UnGodly Holiness Part 4, The Danger the Emergent Movement Poses to Missionary Baptist Churches

Learning the hallmarks and modes of operation of the emergent movement is vital to maintaining the health and prosperity of the Lord's New Testament churches. While most American Baptist Association preachers are doctrinally sound enough to stay true to God's Word, the emergent influence that is so widely published through popular Christian authors that it can easily influence a pastor to lead his church into a direction that will dilute the doctrinal stability and harm the fellowship of the church.

The emergent's goal is to dismantle the church as we know it today, and replace it with a less formal, less authoritative body. It wants a church that establishes a dialog rather than proclaim a message. The emergent movement also wants a church that abstains from politics (thus offering no resistance to pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, anti-family and anti-religious freedom legislation), elevates women to prominent positions (in direct opposition to I Timothy 2), and basically advocates that a church become everything that scripture told it not to become, all in the name of tearing down walls of empty tradition to reach the lost.

Most Missionary Baptist preachers see that agenda coming a mile away. However, there are two premises that the emergents put forth that tend to be Achilles heels to some ABA preachers and churches. (1) The fear of becoming inept at reaching a community for Christ and (2) Ironically, the pastor and church's commitment to scripture.

Change! Change! Change! Change you can believe in! The times, they are a changin'. Listen to the winds of change. George Barna wrote in Boiling Point that life in this world is changing at such a rapid pace, that change has become the one constant in our daily life. He also wrote that the younger generation has grown up knowing nothing but change, and the absence of change bothers the younger generation because they see it as a sign of stagnation.

Our nation's demographics are changing. Political structure is changing. Technology is changing how we do things. Think about it... how has social media (Facebook and Myspace) changed your daily routine? Recently, I chatted with a missionary who is on the field in The Phillipines. Twenty years ago, that conversation would have only been possible via a high-cost international telephone conversation, or by me going to the Phillipines or he visiting me in the states. A week ago, I got to see a missionary in Indonesia address a missions conference at Sublett Road in Arlington via Skype.

Values are changing. American's attitudes are changing. The priority of faith and the church are changing in the lives of people. People are busier, more self-absorbed, more opinionated, and unfortunately, less considerate and more rude.

The emergent will point to the rapid change in our society and say, "Look, to reach this new society, the church must change with it!" I'm not talking about contemporary worship vs. traditional worship... I'm talking in method of ministry and operation and even appearance. Terminology is also under fire. Now, the emergent disdains the title of "Christian" and opts for the title of "Christ follower." In my younger and more ignorant days (two years ago), I though this was cool. Now, it bugs me. The title of "Christian" was given to the believers at Antioch by the heathen because of their faith and devotion to Christ. Now, I am told we have to abandon that title because the emergents claim that people don't like Christians.

So the premise that the emergent puts forward is that society is changing, so the churches must change, or else the churches will become irrelevant and will die off with the last baby-boomer. This premise has scared some ABA preachers into leading their congregations into territory where their congregations are rightfully uncomfortable. Some have taken to cancelling services and replacing them with home Bible studies. While a church is free to do so if it feels so led, doing so with significant opposition leads to discord in the Body of Christ. I'm not saying the preachers who do this are emergent, I'm just saying they have been influenced by emergent thought. Home Bible studies are profitable... but perhaps it is best do so in addition to the current services being offered, instead of as a replacement to them. Hebrews 10:25 says "not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as ye see the day approaching." In other words, as you see the day of Christ approaching, get together more, not less.

The premise that God's churches will be left in the dark is flawed. (1) Jesus said He'd build His church, and the gates of Hell would not prevail against it, regardless of how many Facebook groups are out there. (2) God's churches have endured for centuries. Building styles may have changed, hymn books may have different songs, but the constitution of the church has not changed, neither has its mission. To insist that it all change now is ludicrous. Since the days of the Roman empire, the dark ages, the Renaissance, the Inquisition, Napoleon, American Revolution, Civil War, French Revolution, World Wars, Industrial Revolution, two Darin's on Bewitched, the Digital Revolution, and the so called "post-modern" society, churches have remained stable. They have worshiped by singing hymns, special music (it's in scripture), and sermons have been preached.

