Liberal Media Use Heretic to Counter Christ

Rob Bell of the "emergent church" movement is finally being fully exposed as a "wolf in sheep's clothing" and the liberal media just can't get enough of him.

For background, read Heretical Preacher Embraced by Liberal Media

-- From "'Love Wins': Pastor's book kindles firestorm over hell" by Cathy Lynn Grossman, USA TODAY 3/14/11

Bell's new book, Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived, has provoked weeks of fierce infighting among pastors, theologians and anyone else who scans the Christian blogosphere where critics rage that he's a hipster heretic.

But Richard Mouw, president of the world's largest Protestant [liberal] seminary, Fuller Theological Seminary based in Pasadena, Calif., calls Love Wins "a great book, well within the bounds of orthodox Christianity and passionate about Jesus.

In Love Wins, which arrives in stores Tuesday, Bell claims:

• Heaven and hell are choices we make and live with right now. "God gives us what we want," including the freedom to live apart from God (hell) or turn God's way (heaven).

• Death doesn't cut off the ability to repent. In his Bible, Bell sees no "infinite, eternal torment for things (people) did in their few finite years of life."

• Jesus makes salvation possible even for people who never know his name. "We have to allow for mystery," for people who "drink from the rock" of faith "without knowing who or what it was."

• Churches that don't allow for this are "misguided and toxic."

Small wonder that traditionalists call him a false teacher of a Jesus-optional Gospel, leading innocents to damnation and a traitor to the evangelical label.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.


From "Hard-hitting Rob Bell interview goes viral" by Michael Foust, Baptist Press News 3/16/11

"What you've done is you're amending the Gospel -- the Christian message -- so that it's palatable to contemporary people who find, for example, the idea of hell and heaven very difficult to stomach ... That's why you've done, isn't it?" [MSNBC reporter Martin] Bashir asks Bell at one point.

At another point, Bashir asks Bell if it is "irrelevant" for someone to follow Christ in this life if -- as Bell argues -- non-Christians will be saved anyway.

Bell's evasive answers to questions have frustrated Christian leaders. Even in the interview, he denies he is a universalist, and then proceeds to make universalistic arguments.

To read a partial transcript of the YouTube video above, CLICK HERE.

From "What Happened to Heaven and Is Gandhi There?" by John Wilson, Wall Street Journal 3/18/11

Something strange has happened in evangelical churches over the past generation. Not in every congregation, but in the main, sermons devoted to the grim prospect of hell have become rare, and even talk of heaven is muted.

. . . So is Mr. Bell one more Christian liberal describing God as a mountain you can climb any way you want? Not exactly.

. . . anyone who carefully reads "Love Wins" will see that Mr. Bell is not a universalist. As C.S. Lewis did, he suggests that God grants free will to all, including those who do not want his divine company and therefore choose damnation.

Still, the account of heaven and hell that he rejects does sound a lot like what most Christians have taught and been taught for 2,000 years . . .

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Rob Bell and the (re)emergence of liberal theology" by R. Albert Mohler Jr., President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary 3/16/11

For the last 20 years or so, a movement identified as emerging or emergent Christianity has done its determined best to avoid speaking with specificity. Leading figures in the movement have offered trenchant criticisms of mainstream evangelicalism. Most pointedly, they have accused evangelical Christianity, variously, as being excessively concerned with doctrine, culturally tone-deaf, overly propositional, unnecessarily offensive, aesthetically malnourished, and basically uncool.

And yet, even as many of these [emerging/emergent] leaders insisted that they remained within the evangelical circle, it was clear that many were moving into a post-evangelical posture. There were early hints that the direction of the movement was toward theological liberalism and radical revisionism, but the predominant mode of their argument was suggestion, rather than assertion.

Rather than make a clear theological or doctrinal assertion, emerging figures generally raise questions and offer suggestive comments. Influenced by postmodern narrative theories, most within the movement lean into story rather than formal argument. Nevertheless, the general direction seemed clear enough. The leading emerging church figures appeared to be pushing Protestant liberalism -- just about a century late.

. . . Rob Bell uses his incredible power of literary skill and communication to unravel the Bible's message and to cast doubt on its teachings.

Bell clearly prefers inclusivism, the belief that Christ is saving humanity through means other than the Gospel, including other religions. But he mixes up his story along the way, appearing to argue for outright universalism on some pages, but backing off of a full affirmation. He rejects the belief that conscious faith in Christ is necessary for salvation, but he never clearly lands on a specific account of what he does believe.

