biological father named Larry, and archeologists find Larry’s tomb and do DNA samples and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the virgin birth was really just a bit of mythologizing the Gospel writers threw in to appeal to the followers of the Mithra and Dionysian religious cults that were hugely popular at the time of Jesus, whose gods had virgin births?
But what if, as you study the origin of the word “virgin” you discover that the word “virgin” in the gospel of Matthew actually comes from the book of Isaiah, and then you find out that in the Hebrew language at that time, the word “virgin” could mean several things. And what if you discover that in the first century being “born of a virgin” also referred to a child whose mother became pregnant the first time she had intercourse?
What if that spring were seriously questioned? Could a person keep on jumping? Could a person still love God? Could you still be a Christian? Is the way of Jesus still the best possible way to live? Or does the whole thing fall apart? (026,027)
END QUOTE
Bell is not denying the doctrine of the Virgin Birth. What he is doing is minimizing the doctrine of the Virgin Birth as an ESSENTIAL dogmatic propositional truth on which Christianity is based. Now, that is because the Emerging church movement trend appears to be there are NO absolutes
Beliefnet adds this assessment
-
"I think a lot of people are deeply fascinated with Jesus and just can't do the Christian packages they've seen. Christianity is a little suspect, but Jesus, right on. So I'm trying to free Jesus from the religion that's built up around him."
Too many churches put Jesus and the Bible into a walled-in worldview where no questions are allowed, Bell says. In this "brickianity," as he calls it, church doctrines are like bricks. Removing one can bring the whole wall tumbling down. "What terrifies me are communities that don't have questions," Bell says. "If there's any place where you would express your deepest doubts, it would be church."
Doctrines should be more like springs, helping people jump joyfully toward God, he writes.
What does the Emerging Church and trampoline theology do with the resurrection. Here is Paul's take on this essential BRICK (foundational) Doctrine.
-
12 Now if Christ is preached, that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?
13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised;
14 and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain.
15 Moreover we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised.
16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised;
17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins.
18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.
New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995 (1 Co 15:12–18). LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.
When we read Paul's statement regarding the foundational or brick doctrine of the resurrection, how can we reach any conclusion but the dogmatic proposition that Jesus Christ rose from the dead. The statement of Jesus resurrection stands, as is, and must be beyond questioning. It is such an essential doctrine that to fail to believe this doctrine brings into question one's salvation. Today we dont want to hear that ANY belief/error in belief can impact a soul's stand with God. We can debate election, healing, tongues, etc. What we believe about those wont add to or detract from our relationship with Christ.
Christ's existence and death are irrefutable facts in world history. They arent debatable to anyone. But what about His resurrection? Is Jesus in the grave or not, and does it matter? You see there are foundational truths that were delivered to the Church, and for which the Church is called to contend (Jude). The whole idea of contending for the faith implies the existence of absolute truths that are beyond questioning and non-negotiable to the Christian. These core truths define God, the Church and salvation to a fallen humanity. Some say God is too big to be defined in any way. That would be true had He not done precisely what Jesus promised and that is reveal Himself to Jesus' Apostles who wrote the New Testament. Since God is declared through Christ, and Christ's actions and words are recorded in scripture, then the validity of our relationship is discernible by its consistency with scripture. We must be consistent with scripture. We werent there to hear the essential truths of Jesus' teachings, but we have 4 books (the Gospels) that tell us what those teaching are. And we have the rest of the New testament that tells us how to apply those teachings, and what Jesus first advent definitively must mean to the Christian in a non-negotiable way. The essential and exclusively Christian doctrine that separates the saved and the perishing is that Jesus rose from the dead. If Christ was not resurrected in the faith you and I hold and confess, then we are still in our sins.
In conclusion, this is not a matter of one being right and everyone else wrong unless the One we are referencing is God. The key doctrines of scripture MUST be accepted to be right with God and only then live right before Him. These doctrines include the Virgin Birth, death of Christ for all people, Jesus resurrection from the dead, and others.
Question:
What do you think of the Emerging church movement today? Do we put too much emphasis on hell when the Bible cant mean there is a literal hell?
What valid points do you see this movement bringing to the table? For one, if so much of orthodox Christianity did not disregard the Gospel's social ramifications then Christianity would be more believable. That is true. One person correctly said that ancillary movements to orthodox Christianity abound when orthodox Christians become lethargic. Then the orthodox Christian protects her/his orthodoxy even though his/her practice doesnt line up with those orthodox beliefs. The result is a religion that is hypocritical and people run from. We must reach out and help the poor. Yet, faith in Christ means much more than helping the poor. We dont want to ignore either the horizontal or the vertical dimensions of the relationship Christ's blood brought us into.
Emanresu said:" yet unlike
Emanresu said:
" yet unlike you I do not believe tragic mistakes and mis-understandings shall damn and doom a soul to hell. So in my book which is the Bible you are free to mis-understand my book."
jwmcmac comments:
Not like I . . . 'Un-repented sins' is not a tragic mistake . . . but a 'willful' one.
It is only a 'willfully' committed mortal sin which is un-repented of which has the power to condemn one to hell . . . by his own Free-will 'Choice'.
Mistakes are made and can be repented of . . . and must be repented of.
That is why we must 'Seek the Truth' . . . with our whole Mind, Heart and strenth of our Soul. That is why we 'tell' the Good-News to others . . . so that they can have the Necessary Faith which comes by 'Hearing' the 'Word of GOD'.
