Revelation 4:8 And the four living creatures, w each of them with six wings, are full of eyes all around and within, and day and night they never cease to say,
“Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty,
who was and is and is to come!”

I spend a lot of time speaking against heresies in the modern church. Discernment is important, to be sure, in this day and age. As I was recently at Christianityapostasy 21preaching outside, I felt it necessary not to speak out against the absolute heretical sewage that was spewed forth in that conference, rather, to speak on the attributes of God and proclaim His true nature, as far as it could be communicated by human tongue. One attribute that was absolutely pressed in to me was God’s holiness, because it is there that we must start, for in that attribute is contained His essence, as well as our absolute need as human beings. When we elevate God to his right position, it is there that we can truly see ourselves in truth, and it is only there that we can worship in Spirit and in truth (John 4)

God is holy, that is in the Greek

ἅγιος
1. holy from ἅζομαι (hazomai) to have veneration and awe. ἅγος (hagos) is reverence and the object of it, hence ἅγιος (hagios 40) is what belongs to the same, and denotes holy, sacred. As that could not be sacred which was polluted, purity becomes part of the meaning. ἅγιος (hagios 40) is that which is sacred, and that only can be sacred which is not unclean.

In other words, God is absolutely unique and excellent and utterly set apart from all creation in terms of majesty and excellence and moral purity. Because He is Holy, he is worthy of awe, respect, and honor due Him from that which was created.

Exodus 15:11“Who is like you, O Lord, among the gods?
Who is like you, majestic in holiness,
awesome in glorious deeds, doing wonders?

There is no one like God, he is majestic, that is set above us in terms of Holiness. He is the King of Holiness, and due Him is all glory and honor and service.

1 Chronicles 16: 27 Splendor and majesty are before him;
strength and joy are in his place.

28 Ascribe to the Lord, O clans of the peoples,
ascribe to the Lord glory and strength!
29 Ascribe to the Lord the glory due his name;
bring an offering and come before him!
Worship the Lord in the splendor of holiness

As His creatures, we are necessarily those who should worship Him, and ascribe to Him His true nature and the due honor He deserves, indeed the due honor His name deserves. It is blasphemy to take His holy name and profane it by words, thoughts, or actions. His holiness requires that those who would worship Him, and be called by His name, be righteous and holy in all that they do. this is why Holiness was taught to the Jews by a series of comparisons, in which purity pervaded all the ceremonies of the Law. Everything that they did pointed to the holiness of God and the true depraved condition of man. The Law is God’s standard of goodness and of purity, and it was given to be a tutor, to show us that we are not holy as He is, that we are not good, that is morally perfect. Observe Isaiah, and his response to God:

6 In the year that King Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and the train of his robe filled the temple. 2 Above him stood the seraphim. Each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. 3 And one called to another and said:

“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts;
the whole earth is full of his glory!”

4 And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him who called, and the house was filled with smoke. 5 And I said: “Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts!”

When Isaiah saw God in His temple, he was reminded of how pure and undefiled God was. More than that, He was aware of how impure and defiled he was! I am lost! I am unclean! The only thing that purified Him, and made him be able to stand was a purifying touch from the angel:

6 Then one of the seraphim flew to me, having in his hand a burning coal that he had taken with tongs from the altar. 7 And he touched my mouth and said: “Behold, this has touched your lips; your guilt is taken away, and your sin atoned for.

When we come into contact with the holiness of God, we become painfully aware of our own moral depravity. The holiness of God rightfully produces fear, that is reverent awe of Him.

Is 57:15 For thus says the One who is high and lifted up,
who inhabits eternity, whose name is Holy:
“I dwell in the high and holy place,
and also with him who is of a contrite and lowly spirit,
to revive the spirit of the lowly,
and to revive the heart of the contrite.

God’s holiness makes him transcendent, but he also dwells with those who are lowly and contrite. That is, those who humble themselves before the holiness of God and confess their need before Him. When we are born again, that is what happens. We understand that we are not righteous nor holy, and that God is. It breaks us and causes us to say WOE IS ME I am undone. The role of the Holy Spirit in conversion is that he convinces the world of sin, or righteousness, and of judgement. It causes us to turn around and see ourselves in true light. That is why God gave us the law, to help us to see ourselves in our true condition. When we are humbled by that moral standard, and contrite that we have transgressed Gods law, we turn to him in that Spirit and are able to be saved as we look to Christ, our righteousness.

Many see the law, and they skip that step- the awareness that only God can touch us, can atone for our sin, and make us righteous. They, like the religious lost of Jesus’ day strive for a holiness found in keeping of the law. That pride of self-righteousness blinds us from the holiness of God, making us think that by our efforts we can make ourselves good. We can never meet the standard of God without an alien righteousness found only in Christ.

Hebrews 7:26 For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens.