. . . Yes, we have read this book before. With Love Wins, Rob Bell moves solidly within the world of Protestant liberalism. His message is a liberalism arriving late on the scene. Tragically, his message will confuse many believers as well as countless unbelievers.

To read all of the above in-depth analysis of Rob Bell's "theology," CLICK HERE.

UPDATE 5/3/13: Rob Bell and Andrew Wilson debate homosexuality & the Bible (video):

Heretical Preacher Embraced by Liberal Media

Demonstrating its ignorance of Biblical Christianity (as usual), the liberal media is quick to refer to Rob Bell as a voice of evangelicals, but in promotions of his yet-to-be-released book, Bell refutes Jesus Christ in regards to the doctrine of Hell (for starters).

". . . but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions . . ."
-- 2 Tim. 4:3 (ESV)

UPDATE 3/15/11 Interview with Rob Bell (video):


-- From "Pastor Stirs Wrath With His Views on Old Questions" by Erik Eckholm, New York Times 3/4/11

A new book by one of the country’s most influential evangelical pastors, challenging traditional Christian views of heaven, hell and eternal damnation, has created an uproar among evangelical leaders, with the most ancient of questions being argued in a biblical hailstorm of Twitter messages and blog posts.

In a book to be published this month, the pastor, Rob Bell, known for his provocative views and appeal among the young, describes as “misguided and toxic” the dogma that “a select few Christians will spend forever in a peaceful, joyous place called heaven, while the rest of humanity spends forever in torment and punishment in hell with no chance for anything better.”

Such statements are hardly radical among more liberal theologians, who for centuries have wrestled with the seeming contradiction between an all-loving God and the consignment of the billions of non-Christians to eternal suffering. But to traditionalists they border on heresy, and they have come just at a time when conservative evangelicals fear that a younger generation is straying from unbendable biblical truths.

Mr. Bell, 40, whose Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, Mich., has 10,000 members, is a Christian celebrity and something of a hipster in the pulpit, with engaging videos that sell by the hundreds of thousands and appearances to rapt, youthful crowds in rock-music arenas.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Christian author's book sparks charges of heresy" by Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor 3/1/11

Universalism, in its broadest terms, preaches that everyone goes to heaven and that there is no hell. Critics say it represents a break from traditional Christianity, which they say holds that heaven and hell are very real places. In most Christian circles, universalism is a dirty word.

Last year, Brian McLaren – a popular Christian author and a former pastor - was accused of breaking with Christian orthodoxy and delving headlong into universalism in his book A New Kind of Christianity.

But it's rare that theological arguments become top ten trending topics on Twitter, as Rob Bell did . . .

In the promotional video [for the new book,] Bell refers to the nonviolent Indian independence leader Mahatma Gandhi, a Hindu, and asks, "Gandhi's in hell? He is?"

"And someone knows this for sure?" Bell continues. "Will billions and billions of people burn forever in hell? And if that's the case how do you become one of the few? "

The video follows a trend in Bell's career as a pastor . . .

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Universalism as a Lure? The Emerging Case of Rob Bell" by Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary 3/1/11

. . . Rob Bell and others within the Emerging Church movement represent what can only be described as a new form of cultural Christianity. Bell plays with theology the way a cat plays with a mouse. His sermons, videos, books, and public relations are often more suggestive and subversive than clear.

. . . [Bell's raises] the question of the exclusivity of the Gospel of Christ. With that question come the related questions of heaven, hell, judgment, and the fate of the unregenerate. The Bible answers these questions clearly enough, but few issues are as hard to reconcile with the modern or postmodern mind than this. Of course, it was hard to reconcile with the ancient mind as well. The singularity of the person and work of Christ and the necessity of personal faith in him for salvation run counter to the pluralistic bent of the human mind, but this is nothing less than the wisdom of God and the power of God unto salvation.

The Emerging Church movement is known for its slick and sophisticated presentation. It wears irony and condescension as normal attire. Regardless of how Rob Bell’s book turns out, its promotion is the sad equivalent of a theological striptease.

. . . Universalism is a heresy, not a lure to use in order to sell books.

To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.

Conforming The Church to the Culture: Wall Street Journal

But one of the most popular—and arguably most unseemly—methods of making Christianity hip is to make it shocking. What better way to appeal to younger generations than to push the envelope and go where no fundamentalist has gone before?

-- From "The Perils of 'Wannabe Cool' Christianity" by Brett McCracken, posted at The Wall Street Journal 8/13/10

Recent statistics have shown an increasing exodus of young people from churches, especially after they leave home and live on their own. In a 2007 study, Lifeway Research determined that 70% of young Protestant adults between 18-22 stop attending church regularly.

