Living Journey

I’ve just read something from a website that pretty much stood out for me. Firstly it addresses the Calvinist - Arminian debate and then it speaks about the dangers of Arminian theology when taken to its extreme. The article speaks about the dangers of humanism found in hard Arminian theology. Could we call this Hyper-Arminianism?

I have often wondered why this ‘Social Gospel’ has taken off in such a big way, especially in the west, and this article may have hit the nail on the head. Well, for me it did anyway. Please note that I do not always agree with every link that I use in my posts, but rather glean contents that I see as informative and perhaps in some cases may answer a nagging question that I may have. The article called ‘The Triumph of Arminianism (and Its Dangers)’ says…

Face it, Arminianism is simply more logical. It makes sense to the person on the street. And today’s church is scrambling to make sense to unbelievers. We want to sound sensible, logical, rational, enlightened, fair. Arminianism is so much more appealing to worldly people.Thus, many Calvinist churches customize worship services, communication styles, architecture, and music, to fit the worldly customers. But they also adapt their theology by quietly creeping away from the “right end” of the theological continuum and drifting over toward Arminianism. The truth of the matter is, they are embarrassed by Calvinistic theology. They have found it offensive to the “customers.” The Arminian approach to theology is simply a more “seeker sensitive.”

Sounds familiar doesn’t it? Then goes on to say that pragmatism may well be one of the negatives in Arminian circles…

We Arminians tend to put too much emphasis on man and his decisions, and not enough on God and the gospel. Sometimes we are tempted to act as if God is helpless without us and our work. We lean toward pragmatism and are constantly looking for “what works best” as if methodology were more important than the message. Since we believe that all men can be saved, we tend to assume that if they aren’t saved, we have not packaged the invitation (or the message) right. We especially love management, leadership, programs, marketing, and research data. We tend to focus more on the “potential convert” than on the eternal gospel. Arminianism easily leans toward a NIKE mentality—”Just do it.”[…]Humanists have a sovereign man and an inactive God. Arminians lean toward the humanist end of this continuum and thus are always in danger of becoming humanists

I definitely had an “Aha” moment when I read this.

Is it little wonder then to see such scholarly work from the Calvinist side everywhere on the Internet to counter the Hyper-Arminian view? Every action has an equal an opposite reaction. Is it little wonder that the Arminian side - if heavily leaning towards humanism and pragmatism - finds itself is a sea of secular reasoning and logic instead of using the Word of God to give a defence? Haven’t we noticed recently that all the doctrines that are pivotal to ‘Biblical Christianity’ have been criticised and questioned - like atonement, regeneration, justification by faith and repentance? Charles Finney is dead, but his views are finding there way back into the evangelical Church big time. Are we seeing a rehash of Hyper-Arminianism, if there is such a word? Read Charles Finney’s views and you be the judge.

As for me, I prefer to think that I am closer to the Wesleyan-Arminian side of things, a hair’s breadth away from Calvin.

I have read enough to realise that the Emer move is full of mainly middle-class white men. So much so that the Emer themselves are asking… why is this so?

However, what disturbed me about Catalyst (and conferences like it) is that the majority of the people who attend these conferences are all white males (goatees, glasses, and jeans). Catalyst had over 10,000 people there, and I would guess that 95% were white (Caucasians), and part of the so called, “EMERGING CHURCH” movement. I can only respond to this by asking, “WHY?” Is the “EMERGING CHURCH” movement a “WHITE THING.” @On the Way

I too have been puzzled by this and not because I am female.

The question why does the Emer movement appeal more to the white middle-class male seems a fair one and an honest one at that. A move of God should be unisex, super-cultural as well as breaking any social-economic barrier. A move of God should bring us to our knees, asking for forgiveness first off!