This is why we must be Born again, made new creatures in Christ Jesus, for it is only in his righteousness that we can be made right. And when we are born again, we need to strive for holiness, as we become more and more like Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit.

1 Peter 1:13 Therefore, preparing your minds for action, and being sober-minded, set your hope fully on the grace that will be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ. 14 As obedient children, do not be conformed to the passions of your former ignorance, 15 but k as he who called you is holy, you also be holy l in all your conduct, 16 since it is written, m “You shall be holy, for I am holy.” 17 And if you call on him as Father who judges impartially according to each one’s deeds, conduct yourselves q with fear throughout the time of your exile, 18 knowing that you were ransomed from s the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot. 20 He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you 21 who through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and a gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.

Because He is Holy, those who are called by his name ought to depart from our former wickedness, no longer conform to them, and be holy for he who called us is holy. It is reasonable service, as we lay ourselves out to be living sacrifices holy and acceptable to God (Romans 12:1-2)

God is Holy, Holy, Holy.

Some good humour for Reformation Day:

The Reformation Polka
by Robert Gebel

[Sung to the tune of "Supercalifragilistic-expialidocious"]

When I was just ein junger Mann I studied canon law;
While Erfurt was a challenge, it was just to please my Pa.
Then came the storm, the lightning struck, I called upon Saint Anne,
I shaved my head, I took my vows, an Augustinian! Oh…

Chorus:
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation
Speak your mind against them and face excommunication!
Nail your theses to the door, let’s start a Reformation!
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation!

When Tetzel came near Wittenberg, St. Peter’s profits soared,
I wrote a little notice for the All Saints’ Bull’tin board:
“You cannot purchase merits, for we’re justified by grace!
Here’s 95 more reasons, Brother Tetzel, in your face!” Oh…

Chorus:
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation
Speak your mind against them and face excommunication!
Nail your theses to the door, let’s start a Reformation!
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation!

They loved my tracts, adored my wit, all were exempleror;
The Pope, however, hauled me up before the Emperor.
“Are these your books? Do you recant?” King Charles did demand,
“I will not change my Diet, Sir, God help me here I stand!” Oh…

Chorus:
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation -
Speak your mind against them and face excommunication!
Nail your theses to the door, let’s start a Reformation!
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation!

Duke Frederick took the Wise approach, responding to my words,
By knighting “George” as hostage in the Kingdom of the Birds.
Use Brother Martin’s model if the languages you seek,
Stay locked inside a castle with your Hebrew and your Greek! Oh…

Chorus:
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation -
Speak your mind against them and face excommunication!
Nail your theses to the door, let’s start a Reformation!
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation!

Let’s raise our steins and Concord Books while gathered in this place,
And spread the word that ‘catholic’ is spelled with lower case;
The Word remains unfettered when the Spirit gets his chance,
So come on, Katy, drop your lute, and join us in our dance! Oh…

Chorus:
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation -
Speak your mind against them and face excommunication!
Nail your theses to the door, let’s start a Reformation!
Papal bulls, indulgences, and transubstantiation!

Seen nailed on Mars Hill (MI) Church’s Door:

1. the gospel according to Rob Bell is not the Gospel according to the Bible. It is repackaged liberalism.
2. the disciples did not insist, they witnessed the resurrection and testified to it even unto death
3. Jesus was fully man and fully God.
4. Mithra and Attis are fictional, non historical characters. Jesus is a historical figure which no contemporary could deny.
5. The followers of Jesus died because if they said Jesus is Lord instead of Ceasar is Lord, they would be beheaded.
6. The claims of the Christians were true statements, and they were new and frequently led to their death.
7. The gospel is about saving men from their sins; serving is a result of salvation.
8. The actions of the Christians was as a result of their salvation, not earning their salvation.
9. The actions were not to bring the kingdom of God, the Christians were already living there.
10. Moral living, including loving acts of compassion, do not equal salvation.
11. The way of Jesus is not simply a new moral code to follow.
12. The Gospel is not that God hasn’t given up on the world.
13. The Gospel is that wicked criminals (all of us) who have offended God can confess, repent, and place trust in Christ’s work alone for their salvation.
14. You are not the Gospel. Your life reflects the Gospel, or it does not.

Sometime in the 1st century around the year 30A.D. a movement was started by a group of Jews who insisted that their rabbi, a man named Jesus from the Galilee region in Israel, had risen from the dead after being crucified by the Roman Empire. They claimed that after His resurrection they had seen Him and that they had had conversations with Him and had eaten meals with Him.

And then they said that He had ascended to heaven, and that someday He would return. Now, the world at this time was ruled by the Roman Empire; this giant, military, global superpower, from England to India, the Roman Empire ruled the world.