Increasingly, the "plan" has taken the form of a total image overhaul, where efforts are made to rebrand Christianity as hip, countercultural, relevant. As a result, in the early 2000s, we got something called "the emerging church"—a sort of postmodern stab at an evangelical reform movement.

"Wannabe cool" Christianity also manifests itself as an obsession with being on the technological cutting edge. . . .

Sex is a popular shock tactic. . . . many churches are finding creative ways to use sex-themed marketing gimmicks to lure people into church.

. . . probably the first and only pastor I have ever heard say the word "vulva" during a sermon.

But are these gimmicks really going to bring young people back to church? Is this what people really come to church for? Maybe sex sermons and indie- rock worship music do help in getting people in the door, and maybe even in winning new converts. But what sort of Christianity are they being converted to?

To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.

Redefining Christianity Congruent with the Liberal Media

Guaranteed to get the attention of the mainstream media is every brand of religion claiming to be Christianity that compromises the Gospel (e.g.: toward pluralism, universalism, etc.) and/or Christian leaders prone to hide from the controversy inevitable from challenging popular (sinful) culture.

-- From "Christians Find Their Voice Tackling Global Issues" by Dan Harris, Wonbo Woo and Christina Ng, ABC News 6/20/10

Could the so-called death of traditional Christian America in fact be a good thing ... for Christians? Young Christian activists who are calling for a renewal of their faith seem to think so.

"There's a new generation of Christians who are engaging the world in a different way, largely driven by the fact that we're in a different context than many Christians have had to live in, in quite some time," said Gabe Lyons, founder of Q. The website acts as a forum for people to come together and explore ideas about Christianity's role in a modern cultural context.

In what some are calling "post-Evangelicalism," a revised Christian mentality is making its way into the public forum.

If these young Christians get their way, the future perception of Christians is not as a knee-jerk association with hot-button social issues, but as a largely nonpolitical association fighting for justice, equality and the common good.

Notably missing? Abortion and same-sex marriage, the hot-button issues that surface with every election hand-in-hand with debates over the effect of "values voters."

They want to present a different and, they say, less judgmental face to the world.

To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.

Americans Advancing 'One-World Religion'

President Obama's Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships has an "interreligious dialogue and cooperation" task force that includes a female Hindu priest, an Orthodox Jewish layman, a female Muslim pollster, a nondenominational evangelical Christian pastor, a pastor and black civil rights leader, and a Muslim youth worker.

UPDATE 4/6/10: Can America export 'interfaith model' to secularized Europe?

-- From "Interfaith movement gains new strength" by Julia Duin, Washington Times 4/5/10

Not since 1950, when the National Council of Churches was founded, has this much energy been aimed toward alliances across religious barriers.

Some say the lessening of fervor among evangelicals — the Southern Baptists, for instance, have been losing members several years in a row — is responsible.

Many point out that it's not American Christians but minority religious groups — Muslims, Mormons and Jews — who are providing the energy and creativity for this movement.

One of the newest interfaith initiatives is the annual "twinning" of synagogues and mosques, an effort sponsored by the New York-based Foundation for Ethnic Understanding to build bonds between Jews and Muslims. About 100 mosques and synagogues in North America and Europe "twinned" in November, double the amount that participated in the first Weekend of Twinning in 2008.

Evangelical Christians have been more resistant to interfaith dialogue but are slowly climbing on the bandwagon, especially with Muslims. Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, Calif., has had three such evangelical Christian-Muslim dialogues. The last one, an April 2009 gathering, attracted 30 scholars.

In August, the Rev. Brian McLaren, founder of Cedar Ridge Community Church in Spencerville and a leader in the "emergent church" movement among evangelicals, announced on his blog that he and some friends would fast during the Muslim month of Ramadan.

Sometimes evangelicals and Muslims come together for a common cause, as happened in September when about 3,000 Muslims showed up on the Mall just west of the Capitol for a Friday afternoon prayer rally. While most evangelical outlets disparaged or ignored the gathering, the National Clergy Council, the Richmond-based Hillside Missions and the Christian Defense Coalition teamed up for a news conference to celebrate it.

To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.

Liberal Christian not Liberal Enough for Univ. of R.I.

Inviting Greg Boyd, senior pastor of Woodland Hills Church in St. Paul, Minn., to speak at an inauguration has raised the ire of secularists, despite Boyd's avoidance of Christian hot-button topics of abortion and same-sex marriage.