I came across something today that may shed a bit of light. Or it may be completely irrelevant, but I just wanted to blog my thoughts on it. It was a post about ‘The Kingdom of Emergent Theology’. It actually spoke about this particular theology having a predecessor called ‘liberal postmillennialism’…

It is helpful to know that the Christian community has been down this trail before. Emergent eschatology is by-and-large identical to liberal postmillennialism which flourished prior to the mid-twentieth century. In general postmillennialism is the view that Christ will return after the millennium, or the kingdom age, which is presently on earth.

Theological liberal postmillennialism shares some of the same optimism as its conservative counterparts but directs its attention to social enhancement of the planet.

Liberal postmillennialism focuses on societal transformation rather than personal conversion. Their “social gospel” sees the saving of society from social evil as the great purpose of the church. The mission of the church is not to preach the gospel to sinners in need of God’s great salvation, but rather, to liberate mankind from poverty, racism, disease, war and all kinds of injustice. @The Kingdom of Emergent Theology

What was also said was this…

Maybe the emergent leaders are right, maybe the world is getting better and better and, if we Christians would just get more involved, eventually earth will be like heaven.

Could it be that white men are so blinded by their own world construct - their being successful, and rulers of the free world etcetera - that they really do think that the world is getting better and better? Are they the ones wearing the rose coloured glasses while struggling to even think outside their own world construct? In effect saying… well, if it’s this good for me, then you can have it too, sounds a bit like the prosperity gospel to me, but with a lot of conversation thrown in. Are they just having a great conversation in the mirror to self? No offence guys!

Perhaps the reason that it is filled with white-middle class males is that it fails to attract those who haven’t got it so good. Is this why it is a white male dominated movement? I am using generalisations I know. But the Emer crowd has noticed this themselves. Should they look deeper than their own conversations and start looking towards their theology? Is ‘theology’ really such a dirty word? Surely they must see something doesn’t quite add up?

The kingdom, while already here, will progressively become like heaven as we attend to the social ills and needs around us. Tomorrow looks bright and the day after that looks brighter still.

I actually wonder if this move is so westernised that it will fail to move past the western borders in any great way. All this talk about being culturally relevant seems completely irrelevant to the persecuted church in China, Iran, India, Egypt, Ethiopia etc,. The only thing that the persecuted church covets is the need to be held up in prayer.

It is worth noting that the postmillennial system, which was nonexistent in the early days of church history, was originally systematized by liberal Unitarian minister Daniel Whitby (1638-1726). His system grew legs due partly to the optimism of the age, but lost steam when the two world wars of the twentieth century shattered dreams of the world progressively improving.

Since that time a more realistic understanding of human development has set in and most recognize that the earth is not only not moving toward utopia but is more likely closer to annihilation.

I wonder if this move will fizzle if things start to rock the boat. I wonder if this phenomenon will be examined more as time goes on? Time will tell I guess.

Joh 18:36  Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.”

Where does the Emer camp sit with eschatology? Is it all about the NOW, and not so much about the near Future?

Well according to ‘The Big Event‘ the Kingdom of God goes something like this…

Imagine a world… A new vision for God’s Kingdom on earth

The kingdom of God is here and now

So what is their general understanding of the Kingdom of God?

[...]a consensus by both emerging and emergent leaders is expressed by Sherry and Geoff Maddock: “Our principle (sic) desire is to see God’s kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven. We believe this happens when God’s people are renewed around God’s mission of love and justice in the world.”[1] The conversation apparently views the kingdom as being on earth now but progressively becoming like the kingdom in heaven as Christians live missionally on earth.

Such an understanding of the kingdom of God is obviously at odds with premillennialism,[...]

[1]Sherry Maddock and Geoff Maddock, “An Ever-Renewed Adventure of Faith, An Emergent Manifesto of Hope, p. 80.
@The Kingdom of Emergent Theology – Part 1 by Gary E Gilley

I venture to guess that those other Christians (you know who you are!!!) that dare think along the lines of dispensationalism and premillenialism will be criticised in one way or another.