And one of the most popular gods of the Roman Empire was the god Mithra. Mithra’s followers believed that Mithra has been born of a virgin, that he was a mediator between God and humans, and that Mithra had ascended into heaven. Another popular religion at this time centered around the god Attis. The followers of Attis believed that Attis had been born of a virgin; and each spring they gathered to celebrate the resurrection of Attis.

Which takes us back to the Roman Empire, which was ruled by a succession of Emperors called Caesars. The first one, Julius Caesar, when he died, a comet appeared in the sky and people said: “Well, of course, that’s Julius Caesar, the Son of God, ascending to the right hand of the gods of heaven.”

Soon after this Julius Caesar’s adopted son, Caesar Augustus came to power, and Caesar Augutus believed that he was the Son of God sent by the gods to Earth to bring about a universal reign of peace and prosperity. One of his popular propaganda slogans was: “There is no other name under heaven by which people can be saved than that of Caesar.” Caesar inaugurated a 12 day celebration of his birth called the Advent of Caesar.

Another popular phrase at the time, people would literally greet each other on the street by saying “Caesar is Lord”. So, in the first century, to claim that your god had risen from the dead and ascended into heaven; well, it just wasn’t that unique. The claims of these first Christians weren’t really anything new.

Everybody’s god had risen from the dead. What makes yours so special? Now, these first Christians believed that Jesus’ resurrection had implications for the entire universe. Their tradition had taught them that the world is broken and desperately in need of repair and that at some point in the future, God was going to put it all back together. Now, for them, this future restoration had nothing to do with leaving this world, it was all about restoration, the renewing and the reclaiming of this world.

And so they saw in Jesus’ Resurrection the beginning of this universe-wide movement to put it all back together. Well, this, of course, brought them into direct conflict with the Roman Empire, because remember, for the Caesars, it was all about Caesar’s belief that he was making a new and better world through his power, through his armies, and through his wealth.

And so when Caesar wanted to send out a message to let everybody know of his latest military conquest or his latest accomplishments, he would send out a royal pronouncement telling the masses of his latest achievements. These pronouncements were called in the Greek language “evangelions.” An “evangelion” was like a “gospel” or a “good news.” In English “evangelion” spells “evangelical.”

Now,these first Christians believed very passionately that the world was not made better through military power and political coercion. The Gospel they were living had nothing to do with using political force to force people to live according to your laws. For them, this Gospel was about serving the world, especially those on the underside of the Empire. For them, it was about serving not ruling.

And so they took this Empire propaganda term “gospel,” and they used it to describe this new world that Jesus and His followers were making right under the nose of the Empire. Because their way, the way of Jesus, was totally opposed to the way of Rome. And so, when we read accounts of how they lived, we read they shared their possessions, they fed the hungry, and they carried each other’s burdens.

Well, it’s because the Gospel for them was a whole way of life. A whole new world, right in the midst of this one. Now, Caesar had a particular word that was used for a city or a village or a province that worshipped Caesar as the Son of God, that acknowledged Caesar as Lord. So Caesar would conquer, with his armies, a new land and then demand that all of the people would confess “Caesar is Lord.”

If people didn’t, well, then they were crucified as a way of showing everybody what happens when you refuse to submit to the power of the Empire. But if a group of people did, if a city or a village of a region did acknowledge and worship Caesar as the Son of God, Lord, if they did accept Caesar as their savior, then the area became a worshipping center of the Caesar. These worshipping centers were called, in the Greek language, “ekklesias.”

The word “ekklesia” translates in English, “church.” And so these first Christians took this empire propaganda term “ekklesia,” and they used it to describe their gatherings, the ones where they confessed “Jesus is Lord”. Well, obviously, the way they were living it raised all sorts of questions for those around them. Who do you believe?

Caesar, who thinks that a new world, a better world, is made through his brut military and political power, by forcing people to do what he says? Or Jesus, who invites you to make a new and better world through loving acts of compassion and generosity? Caesar, who killed Jesus on an execution stake, or God, who raised Jesus from the dead? Whose way do you think is better? Who do you think is Lord? Jesus or Caesar? Whose kingdom do you find more compelling?

For them, the Gospel was an invitation to a whole new way of life. And they lived this way because they had this profoundly mystical understanding of what they were doing in their lives. They called themselves “the body of Christ.” And they believed that in their communities, in these loving, compassionate, generous, peace-loving communities, they believed that Jesus was present in a way that went beyond words.

So they’d invite people to join them, to eat with them, to celebrate with them, to suffer with them, and then they’d ask them, after they’d seen the hungry fed, the lonely loved, and the poor honored, they’d ask the people, “Well, do you think Jesus is here?” Or, more specifically, “Who do you think is Lord? Who’s making a better world, Caesar or Jesus?”