-- From "University of Rhode Island president’s choice of speaker resonates, stirs debates" by Jennifer D. Jordan, Providence Journal Staff Writer 4/2/10

University of Rhode Island President David M. Dooley’s selection of a Christian minister to speak at his inauguration ceremony has triggered a campus-wide discussion about the separation of church and state, tolerance and free speech — precisely the principles Dooley says he hopes will define the URI community.

But not everyone at the state university is comfortable with his decision.

Dooley invited Greg Boyd, a well-known minister from Minnesota, to deliver the keynote address at the April 8 inauguration, a choice that has sparked all sorts of discussions — online, informally and in campus meetings. Some students and faculty say they are concerned that Boyd’s views on issues such as same sex-marriage and abortion — he opposes both — and his position as a religious leader make him an inappropriate representative at such a significant public university event.

But Dooley, the son and husband of Baptist ministers, said he had read many of Boyd’s books and was struck by their emphasis on themes Dooley says are relevant to college communities. These include separating politics from religion, advocating nonviolence and refraining from judging others, views that have put Boyd at odds with evangelical Christians.

Boyd said he no longer describes himself as an evangelical as the word “has gotten so wrapped up with so much that I’m against. Jesus does not want to enforce his morality on others. That’s why he attracted prostitutes and tax collectors. Jesus has this encompassing embrace. His love for people outruns his desire to control them.”

Michael A. Rice, professor of fisheries and aquaculture, says he, too, is troubled by the symbolism of a keynote speaker who has spoken out against gay rights. But in recent days, Rice said he has come to think the controversy has been good for the university.

To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.

When the Church Fails HIS Mission, All Suffer

The church's failure to respond adequately to the relentless and ubiquitous promulgation of profoundly sinful ideas reveals an unbiblical doubt in the sovereignty of God; an unconscionable refusal to protect children . . .

Will the contemporary American church rise to this occasion to defend children and biblical truth . . .?

Scroll down to video of July 1, 2009 "Who's to Blame"


-- From "Anger and the Church" by Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute 7/22/09

There are some battles in which all Christians and all who are committed to truth are called to engage: all Christians should have opposed slavery; all Christians should have fought for the civil rights of blacks; all Christians are called to oppose abortion; and we are all called to oppose the rancorous, pernicious demands to affirm homosexual acts as moral. The question as to why so many Christians, particularly church leaders, refuse to engage in this battle is a vexing question.

In his book Kingdoms in Conflict, Chuck Colson writes about the failure of the church to oppose the extermination of Jews and the government usurpation of control of the church in Nazi Germany. Immediately following the naming of Hitler as Chancellor of Germany, the persecution of the church began in earnest. In response, a resistance movement sprang up headed by Martin Niemoller and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Initially, they had the support of the dominant Protestant group, the German Evangelical Church, but as the persecution increased, so did the cowardice and concomitant rationalization of cowardice on the parts of most church leaders. In Germany only a remnant, who came to call themselves the Confessing Church, remained standing courageously in the gap for truth.

The German Evangelical Church acted in ways most Christians now view as ignoble, selfish, and cowardly:

Pastors resigned from the resistance out of fear that they might lose their positions in the church.

Frightened by the boldness of the resistance movement, church leaders issued public statements of support for Hitler and the Third Reich.

Some pastors believed that a "'more reasonable tone would be more honoring to those with different views.'" One bishop told Martin Niemoller that those pastors who refused to join the resistance were "'trying to bring peace to the church'" rather than "'seem like . . . troublemakers.'" In response, Niemoller asked "'What does it matter how we look in Germany compared with how we look in Heaven?'" The bishop responded, "'We cannot pronounce judgment on all the ills of society. Most especially we ought not single out the one issue that the government is so sensitive about.'"

In a conversation with Dietrich Bonhoeffer, one young pastor justified capitulation like this: "'. . . [T]here are no pastorates for those of us who will not cooperate. What is the good in preaching if you have no congregation? Where will this noncooperation lead us? We are no longer a recognized body; we have no government assistance; we cannot care for the souls in the armed forces or give religion lessons in schools. What will become of the church if that continues? A heap of rubble!'"