In fact some may say that premillenialism is a theology that didn’t start until John Darby. But here is something of interest…

“One of [John] Bunyan’s contemporaries, Benjamin Keach, an illustrious predecessor of Spurgeon in the pastorate, has left a very full confession of his views on this point. He was brought to trial Oct. 8th, 1664, on two charges of Anabaptism and Millenarianism. As he stood before Lord Chief justice Hide, the representative of the [Church of England], he was summoned first to answer for his ‘damnable doctrine’ concerning baptism; which, being disposed of, the second article of indictment was taken up, viz., that he held ‘that the saints shall reign with Christ a thousand years.’ The judge pronounced this ‘an old heresy, which was cast out of the church a thousand years ago, and was likewise condemned by the Council of Constance five years afer, and hath lain dead ever since, till now this rascal hath revived it.’ He was condemned and sent to the pillory.” Taken from a review in The Sword and the Trowel (October, 1891, p. 581)

Hmmmm, perhaps premillenialism is not that new after all!

Related Articles

• History and Premillennialism Part I (The Early Church) Gary E Gilley
  
• Eschatology in Church History by Michael J. Vlach, Ph.D.

By the way… I have just added a website to my theology blogroll called ‘Theological Studies’, it looks pretty informative. And here is another one called ‘Think of These Things‘ by Gary E Gilley, not actually a blog but it has some interesting things on it.

A popular website for the emerging reformation called ‘Emerging Grace’ posted something that doesn’t sit quite right within the emergent camp… how many times do I wanna say emergent/ing. Anyway, it’s all about Mark Driscoll and the problems he has with 3 guys in particular ( Those being McClaren, Pagitt and Bell) who are pretty much the movers and shakers of the Emer’s. This from a post called ‘The Emerging Streams Just got Muddier‘.

In my reading this evening I came across the fact that Mark Driscoll spoke at a southern baptist conference this weekend. The reports I read so far indicate that Mark has confirmed the southern baptists’ fears concerning the emerging church, and maybe thrown a few old friends under the bus.

From conference attendees:

“He talked about how Brian McClaren, Doug Pagitt, Rob Bell are basically sell outs when it comes to Scriptural integrity. He presented a strong case and held nothing back. Interesting stuff. Without a doubt, this is the most direct, I’ve heard Mark address these issues.

He specifically cited their views on the Atonement, views on homosexuality,rabbinical study, their influences, and theology. There were some very vivid conversations and references to the virgin Mary and McClaren’s new organization, “Deep SHIfT“.” (Travis Johnson)

Travis Johnson was the one reporting the low down on Driscoll’s take on the 3 guys aformentioned and the 3 streams of emergent. This is his brief point by point break down of the conference.

• the difference between the three streams of the emerging church (the relevants, the Emergents, and the confessional contextual calvinists).
• how that Brian McClaren, Doug Pagitt, Rob Bell are basically sell outs when it comes to Scriptural integrity. He presented a strong case and held nothing back. Interesting stuff. Without a doubt, this is the most direct, I’ve heard Mark address these issues.
• He specifically cited their views on the Atonement, views on homosexuality, rabbinical study, their influences, and theology.
• There were some very vivid conversations and references to the virgin Mary and McClaren’s new organization, “Deep SHIfT“.
• Most importantly, he spoke of how there is a generation of people on the scene now who have no historical knowledge of the Church and how we must engage them.
• If we fail to do so, the Church will continue to compete for an ever shrinking circle of angry children of liberal or fundamentalist religious people.
• Rather than embracing syncretism or sectarianism, we must practice the art of subversion.
• We must follow Paul’s example in Acts 17 and “Go and see” the world. We must understand our culture and speak effectively to it whil remaining faithful to the message of Jesus.

Nice!

Meanwhile the Pyro guys have noted that there are definitely two ‘Different Gospels‘ which are becoming all the more self evident as time goes by. Crazy but true … they have noticed that the line in the sand is being drawn, however cautiously.