They believed that a church was a living, breathing display of a whole new world God was bringing about, right here, right now. Because some people, some people are fierce with reality, aren’t they? They don’t have to spout off about how they’re right and everybody else is wrong because there is something going on inside of them so powerful, so tangible, you can’t help but ask questions. You’re dying to know why they are the way they are. You want them to explain the reason for the hope that’s within them.

It’s because when you’re around people like this, you have this sense that you’ve in some way been with Jesus, and that is church. This group of people who by their compassion, their generosity, the grace that they extend to others, you find yourself believing when you’re around them, that God hasn’t given up on the world. That’s the Gospel. That’s it.

The Gospel is the good news that God hasn’t given up on the world, that the tomb is empty and that a giant resurrection rescue is underway and that you can be a part of it. And so, yes, this has a deeply personal dimension to this. Jesus is saving me. He’s saving me from my sins, from my mistakes, from my pride, from my indifference to the suffering of the world around me, from my cynicism and despair.

The brokenness I see in the world around me is true of my own soul, and so He’s resuing me moment by moment, day by day, because God wants to put it all back together. You, me, the whole world. And so He starts deep inside each of us with our awareness that we need help, that we need saving, that we need rescuing.

And then He begins to show us, step by step, what it looks like to put flesh and blood on this Gospel. Because we all fall short, and that’s the beautiful part. Broken, flawed, vulnerable people like you and me are invited to be the hands and feet of a Jesus who loves us exactly as we are and yet loves us way too much to let us stay that way. I believe. I believe because I see. I see the Resurrection all around me.

If people only had your life and they were asked the question: “Has Jesus risen from the dead?”, how would they answer? Has He? May you be a “yes” to the question “Has Jesus risen from the dead?” And may you come to see, may you understand, that you are the good news. You are the Gospel.

HT: Apprising

If Rob Bell believes that this is the Gospel, then He believes a different Gospel than is presented in the Bible. Mars Hill (Mi) is then just an assembly in the same ways as the temple of Caesar was in the false history that Rob presented in the video. It is liberalized, Oprafied, ‘churchianity’.

Today is Reformation Day, the day when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses on the Wittenburg Church Door.

95 Theses of Martin Luther

Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther
on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences
by Dr. Martin Luther (1517)

Published in:

Works of Martin Luther:
Adolph Spaeth, L.D. Reed, Henry Eyster Jacobs, et Al., Trans. & Eds.
(Philadelphia: A. J. Holman Company, 1915), Vol.1, pp. 29-38

Out of love for the truth and the desire to bring it to light, the following propositions will be discussed at Wittenberg, under the presidency of the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and of Sacred Theology, and Lecturer in Ordinary on the same at that place. Wherefore he requests that those who are unable to be present and debate orally with us, may do so by letter.

In the Name our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite, willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.

2. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i.e., confession and satisfaction, which is administered by the priests.

3. Yet it means not inward repentance only; nay, there is no inward repentance which does not outwardly work divers mortifications of the flesh.

4. The penalty [of sin], therefore, continues so long as hatred of self continues; for this is the true inward repentance, and continues until our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

5. The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by that of the Canons.

6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring that it has been remitted by God and by assenting to God’s remission; though, to be sure, he may grant remission in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in such cases were despised, the guilt would remain entirely unforgiven.

7. God remits guilt to no one whom He does not, at the same time, humble in all things and bring into subjection to His vicar, the priest.

8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to them, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

9. Therefore the Holy Spirit in the pope is kind to us, because in his decrees he always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

10. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory.

11. This changing of the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory is quite evidently one of the tares that were sown while the bishops slept.

12. In former times the canonical penalties were imposed not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties; they are already dead to canonical rules, and have a right to be released from them.

14. The imperfect health [of soul], that is to say, the imperfect love, of the dying brings with it, of necessity, great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater is the fear.

15. This fear and horror is sufficient of itself alone (to say nothing of other things) to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.

17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror should grow less and love increase.

18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love.

19. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite certain of it.

20. Therefore by “full remission of all penalties” the pope means not actually “of all,” but only of those imposed by himself.

21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope’s indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;

22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life.

23. If it is at all possible to grant to any one the remission of all penalties whatsoever, it is certain that this remission can be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to the very fewest.

24. It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and highsounding promise of release from penalty.

25. The power which the pope has, in a general way, over purgatory, is just like the power which any bishop or curate has, in a special way, within his own diocese or parish.

26. The pope does well when he grants remission to souls [in purgatory], not by the power of the keys (which he does not possess), but by way of intercession.

27. They preach man who say that so soon as the penny jingles into the money-box, the soul flies out [of purgatory].

28. It is certain that when the penny jingles into the money-box, gain and avarice can be increased, but the result of the intercession of the Church is in the power of God alone.

29. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory wish to be bought out of it, as in the legend of Sts. Severinus and Paschal.

30. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that he has attained full remission.