What is alarming about the account of the German Evangelical Church's reprehensible failure is its similarity to the ongoing disheartening story of the contemporary American church's failure to respond appropriately to the spread of radical, heretical, destructive views of homosexuality. Don't we today see church leaders self-censoring out of fear of losing their positions or their church members? Don't we see churches criticizing those who boldly confront the efforts of homosexual activists to propagandize children and undermine the church's teaching on homosexuality? Aren't the calls of the capitulating German Christians for "a more reasonable tone" and a commitment to "honor different views" exactly like the calls of today's church to be tolerant and honor "diversity"? Don't pastors justify their silence by claiming they fear losing their tax-exempt status (i.e. government assistance)? Don't they rationalize inaction by claiming that speaking out will prevent them from saving souls?

What is even more reprehensible in America, however, is that church leaders don't currently face loss of livelihood, imprisonment, exile, or death, as they did in Germany, and yet they remain silent.

To read the entire commentary, which includes further references, CLICK HERE.

Predicting the Failure of Evangelicalism

We are on the verge – within 10 years – of a major collapse of evangelical Christianity. This breakdown will follow the deterioration of the mainline Protestant world and it will fundamentally alter the religious and cultural environment in the West.

-- From "The coming evangelical collapse" by Michael Spencer, posted on The Christian Science Monitor 3/10/09 edition

Within two generations, evangelicalism will be a house deserted of half its occupants. (Between 25 and 35 percent of Americans today are Evangelicals.) In the "Protestant" 20th century, Evangelicals flourished. But they will soon be living in a very secular and religiously antagonistic 21st century.

This collapse will herald the arrival of an anti-Christian chapter of the post-Christian West. Intolerance of Christianity will rise to levels many of us have not believed possible in our lifetimes, and public policy will become hostile toward evangelical Christianity, seeing it as the opponent of the common good.

Millions of Evangelicals will quit. Thousands of ministries will end. Christian media will be reduced, if not eliminated. Many Christian schools will go into rapid decline. I'm convinced the grace and mission of God will reach to the ends of the earth. But the end of evangelicalism as we know it is close.

Why is this going to happen?

* We Evangelicals have failed to pass on to our young people an orthodox form of faith that can take root and survive the secular onslaught. . . .

* There are three kinds of evangelical churches today: consumer-driven megachurches, dying churches, and new churches whose future is fragile. Denominations will shrink, even vanish, while fewer and fewer evangelical churches will survive and thrive.

* Despite some very successful developments in the past 25 years, Christian education has not produced a product that can withstand the rising tide of secularism. Evangelicalism has used its educational system primarily to staff its own needs and talk to itself.

* Evangelicals have identified their movement with the culture war and with political conservatism. This will prove to be a very costly mistake. Evangelicals will increasingly be seen as a threat to cultural progress. Public leaders will consider us bad for America, bad for education, bad for children, and bad for society.

* The evangelical investment in moral, social, and political issues has depleted our resources and exposed our weaknesses. Being against gay marriage and being rhetorically pro-life will not make up for the fact that massive majorities of Evangelicals can't articulate the Gospel with any coherence. We fell for the trap of believing in a cause more than a faith.

To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.

Also available is the full (original) writing by Michael Spencer

The author has presented a very thought-provoking treatise, but concerning the final point excerpted above, he is exhibiting signs of being cloistered from the actual churches that account for the majority of evangelical Christians. Sure, there is demonizing rhetoric from those who oppose evangelical Christianity concerning "culture war" issues, but the vast majority of evangelical Christians do not address such issues, rather it's only a very vocal, tiny minority of evangelicals, who are concentrated in advocacy organizations, bringing culture war issues to the fore.

It is utterly laughable to suggest that rank-and-file evangelicals are currently too focused on Christian witness to the decadent culture.

If the author's prediction of an "evangelical collapse" is correct, the precursor will certainly not be an overemphasis on recognizing the moral decline of American society.

Willow Creek Conference Speaker Denies Basic Christian Doctrine

Attendees told Christian doctrines of hell and the second coming of Jesus inhibits believers from living effective lives of service in this world...

From "Lessen focus on eternity, McLaren says at Willow Creek student ministries conference" by David Roach, posted 4/18/08 at Baptist Press

The emphasis Christians place on the traditional Christian doctrines of hell and the second coming of Jesus inhibits believers from living effective lives of service in this world, according to speaker and author Brian McLaren.

McLaren explained his views April 9-10 at Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Ill., as a featured speaker during the Willow Creek Association's annual Shift student ministries conference. During the conference's opening session, Bo Boshers, executive director of student ministries for the Willow Creek Association, said he does not agree with all McLaren's views but that all youth ministers should consider his thoughts.