Churches actively engaged in mission work and associated freely to assist one another in the Great Commission. The world today is vastly different than the world 2,000 years ago, but the church, it's operation, mission, values and scripture, remain the same. Why change now?

The emergent will claim that church today is nothing like church 2,000 years ago, but the church 2,000 years ago would not be an emergent church. You don't think the Apostle Paul would have taken an opportunity to speak out against abortion and homosexuality on the floor of the senate? Go back and read your Bibles and see how Paul acted in front of those in authority. If Paul could have seen souls saved by influencing the government, he would have. Did Paul establish a dialog? Or did he preach the Gospel and establish churches? Churches today are much like churches 2,000 years ago. I can defend this, scripturally. Read the book of Acts. Churches were sending out missionaries, collecting money for the poor, spreading the Gospel, and associating one with another. They were organized bodies, had membership rolls, and were committed to a mission, just like the churches today.

The second premise of the emergent movement which is a weakness of Missionary Baptist pastors is ironically that pastor's commitment to scripture. The emergent, like I mentioned in a previous post, will point to the book of Acts and highlight all the things we do that are not specifically mentioned in Acts. The Missionary Baptist Pastor, desiring to stick to God's word and not tradition, is then less enthusiastic about defending traditions and customs not clearly spelled out in Acts. Thus, little by little, the actions and activities of the church are eroded away until the church finds itself in an identity crisis. This has happened before, but out of reverence to those affected, I will not discuss those examples here.

The premises of the emergent movement paint a nightmare scenario for most Missionary Baptist preachers... a lost and dying world to whom the church is ill-equipped to minister. The fear of that nightmare entices some pastors to take steps the emergent movement pushes. This should not be so. The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believes, no matter the time period, culture, or social change. People today might be busier, but their spiritual need is the same. They might be pushier, but their need is the same. They might be angrier, but their need is the same.

In a time of constant change... don't let the emergent's desire for acceptance rob your community of the only solid Rock on which it can stand. Be the church. Worship God the way you can in your heart. Preach the Word, the way the Lord has called you to preach it. Reach out to people the way the Word, the Lord, and your pastors have taught you.

Hold fast the profession of your faith without wavering, for He is faithful that promised. Hold forth the Word of life, defend the faith once delivered to the saints, PREACH THE WORD. It is still God's sword, and His answer for a lost and dying world.

This should be my last post on the emergent movement.

UnGodly Holiness Pt. 3 - Rebels without a Cause

Zechariah 3:1-2 And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him.2 And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: [is] not this a brand plucked out of the fire?

"Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father." - Jesus Christ in John 5:45.

One of the main problems I have with emergent Christianity is its hostility toward traditional Christianity. Visit any forum, blog, debate or discussion site, and you will find emergents who are unabashedly anti-church, anti-tradition, anti-leadership, anti-elder and anti-establishment. They question everything the church does from organized missions programs, associations, and even the structure of the worship services.

Noticeably absent from emergent literature and postings on blog sites and discussion boards are a clear set of principles and beliefs. So the nature of the emergent church is one of protest and accusation, not one of a constructive nature. So, the emergent church by nature is basically one that is set on protest against the establishment and questioning every practice in which God's New Testament churches have engaged.

The aim of this post is to highlight the hostility of the emergents toward Christianity, highlight the absence of a clear set of beliefs, and note the lack of scripturality and Spirituality in their movement.

The premise of the emergent movement is that modern Christianity has become pharisaical, hypocritical, and nothing more than empty traditions. They prey upon the errors committed by churches and Christian leaders.

The church, obviously, is made up of men, who still suffer from the sin nature and the temptations thereof, and so it is natural that errors will be made. By the vote of the church, or actions of the leadership, mistakes will be made, wrong decisions will be made, bad moves will occur. Doctrinal error will happen, practical error will happen, and leaders will fall to temptation. It's human nature. It happens.