31. Rare as is the man that is truly penitent, so rare is also the man who truly buys indulgences, i.e., such men are most rare.

32. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon.

33. Men must be on their guard against those who say that the pope’s pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to Him;

34. For these “graces of pardon” concern only the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, and these are appointed by man.

35. They preach no Christian doctrine who teach that contrition is not necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia.

36. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon.

37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God, even without letters of pardon.

38. Nevertheless, the remission and participation [in the blessings of the Church] which are granted by the pope are in no way to be despised, for they are, as I have said, the declaration of divine remission.

39. It is most difficult, even for the very keenest theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the abundance of pardons and [the need of] true contrition.

40. True contrition seeks and loves penalties, but liberal pardons only relax penalties and cause them to be hated, or at least, furnish an occasion [for hating them].

41. Apostolic pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love.

42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend the buying of pardons to be compared in any way to works of mercy.

43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons;

44. Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty.

45. 45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God.

46. Christians are to be taught that unless they have more than they need, they are bound to keep back what is necessary for their own families, and by no means to squander it on pardons.

47. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter of free will, and not of commandment.

48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting pardons, needs, and therefore desires, their devout prayer for him more than the money they bring.

49. Christians are to be taught that the pope’s pardons are useful, if they do not put their trust in them; but altogether harmful, if through them they lose their fear of God.

50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the pardon-preachers, he would rather that St. Peter’s church should go to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh and bones of his sheep.

51. Christians are to be taught that it would be the pope’s wish, as it is his duty, to give of his own money to very many of those from whom certain hawkers of pardons cajole money, even though the church of St. Peter might have to be sold.

52. The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain, even though the commissary, nay, even though the pope himself, were to stake his soul upon it.

53. They are enemies of Christ and of the pope, who bid the Word of God be altogether silent in some Churches, in order that pardons may be preached in others.

54. Injury is done the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or a longer time is spent on pardons than on this Word.

55. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

56. The “treasures of the Church,” out of which the pope. grants indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of Christ.

57. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only gather them.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outward man.

59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the Church’s poor, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ’s merit, are that treasure;

61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient.

62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.

66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.

67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the “greatest graces” are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.

68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross.

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence.

70. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope.

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!

72. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!

73. The pope justly thunders against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons.

74. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth.

75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God — this is madness.

76. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned.

77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against the pope.

78. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii.

79. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross of Christ, is blasphemy.

80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render.

81. This unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or even from the shrewd questionings of the laity.

82. To wit: — “Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial.”

83. Again: — “Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?”

84. Again: — “What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money they allow a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God, and do not rather, because of that pious and beloved soul’s own need, free it for pure love’s sake?”

85. Again: — “Why are the penitential canons long since in actual fact and through disuse abrogated and dead, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences, as though they were still alive and in force?”

86. Again: — “Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?”

87. Again: — “What is it that the pope remits, and what participation does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full remission and participation?”

88. Again: — “What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once, and bestow on every believer these remissions and participations?”

89. “Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?”

90. To repress these arguments and scruples of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the Church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christians unhappy.

91. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they would not exist.

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Peace, peace,” and there is no peace!

93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Cross, cross,” and there is no cross!

94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;

95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace.

My question and Challenge is this: I believe that the Roman Catholic Church, so far as its Institution is still apostate and not reformed all these 592 years since Wittenburg. The Evangelical Church at large has become more and more apostate as the years have passed, and the Seeker sensitive, Purpose Driven, Emergent, Contemplative movement is making it weaker by the day. So, what should we as those reformed and still reforming post on the door of the local Evangelical Church that needs to be reformed? Please post in the comments below!

I was really excited to see this video; what I believed would be a testimony of Doug Pagitt’s conversion!

I do not know about you, but I was disappointed, and not really surprised about what he described as conversion.

It sort of reminds me of the mockery Tony Jones made of being born again.

I can only imagine what the guys wrote down on the placemat at the burger king, maybe it was the gulf of sin that we cannot cross without Jesus, perhaps it was the faith train, maybe the trinity. I wonder, in 83, if it was the ladder.

I can only imagine what the version of Christianity he tossed away to give us the Christianity worth believing in. The christianity apostasy which mocks people for actually saying “The Bible Says” like the prophets of old “Thus saith the Lord” or that mocks eternal life in heaven with God as something to be disdained when the NT writers called it the ‘blessed hope’ and an ‘encouragement’. This same christianity apostasy that says that everyone is going to be restored and reconciled on the day of judgment.

What did Doug toss out? Biblical Christianity in favor of the christianity apostasy of Doug’s worldview, that fits him, and the world he lives in.

You would do well to remember, Doug, that Christianity is about Christ, to the glory of God.