It is not my job or yours to condemn. It is our job to point to the Truth . . . so that they may come to Believe and Repent and be Saved through that Faith and by the Grace and Mercy of GOD presented in the Person of JESUS CHRIST.
Nope! Not like I at all . . . if that is the way you see what I said.
Emanresu said:
"You are a servant of Christ and I am a son of God."
jwmcmac comments:
I believe that you and I are both Servant and SON, just as was the LORD HIMSELF . . . at least that is how I see it . . . Servant by vocation in this Life . . . Son by adoption in CHRIST, by Grace. Don't confuse this . . . it is both.
Emanresu said:
"Demonstrate to me that I must be wrong, rather than you must be right, demonstrate that something I say is beyond a shadow of doubt incorrect mis-understanding, instead of throwing your familiar argument, against which you ignore all critiicsm."
jwmcmac comments:
Why bother convincing you that you are wrong . . . when many times you are not wrong . . . ?
I am only stating what I Believe JESUS and HIS Church Teaches. If what you Believe is in conflict with what I have said as regarding the Faith as the Church Teaches it . . . it is not my job or intention to do either one . . . neither to convince you that you are wrong nor to convince you that I am right.
I am only presenting the Teaching of the Church . . . as best and as clearly as I can . . . because I Believe it . . . and I am trying to clarify that Teaching at all times in the face of mis-understandings and mis-interpretations of that Truth, as the Church understands and Teaches that Truth found in the Person and Teachings of CHRIST.
I let the Truth of CHRIST and of HIS Church 'Speak for Itself'. That is my job. It is the Job of the HOLY SPIRIT to Bless you and I to the understanding there-of of the Truth . . . though HE does expect us to be 'receptive' in that HE expects us to Love one another in this process.
I do not find what you say offensive . . . only incomplete . . . and sometimes I find you to mis-interpret the Church's Teachings because of your own pre-conceived idea that She must be wrong . . . and you right.
I am not even saying that I am right . . . but am saying that She is right . . . because of the HOLY SPIRIT WHO overshadows and Indwells Her . . . if we understand 'correctly' in what manner this is accomplished.
Emanresu said:
"Clearly the rules you have applied can not always apply, as the resurrection is also now because God is not a God of the dead, but of the living, which astonishes many but is still what the Christ has taught."
jwmcmac comments:
I did not say my rules always apply in every conceivable instance . . . as you are correct that they do not.
But . . . don't limit your understanding or that of the Church . . . and don't limit the understanding or application of the rules . . . as you say . . . these rules apply in an ever-present on-going manner of continuity . . . and these rules apply in specific instances of time and place, historically, as well.
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a Prime example of this.
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is an ongoing Historical 'Making-Present' of the 'One-Time-Historical-Event-of-Calvary' which Event is also an 'Ongoing-Eternal-Ever-Present-Reality' which both are One Event . . . that being . . . the Event of 'Lamb Slain before the foundation of the World' . . . WHO also is Slain Once at Calvary in History.
*** as to Heaven and Hell ***
I do not disagree with you.
Heaven and Hell are ongoing Realities, in this Life . . . states of being, so to speak . . . and they are actual Realities as well . . . in Time and in Eternity . . . and at the end of time, so to speak.
Some of those who have 'fallen asleep' in the first death, the death of the body . . . are 'alive' in the LORD . . . already in Heaven . . . even as we speak (thus you might say that we already have one spiritual foot in Heaven, even if we are curently living on this earth - or whether or not we have passed away, the first death) . . . if we have died in Faith and in Grace . . . then we are awaiting the redemption of our body.
Some of those who are 'alive' on this earth in the present Life, alive in the flesh . . . are 'dead' in their souls . . . even as we speak (thus you might say they have one spiritual foot in hell) . . . being reserved unto a corrupt body on that day of judgement.
Location does not matter. However . . .
. . . Experiencing the first death does matter . . . as this seals our fate, so to speak.
As we Live, so shall we die . . . whether to Heaven or to Hell we go, based on our works in the LORD or our lack there-of.
As long as we have not experienced the first death, that of the body . . . we have a chance to Believe and Repent and be Saved.
It is said . . . do not die the second death . . . which is that 'living-death' which is the death of un-repented sin . . . the eternal death of our 'eternal-soul', if we die the first death while in that state of un-repentance.
This 'second-death' . . . the death of the soul . . . in un-repented sin . . . is permanent and is un-forgivable, if we die the first death while in this un-repentant state of being . . . which state is that of un-repentant mortal sin.
The only 'unforgivable-sin' is the sin by which we 'do-not-repent' and this is a sin against the HOLY SPIRIT because it is HE WHO 'convicts' us of our sins. If we 'refuse' to repent . . . it is our murdering of our conscience . . . murdering the Life of the HOLY SPIRIT in our soul.
Since the soul of a man was made eternal, in the image of GOD, it cannot 'die' as in cease to exist.
This is why we call it 'Living-Death' to Die the second death, the death of the soul . . . as it is 'existence' without the source of all Life, GOD . . . Existence without Life.
I do not really disagree with much of what you have said, I think, but you are correct in that I agree with the Teaching of the Church . . . and She Teaches much more than you are covering at any one time.
The Church exists on two levels at the same time . . . the time and the eternal . . . and these as One . . . and She is always aware of both of these at once . . . both seperately and together at once . . . which can seem confusing to those who are only dealing in one or the other separately and not at once.
GOD Bless us all.