Failing to see the dual nature of man, and the struggle that each Christian has within their own spirits and souls (except when it's their own struggle) the emergent will jump on any error, any sin, any wrong action, word, belief or practice, all for the sake of advancing his own agenda of deconstructing the church. His arguments are not one of "here is the way the Bible teaches us to do things," rather his arguments are, "look how rotten the modern church is. It needs to be changed."

I remember a few years ago. A dear brother in Christ, to whom I looked up at the time, was in the midst of what I believed to be a Spiritual struggle. He struggled at 2 a.m. on Sunday morning to write a sermon. Unable to get his message together, he aired all of his grievances on his blog (which has since been deleted.) A number of preachers jumped in and encouraged this meltdown, until a notable ABA preacher, Brother Bobby Sparks, stepped in and called the meltdown for what it was worth. The initial post challenged the 21 doctrinal statements of the American Baptist Association (which are all basically non-controversial to the learned Bible student), basically saying, "You can keep your Baptist doctrine, I like Bible doctrine." His insinuation was that Baptist doctrine was not Bible doctrine, and that insinuation seemingly infuriated Brother Sparks.

Brother Sparks is still a man to whom I look up. No man preaches the Gospel like he does. Anyone who heard him preach at the 2006 Missionary Baptist Association of Texas meeting in Longview would have to agree. However, less than a year after Bro. Sparks amazing sermon at the state meeting, several preachers, lay members, and self-ascribing emergents were on Bro. Sparks' case for his statements in response to the original meltdown posts.

The posts included such statements as "Who does Bobby Sparks think he is?" and "What has Brother Sparks done for the ABA?" "His degree isn't worth the paper it's written on." and so on. Bro. Sparks comments were not debated, only his credentials and personality. Basically, Bro. Sparks was under attack from that moment on, at least in cyberspace. THESE WERE PEOPLE WITH ABA BACKGROUNDS, who were preachers, lay members, and some former members of ABA churches.

Bro. Sparks has spent much of his ministry debating the Campbellites, so this sort of controversy had little effect on how he carried out his ministry. In fact, it probably barely registered on his radar. Bro. Sparks, you might say, is a big boy. I rehash all of this for the sole purpose of highlighting the hostility and animosity the emergent movement (of whom at least one of the participants of the discussion was a part, and I suspect several more were) has toward the traditional church. As much as I regret having gotten involved in the discussion, it was a learning experience for me. I began to see the enemy at work in our own ranks.

For the record, Bro. Sparks has spent his entire ministry of preaching and defending God's Gospel, salvation by faith through grace apart from works, preaching the Gospel to the captives in the form of debates, writing books that highlight how Old Testament worship pointed to the coming of Christ (which is very important), and I understand he even has become knowledgeable in tax codes for ministers and has made that knowledge available to others. Yet this man, in the course of that discussion, was regarded as the enemy. That basically sums up the emergent movement.

The emergent views the seasoned pastor as a lord over God's heritage. He sees the church's influence on our political processes (such as Focus on the Family's lobbying for pro-family and anti-abortion legislation) as harmful. He sees traditional worship as boring and unexciting, and thus aims to change that. He sees evening services as redundant and seeks to replace those with Bible studies. Back when the ABA Survey blog was still in existence, the notion was floated that a church could conceivable have only one corporate worship service per month and spend the rest of the month in small groups. They see formal leadership as a hindrance because they believe that post-modern individuals don't trust ordained leaders. They see themselves as Jesus Christ, and the New Testament church as Caiaphas.

The emergent would be perfectly content if all the churches in America sold their buildings, scuttled their missions programs, withdrew from the political arena, accepted a secular society, then worked quietly from their homes withing that secular society. Stuart Murray, author of Post Christendom: Church and Mission in a Strangle Land says the emergent church is widely opposed to the attributes of the traditional church, including being at the center of society rather than the margins. Satan also wants Christians and churches to withdraw from society and live on the fringes. It's much easier to discredit and disregard them that way.

Other similarities between the emergents and Satan include the constant accusations made toward the church and its leaders, and the hostility toward God's churches.