It is the glory of God that determined to save sinners, to rescue us from our sin. It is the love of God that sent his Son into a world that was already condemned (John 3:16-19) To a world of people who were weak and ungodly (Romans 5:6-8) and unrighteous (Romans 3:9-18) with the goal of his kindness leading us to repentance (Romans 2). What do we need to repent from? Our lawless ways that are offensive to God, because of which he is storing up wrath (Psalm 7:11, Romans 2). We need to change our minds, followed by a change of direction (this is repentance) and then place all our trust in Christ Jesus for salvation from sin, and death, and lawlessness. Why does he save us? because it demonstrates His glory when a wicked sinner (like me) gets saved and molded into the image of Jesus Christ. And salvation is not just for the glorification (heaven). I have been saved, by justification, (paying the penalty on my behalf) redemption (the purchase price paid for slaves) and now I am being saved (sanctification, the process of becoming more like Christ as long as I live) and then I will be saved (glorification). This process is one in which I get a benefit, but God gets all the praise and glory.

It is a true conversion, where I have been changed (2 Corinthians 5:17) and have been made into God’s workmanship (Ephesians 2:8-10) to do good works that demonstrate salvation and bring glory to God.

I just wonder: Since when is salvation by faith in Christ Jesus alone for salvation not a Christianity Worth Believing In?

Seth Donovan writes on her blog ‘Confessing Queer’ regarding her ‘ministry’ at C?21:

Seth presenting Confession- She is the one on the right in the tie.

first, i’d like to say that my talk at #c21 was the reflection of a 9 month process for myself on the topic of Confession…it began when i asked myself in thinking about the conference what the greatest value of the church to me in the 21st century would be. Generally, i’m a person with a lot of privilege and have most of my needs met – as well as having a lot of my 21st century, post-modern wants met (books, masturbatory intellectual debate space with friends, cultural validation for doing things like biking everywhere and drinking fair-trade coffee, infinite venues to feel self-righteous for working for justice in the world, etc). So what does the church bring to me? what space could the church offer that i don’t get anywhere else in the world? the answer to that for me was a place for confession.

Herein lies the problem, Seth. The CHURCH is not a place, it is an living organism, the Body of Christ. You may receive ‘value’ from it, but only as a side-product. The Body of Christ exists to glorify God, and the greatest glory God gets is when people approach Him, in humble agreement (confession)with His assessment of them in His Word, the Bible. That is the first step to approaching God- The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom! This repentance, a change of mind that leads to a change of direction, is made possible by the regeneration that God gives those that are His. Your confession, your repentance, and your eventual faith and trust in Him alone as Savior and Lord make you a part of the Church, and gives glory to Him alone for saving you. The very title of your website makes me wonder if you have ever come to a place of confession- that is agreement with God- or if you are still in rebellion according to His Word. I suggest you study His Word (the Bible) and use the church- His true bride- as a place where you come to agreement with Him-not your friends, nor the post-modern liberal expression of faith which is the emergent church cult. When it comes right down to it, Seth, it matters not what they believe is truth, nor what you believe is truth. In terms of the CHURCH, it matters what God believes. Only he makes you part of His family.

Seth continues writing about ‘positions’ of confession, from her lecture:

Kneeling: a place to be wrong, to be uncertain, to not have everything figured out, to query, to play and experiment, to be forgiven. And how can the church be that space for me? Only by being a space where i know i am loved before i know that i have to be right.

Seth makes an interesting proposal here that I think is very consistent with emergent, post-modern people. They believe that truth is relative, and that the Bible is a book that is good for guidance, but not to be taken literally, or to dictate behavior. Seth believes the acceptance and ‘love’ of the people she sees are more important than the approval of God. Yes, Seth, God does love you, but He commands all men (and women) everywhere to repent.

Romans 2:2 We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. 3 Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? 5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed.

The kindness you have experienced, with all the blessings you have listed above, as well as the air you breathe is all the common grace of God. But this kindness that God has shown you is meant to lead you to repentance. But you, Seth, like many others in this ‘movement’ called emergent refuse to repent because you think that God’s decrees are not deadly serious. They are! Why would God punish His Son Jesus on the cross so severely if He did not take sin seriously? This thing you call church is not a church if it does not warn you of the wrath to come for all those who by their wicked works suppress the truth by their unrighteousness (see Romans 1:18-32 for a laundry list of sins practiced when Man rebels against God)

you see, I walk through the world constantly defending or proclaiming: I defend my right to be in the world & in the church at all because of my marginalized identities; and I proclaim and struggle for justice daily in my life: justice around race, justice around oppression, justice around glbtq rights, labor justice – and the relief for me when I walk into House every Sunday at 5pm is that I get to be wrong – that I get to not have all the answers – that I get to talk about how I am complicit in those injustices hourly – that I get to be called to a different standard: one that is not about how right or just I can be, but one that is about how much I am loved