Praise God I say! I wonder if we are witnessing a post-emergent move about to happen, as Phil notes…

However you look at it, this has been a seriously hard week for the Emerging/Emergent conversation. I’m thinking of trying to trademark the name “Post-Emergent,” because I think it’s going to be really, really useful very soon now. @Pyromaniacs

I hope you’re right Phil!

Pehaps we can call those who post- emerge — Po-Emers or PoMers — still holding onto that whole ‘PoMo’ theme so they don’t feel quite so outed!

Roger Oakland recently sent me an email about a new book he has written… Here is the blurb:

FAITH UNDONE
The emerging church - a new reformation or an end- time deception
by Roger Oakland

Published by Lighthouse Trails

Note from Author:

In the not-too-distant future, most evangelical pastors will have to decide whether to support or reject the spirituality behind the emerging church. If this movement continues unfolding at the present pace, mainstream Christianity will be completely restructured, and the biblical gospel of Jesus Christ will be considered obsolete. If I believed for one minute that this movement was just another passing whim or the discontent rumblings that so often occur with young people as they search for answers to life, I would never have written this book.

But sad to say, the emerging church is far more than a fleeting fad and much more than the complaints of a group of young leaders. It is indeed a new way of being Christian and its objective is to usher in a new reformation throughout the world.

Those who refuse to embrace this direction will be considered spiritual oddballs that are hindering a unified one-world spirituality that is promoted as the answer for peace and that is prophesied about in the Bible. I know these sound like preposterous concerns. How could a movement that seems so unorganized and mismanaged do so much damage? The answer to that is the reason I wrote this book. For behind this new kind of worship, this new kind of church is a strategic apostasy and maneuver by the prince of this world, the enemy of our souls, to literally take apart the faith of millions-it will be nothing less than faith undone.

Chapter by Chapter Overview can be found here at Roger Oakland’s website.

This would be a great book, and one well worth the read.

This also brought to my mind what it means to have a ‘Faith Undone’.

Interestingly, a ‘Faith Undone’ is classic deconstructionism at work (or is it deconstructionalism, is that even a word?).

Deconstruction was a word that made it into high-popular culture, a word that Jacques Derrida gave birth to. John D. Caputo has taken that philosophy and is the one person that has blended that philosophy with theology within the post-modern emerging church.

In a post called ‘A weak theology — A weak God‘ I wrote the following:

I have found some interesting quotes from people who have analysed Caputo’s work, and from my understanding, the outcome of ‘Deconstructionism’ and its theological and doctrinal implication is something that we as Christians may have to deal with in the not so distant future.

What does Derrida and others who now favour deconstructionism and Post-stinkin-modernism as the way forward for our world offer at the end of it all? What precisely is it that Christians may have to deal with in the not so distant future?

What is the desired outcome?

According to Caputo after total deconstruction, you are only left with the undeconstructible!

And what may that be?

The undeconstructible is the subject matter of pure and unconditional affirmation –”viens, oui, oui” (come, yes, yes) — something unimaginable and inconceivable by the current standards of imagining and conceiving. (Pdf file - Jacques Derrida by John D. Caputo Syracuse University)

Where does this lead?

It is of no surprise, that according to Caputo, Derrida would start talking about religion, a religion that is without religion. He even spoke of the Messiah! Caputo understands it this way:

Deconstruction, it turns out, is not nihilism; it is just high standards! Deconstruction is satisfied with nothing because it is waiting for the Messiah, which Derrida translated into the philosophical figure of the “to come…, the very figure of the future, of hope and expectation.

For we pray and weep for something that is coming, something I know not what, something nameless that in always slipping away also draws us in its train. (Pdf file - Jacques Derrida by John D. Caputo Syracuse University)

Yes that’s right, Caputo is one individual that is giving insightful theology to the emerging church. A theology in a new form that post-modernists love. Caputo is just one of many who will tear down the church to build a ‘Faith Undone’. This will ultimately leave the church wanting and expecting a new kind of Messiah and the old Weak God outside of His own House knocking to come in.

Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock: If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will enter to him, and I will dine with him, and he with Me.

Do you hear Him?