Emergents think formal organization is also a hindrance. In fact, having an organized belief system is also useless to the emergent, who seeks to establish a dialog rather than deliver a message. The problem with this viewpoint is that Christ came to deliver a message and complete a mission, not to establish a dialog. When God told His people in Isaiah 1:18 "Come let us reason together," He was not asking them how they felt. He was telling them what He was going to do. He was going to cleanse them from their sin. No dialog. God gave us His message, and He commissioned the churches to spread that message and make disciples.

Perhaps the commitment to dialog and railing against the church can explain the absence of a clear belief system for the emergent movement. Christian scholar D.A. Carson wrote that the emerging church movement is primarily a movement of protest against their more conservative heritage. He concluded that emergent literature is more preoccupied with criticizing the church rather than offering a constructive agenda. In fact, the only thing an emergent will truly be dogmatic about is the need for contemporary worship service.

ABA, as well as most Baptist writers, write about the distinctions of the Baptist faith and use their research and study to affirm Bible doctrines. Emergent writers use their research to figure out why people are non-religious and seek out new ways to engage the unchurched in a dialog, conversation, or seek to interact with them via contextualization. When the focus becomes fitting in with the unchurched and being attractive to them, Bible doctrines and beliefs are abandoned, no message is conveyed, and evangelism and Bible study get reduced to "I kind of think this... but you have the right to your own belief."

Beyond the idea that church stinks, I can not find the central message of emergent Christianity. And I've tried. I've read some of the books, many of the blogs, and engaged a few online. Many emergents (and many Christians in general) don't even have a clear concept of what the Gospel is. The lack of a central message and mission relegates the emergents to being rebels without a cause. They don't like the way things are, they want to change the way things are and withdraw from the church, but they don't really know (as a group) where they are going. All they know is where they are going will be a magical land of authenticity, openness, dialog, equality, and emotional comfort. All of which are alive and well in the Lord's churches, but then again, who wants to wake up on Sunday morning?

The lack of a central message is indicative that the movement is not rooted in scripture. This is vastly different from B.M. Bogard's protesting against increasing infringements on church sovereignty back in the 1920s, or John Leland's railing against the rise of missionary societies back in the 1700s and 1800s. Both men had a core set of beliefs, that God commissioned the churches to carry out his work, not para-church organizations. They had a strict set of doctrinal beliefs, and preached and taught those beliefs. Anyone who has read either man's work will see that those beliefs were deeply rooted in their study of the scriptures.

Contrast that with the emergent's approach of studying the culture then looking for ways to blend in with that culture without violating an explicit Bible command. One example of this is the new rise in third-location churches, many of which meet in coffee shops. Now, scripture permits a church to meet anywhere it deems practical, however, the coffee-shop phenomenon was not born out of a study of the scripture, rather it was born of an idea that it would be easier to get people to show up to a coffee shop where food was being served than a brick building with a steeple. In fact, many of these third-location churches even reject the notion of calling themselves a church.

Notice the difference between studying the scriptures and letting the practice grow out of that, as opposed to studying the culture and building a practice around that. The emergent movement, by practice, lack scripturality because they seem to have no interest in deep studies in the scriptures. Rather, they look for permission to fit into a culture that they have deeply studied. The premise and starting point are flawed.

While it sounds nice to be "outwardly focused," the truth is we are to be focused on God. Any time our primary focus shifts away from God, we are drifting into idolatry. This drifting leads to a lack of spirituality. While the feeling in the room of an emergent gathering might have a spiritual feel to it, the fact that they are operating outside of God's will renders them unspiritual. The greatest action by the Holy Spirit, the empowerment of the church in Acts 2, happened as the church was praying to God and seeking His will, not as they were studying their culture.

The fatal flaw of emergent Christianity is that it seeks to deconstruct the church and remake it after its own image. God never called anyone to remake the church after his own image. We are to join the church and its mission to make disciples in all the world. If the emergents really want to see God move, they'd be well off to get on board.