Yes Seth, you are loved. Loved by a God that, despite your continued rebellion against Him- your continued idolatry (creating a god in your mind that is NOT the God of the Bible), your continued blasphemy (speaking words about God that are not true about His character and nature)- loves you and sent His Son Jesus to die for you despite your weakness, your wrongness, and this continued rebellion. ( a Word you would have heard preached if you were outside at C?21). You see, the Church is not all about you. It is about HIM. It is about praising Jesus and lifting Him up, because despite our nature, despite our wrongness- He still died to save those who will respond to Him by confession, repentance, and faith:

Romans 5:6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— 8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

And we demonstrate our love for Him when we respond, in repentance and faith- and yes- daily confession for our wrongs towards Him and others. When God saves us, he gives us anew nature. What we used to hate, we love. What we used to love, we hate. He saves us completely, though the flesh still remains, and must be cut away by the grace of God in a process called sanctification, until we look more like Jesus Christ.

Romans 6:10 For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. 11 So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.
12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey its passions. 13 Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness. 14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

Seth continues on her blog:

Standing: a place where i can confess my faith – which means that i have to be able to show up with all of my identities. i need a place to de-compartmentalize.

from my notes:

· I also walk through the world as a compartmentalized person: I am queer, I am gender-queer, I am a community organizer, I am a partner, I am a friend, I am white, I am middle-class, I am able-bodied, I am a Christian – I have a thousand identities and as a person in the 21st century am skilled in accessing and repressing those identities as I need to in order to be safe and to be loved and to get what I need. The other aspect of confession – the aspect of being able to confess my faith and confess myself as a whole person is vital to me in participating in the church…that when I walk into the church my theology has everything to do with me and all of my identities have everything to do with my faith – that there is no shame to be carried in with certain parts of myself…that my whole self can be confessed. That my faith and theology can be about my body and my gender and my relationships and all of the parts of myself that I am sent consistent messages should be things that I keep in compartments

Again, church is not about what you need, Seth. Church is about worshiping God, lifting Him up, and bringing Him glory. You are promoting a pride filled faith, go to church to get what I need- my rights, my opinions, my theology that is ME centered. There is the problem; if your theology is all about you, you are a god unto yourself. Why not just be honest and say that you worship yourself? Your faith and your theology is about your body and your gender and your relationships? It is the oldest trick in the book, that this worship of God should be all about you. At least you are honest- honestly wrong about what the church is and who it serves.

And this, in a nutshell, is what is wrong with the emergent church, and what was wrong with C?21: It is not about worshiping and serving the One True God in the 21st century, it was about what is ‘your’ vision for the church in the 21st century. This vision does not line up with God’s vision, which He has published to the nations, that we ought to live holy lives, that we ought to proclaim His name to the ends of the earth, making disciples, and teaching ALL that He has commanded us.

Seth closes, in part:

- it means we (the church) have to be humble enough to allow ourselves to be shaped and formed by each other

I urge you Seth, and all your friends from C?21 to be shaped and formed by God into the image of Christ by confession, repentance, and faith. If you continue allowing yourselves to be formed by each other, I fear you will hear these words:

Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who p says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

May God save you!

Great title, I thought, as I surfed Mike S.’s blog

The Awakening

After all, the non-christian expressions and the corinthian love feast for communion, as well as the teaching of both Doug Pagitt and Tony Jones could be enough to ruin anybody’s faith.

I was surprised to see what this blog post was really all about. It was about the message in a song about Abraham and Isaac. After sharing a painful story from his past (Mike lost a son- I cannot imagine the grief), Mike related the pain he imagined Abraham went through:

And somehow, these feelings were multiplied as I tried to put myself in Abraham’s shoes. How could he even consider taking his own son’s life? How could he continue to consider it over the many days of their journey, to premeditate that act, again and again? To feel the knife on his belt and think about pressing it into his son’s flesh, to do what could never be undone? To ask his son to carry the wood for the fire that would consume his son’s body? What did they talk about on the journey to the mountain (and what on earth did they talk about on the way home?)?

Mike, the scripture tells us why he did it. He did it because God told him to. He did it because he trusted God, even in his questions he walked in faith towards that place where, 1400 years later, Christ would be crucified. He believed that Isaac would return with him, that God would provide a sacrifice, or that God could bring Isaac back from the dead.

Genesis 22:5-
Then Abraham said to his young men, “Stay here with the donkey; I and the boy will go over there and worship and come again to you.” And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering and laid it on Isaac his son. And he took in his hand the fire and the knife. So they went both of them together. And Isaac said to his father Abraham, “My father!” And he said, “Here am I, my son.” He said, “Behold, the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?” Abraham said, “God will provide for himself the lamb for a burnt offering, my son.” So they went both of them together.

17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, 18 of whom it was said, “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 19 He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back.