...Though he did not specify at Willow Creek which traditional doctrines need revision, McLaren wrote in his 2007 book "Everything Must Change" that the doctrine of hell needs radical rethinking. He argues that people who believe in hell may be inclined to dominate and take advantage of other people, rather than help them.

"Many of us have been increasingly critical in recent years of popular American eschatology in general, and conventional views of hell in particular," he wrote. "Simply put, if we believe that God will ultimately enforce his will by forceful domination, and will eternally torture all who resist that domination, then torture and domination become not only permissible but in some way godly."

The orthodox understanding that Jesus will return at a future date and forcefully conquer all His enemies also needs rethinking, according to McLaren.

Read the rest of this summary.

Tim Roach has written another article, "SBTS prof: McLaren serpent sensitive" that is very helpful in understanding the complicated of the Emergent Church.

In it, Roach talked to Russell D. Moore, senior vice president for academic administration at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, about Mr. McLaren's views. Moore says that denials of hell and a literal second coming of Christ by emergent church leader Brian McLaren are absurd and actually lead to the kind of violence McLaren seeks to prevent. Moore says:

"When a Christian understands that he does not fight for his own honor, but that justice will be done by God, either through union with Christ and His cross or at the judgment itself, the Christian is freed then to trust God, not his sword or his gun or his fists or his tongue," he said. "It is McLaren's vision of a life that consists only of the justice achieved in this era that leads to violence and Darwinian struggle to see that a pound of flesh is exacted.

"It is the kind of world that McLaren envisions, without a messianic hope of a second coming, that leads to the bloody utopian experiments we have seen throughout the twentieth century. If human beings do not expect a Messiah in the skies, they will expect to elect one or anoint one or biochemically engineer one. And, do not be deceived, such pseudo-Messiahs always eventually have a sword."

Christians should know by now that McLaren displays "hostility to the most basic aspects of the Gospel message," Moore said, adding that Willow Creek should not have invited him to speak.

Read the rest of this very helpful analysis.

Apostasy is spreading throughout American churches, both large and small, at an alarming rate. We must be vigilant and be ready to contend for the truth in our own churches.

More information on Brian McLaren's apostate views:

Examine a list of quotes from his books and lectures that very clearly show him denying God's authority as clearly expressed in Scripture. Click HERE.

Read a review of McLaren's latest book, "Everything Must Change," that is rather disturbing (indications of socialism, the social Gospel and utopianism.) Click HERE.

Here is a link of a must listen interview of McLaren. If you are in a hurry, the first two minutes are the most important. Click HERE.

From Wikipedia: (not necessarily the most reliable source)

"Brian McLaren admits to not knowing why Jesus died on the cross, and he maintains that even Jesus did not know the reason for this sacrifice." Click HERE.

"...snatch others from the fire and save them; to others show mercy, mixed with fear--hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh." - Jude 1:23

MacArthur: The Emergent Church is a Form of Paganism

From "MacArthur: The Emergent Church is a Form of Paganism" by Paul Edwards, posted on Crosswalk.com

Paul Edwards, host of “The Paul Edwards Program” on WLQV in Detroit, interviewed pastor-teacher of Grace Community Church John MacArthur about the emerging church movement in America. Paul begins the interview by asking Pastor John to respond to a radio interview with prominent emerging church leader Doug Pagitt. In the clip from October 22, 2007, Pagitt denied that there is a place of eternal conscious torment for persons who die apart from faith in Jesus Christ.

Paul Edwards: Help me with this—the emerging church prides itself on conversation, having a conversation, so let’s have a conversation. How can you have a conversation with someone, when you’re not even speaking the same language?

John MacArthur: Let me just cut to the chase on this one: [Doug] Pagitt is a Universalist. What he was saying is real simple. He was saying when you die your spirit goes to God and judgment means that whatever was not right about you, whatever was bad about you, whatever was substantially lacking about you, gets all resolved. It doesn’t matter whether you’re a Buddhist, a Hindu or a Muslim—doesn’t matter whether you’re a Christian really; we’re all going to end up in this wonderful, warm and fuzzy relationship with God. That’s just classic universalism.

I think you know it’s most helpful, Paul, to go back and kind of recast how we view these people. He’s not a pastor; he’s not a Christian; that’s not a church. When you call yourself a Christian and you call yourself a pastor and you say you have a church, all of that has to be—to be legitimate—defined biblically. And if it’s not, that’s not a church and you’re not a pastor and you’re not even a Christian.

Read the whole interview.

The yeast of the Emergent church movement is working its way through the church with incredible speed. For the sake of your church, be vigilant. More on this to come...