Mission: Brownwood December 2009 Report

Grace Pointe Adopts Constitution and By-Laws

Pursuant to God’s directions to do all things decently and in order, Grace Pointe adopted their constitution, by-laws and articles of faith on Dec. 6. This step has given Grace Pointe much needed structure as they move toward being self-supporting. The articles of faith match the ABA doctrinal statement, although Grace Pointe did add a provision that encourages the use of the KJV.

Mission: Brownwood Still Needs Support

While Grace Pointe continues to pay her own day-to-day expenses, support is still needed to fund outreach efforts like Vacation Bible School, summer revival, facility purchase, summer youth camp and other public outreach events we feel will help Grace Pointe get a leg up toward becoming self supporting. If you currently support our work, we greatly appreciate it and hope you’ll prayerfully continue that support. If you don’t support our work, we would be grateful for any consideration you may give us.

God has blessed the support that has come in and He has built Grace Pointe well. Our prayer is that the progress we have seen this year will continue.

New PO Box for Grace Pointe

We have a new mailing address for Grace Pointe. Please address all correspondence to me personally, or to Grace Pointe MBC, PO Box 1828, Brownwood, TX 76804.

VBS Dates Set

Grace Pointe’s Vacation Bible School will be held June 7-11, 2010. We are currently enlisting volunteers.

By The Numbers:

Sunday Morning

12/6 - 14
12/13 - 23
12/20 - 13
12/27 - 8

Wednesday Evening

12/2 - 12
12/9 - 7
12/16 - 11
12/23 - 11
12/30 - 6

Finances

Offerings: $1,727.66
Oakland MBC (Rusk, TX) $50
Oakland MBC (Rusk, TX) $50
Northcrest MBC (Andrews, TX) $74.74
Northcrest MBC (Andrews, TX) $68.90

Expenses:

Rent: $600
Rich Cone Air Conditioning (Heater repair) $82.50
Walmart (decorations) $111.43
TMD $82.69
MBA of Texas $82.69
Leland Acker $100
Brownwood Water $84.51
Kelso family (reimbursement for curtains) $60.27
TXU-Electricity $97.64
Banking $3

Mission: Brownwood Account

Deposits:

Missionary Bapt. Assn of TX $2,484
Rocky Springs MBC (Jacksonville, TX) $200
Muse MBC (Grapeland, TX) $200
White Rock MBC (Center, TX) $100
Quaker Ave MBC (Lubbock, TX) $100
Memory Lane MBC (Palestine, TX) $50
Heritage MBC (Missouri City, TX) $200
Muse MBC (Grapeland, TX) $200
58th Ave MBC (Amarillo, TX) $138.47
East Side MBC (Jacksonville, TX) $100
Hickory Grove MBC (Newport, AR) $64.45
Nevill’s Chapel MBC (Mt. Pleasant, TX) $151.64
Muse MBC (Grapeland, TX) $200
Wyndrock MBC (Abilene, TX) $140
Arp First Baptist Church (Arp, TX) $120

Expenses

Salary $1,784
Housing $700
CPA Services $50

UnGodly Holiness Part Two - Declergification

But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd. - Matthew 9:36

Imagine for a moment...

It was a routine play... the quarterback takes the snap and tosses to the running back, who just happens to be your son. He cuts to the inside and disappears beneath a pile of linemen. Everyone gets up, except for your son.

You rush out onto the field. The trainer tells you his arm is broken. Relieved that it's not more serious, but still concerned for your son's well being, you load him up into the truck and head to the emergency room.

You arrive at the hospital, rushing in with your son.

"I NEED A DOCTOR!" You exclaim.

A Nurse at the door responds, "Here at the PostModern Method Hospital, we aren't realy big on titles... but here, let's plug you in to this lifegroup here and your peers will help you overcome the problem."

See, it doesn't make sense in that context either.

Declergification is the process by which a church removes all ordained pastors and deacons and becomes totally run, and led, by lay members. The intent is to eliminate the office of pastor and deacon.

There is a movement within Emergent and Postmodern Christianity to remove all titles from the church. Many even want to declergify the church, meaning they want to see the church reach the point where there is no formal leadership, no formal titles, no formal pastor, and no ordained deacons or ministers. They would like to see the church just be a collection of people who gather, study the Bible, share testimonies and fellowship. While on the surface this might sound like a utopian church, in actuality it is neither practical nor scriptural.

While we can argue whether it is more fitting to call the pastor of a church pastor or elder, we should be able to agree that God's model for the New Testament church called for organized leadership. I mean, if God's will were for the church to go without pastors, then what did Christ spend 3 1/2 years training the apostles to do? Just "be" the church? I think not. Christ was very specific in John 21 of what He wanted the apostles to do. He explicitly told Peter to "Feed my lambs." Peter was specifically told to feed the flock of God. It's no surprise that Peter emerged as the leader of the 12 in the Book of Acts.

The commandment to "feed the flock" was extended to all elders (read, pastors) in I Peter 5. The job of an elder is to feed the flock (the church). To feed the flock means to teach the church the Word of God. This is demonstrated in Acts 6:2-4:

Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples [unto them], and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word.

One has to wonder if one reason our churches are in the shape that they are in is because our pastors or elders have been pulled from the Word of God and made to serve tables... in some cases by taking on too much side work at the church (mowing, cleaning, and other non-spiritual type work) and in some cases, literally waiting tables at the local cafe to make ends meet. I digress.

So, elders (pastors) have the exhortation in I Peter 5 to feed the flock of God... to teach the word to the church. However, it doesn't stop there. Elders are also to take the oversight thereof (I Peter 5:2). This means to step into a leadership role in the church. It means that a pastor is not only to teach the church, he is also to give it leadership... both Spiritual leadership and leadership in its ministries. He is also called upon to be an example (I Peter 5:3).

This scripture is in direct opposition to the idea of not having a pastor, and it is also in direct opposition to the practice in some denominations of stripping the pastor/elder/minister of all leadership roles and placing him ONLY in a position of teaching. There are some denominations where the church is led and governed by a board or committee of lay people, and the pastor only gets to teach and preach. They might let the pastor in on the board meetings, but he has little, if any, leadership or oversight.

Not only does I Peter 5:1-3 give instructions for pastoral leadership, you see this process in action in the book of Acts. In addition to that, I Timothy 3 clearly gives qualifications for the men who desire to fill the office of pastor and deacon. Not only does the first chapter of Titus reiterate these qualifications, Titus is reminded in Titus 1:5 that he was appointed to ordain elders (pastors) in every city. Establishing church leadership was just as vital to the mission of the early churches as getting people saved.

As for pastoral salary, scripture gives indication that pastors are to be supported financially. They are not to get rich from the ministry (I Peter 5:2), but they should have their needs met. How else could the apostles, the first pastors of God's church, stay in the word unless someone were feeding them. Paul praised the Philippian church for meeting his needs in their time of poverty, told the Corinthians not to muzzle the ox that treads out the corn (I Corinthians 9:9), and even apologized to the Corinthian church for making them an inferior church by failing to teach them to support their clergy (II Corinthians 12:13).

I've barely scratched the surface. Scripture discusses the need for pastors, ordained ministers, deacons, all of which could fall under the heading of "clergy." Scripture not only discusses the need, it gives instructions for ordaining clergy and what the clergy should do. While individual members of the clergy may have strayed from their God-called purpose and God-given duty, that hardly warrants direct disobedience by eliminating the clergy from the church altogether.

If the emergent and post-modern Christianity movements really want to set up utopian churches, they would be well of to go to the examples and instructions clearly given in the scriptures. Anything other than that is an apostate religion.

A church without clergy, where every member contributes to the dialogue in a "Bible study" that has no leadership is like kids on a playground playing the parachute game. The parachute game is a game where a parachute is laid out on the ground, and a ball is placed in the middle. The kids surround the parachute, grab the ends, and pull, resulting in the ball being bounced into the air. But as the kids pull on the parachute, the group moves, without solid direction, and wanders aimlessly on the playground until one of the kids collides with an object.

Churches without clergy will wander aimlessly as well, being tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine.

Jesus looked out upon the multitudes and saw them scattered as sheep without a shepherd. May God help us if that scene ever describes the institution of the church.