You see, we do not need to imagine this for the situation apart from faith. Abraham likely thought about these hard questions, but he trusted God for everything. He understood God’s nature, his promises were always true. Isaac was Abraham’s unique Son, called for a specific purpose. The covenant promise would be kept through Isaac.

Moreover, how could God ask Abraham to do such a thing? Something so inhumane, and so ungodly? What kind of Father God would require such a thing, and what kind of Father was Abraham to consider it? If God Almighty asked my dad to kill me, I hope my dad would tell God to forget about it. That’s insane. I’m not going to do that. What kind of cruel God would ask his follower to kill his firstborn? (And the latter detail that God provided an alternative seems to make God look even worse– was God just messing with Abraham, in some kind of twisted test?)

God does not give twisted tests, everything He allows in our lives as Christians is to make us look more like Christ. Every trial, every temptation, every sickness- everything. Go ultimately tested Abraham in order to bless him! These thoughts (above) expose a wrong view of God- that He is cruel, merciless. No, God is a kind God who desires trust and obedience. He is a God of mercy and grace, not willing that any should perish, but that all will come to repentance!

10 Then Abraham reached out his hand and took the knife to slaughter his son. 11 But the angel of the Lord called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here am I.” 12 He said, “Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.” 13 And Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him was a ram, caught in a thicket by his horns. And Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son. 14 So Abraham called the name of that place, “The Lord will provide”; as it is said to this day, “On the mount of the Lord it shall be provided.”

15 And the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven 16 and said, “By myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, 17 I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of his enemies, 18 and in your offspring shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because you have obeyed my voice.”

Now I know some will respond that it’s just a story. But it’s an awful story. A terrible, cruel, deeply unsettling story. And even if it never literally happened, the story is so central to so much of the Biblical narrative, and is cited by so many of the early Christian writers, that I honestly don’t know what to do with it.

It is because it is a historical account. It is also a foreshadowing of Jesus Christ.

Some will say that God made exactly the same choice with his own son, Jesus. Which might bother me even more, because sanctioning this kind of abusive and violent behavior has even wider repercussions. At a theological level, it makes God out to be a harsh tyrant, a character trait seemingly absent from Jesus’ teachings and storytelling about his Abba Father, who is pointed only when it comes to un-grace and injustice. On an ethical level, it seems to endorse all kinds of contemporary injustices and abuses: if God can torture and kill his son, then why shouldn’t we do something similar to our enemies?

To this I reply that God did make the same choice with His son Jesus; or shall we say Jesus condescended to us in submission to the Fathers will, but by His own choice:

John 10:14 I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. 17 For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. 18

No one takes it from me, but I lay it down a of my own accord

. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.

Again with God being a ‘harsh tyrant’ and cruel. No, God is a god of love and mercy. Because of the justice of God, sinners like you and like me were doomed, deserving of condemnation. But because of his love and his mercy, God provided a substitute in Christ Jesus. Jesus volunteered for this duty, and he did follow through with it. Not only did God allow it, but as Isaiah 53 says:

Yet it was the will of the Lord to

crush

him;he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.

And he did this willingly, again in Isaiah 53:

He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and l we esteemed him not. 4 Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. 5 But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities;upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed. 6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned—every one—to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

He tortured and killed His son because of our iniquities because He loved us. It is not because He is a cruel tyrant, it is because He is a loving Father. And Jesus loved us so much He was willing to condescend, to be humbled as the God of the universe walking on this earth in skin. He did this, because as God the Son, He loved us and submitted to His Father’s will.

This is the wickedness of Emergent in general, and C?21 specifically. They love making a false image of God and of His Son, Jesus. Brian McLaren and Tony Jones hold this same view, that somehow the most loving act in world History Jesus dying on the Cross as an innocent sin-bearer is an act of ‘cosmic child abuse’ and that God would not punish his Son as our substitute. In fact, we do not need a substitute, because, as Doug Pagitt says ‘we all will be reconciled and restored on the day of judgment’. The most beautiful foreshadowing ever shown, and the sacrifice of a spotless lamb in Jesus for our iniquities, read through an emergent glasses turns into a cruel, vengeful, and hateful God. How utterly tragic.

1 Timothy 1:8
Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9 understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, 11 in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted. 12 I thank him who has given me strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he judged me faithful, appointing me to his service, 13 though formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received mercy because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief, 14 and the grace of our Lord overflowed for me with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. 15 The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost. 16 But I received mercy for this reason, that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display his perfect patience as an example to those who were to believe in him for eternal life. 17 To the King of ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.

The real danger of the emergent cult is the impact it has on young, idealistic, and intelligent (read worldly knowledge) people with a form of godliness. That is, they were raised in a church and went off to college to become re-educated and to depart from the faith of their family. When leaving college, they perhaps start a family or desire to be part of a group that has a high calling of helping the world.

College students are ripe for the teachings of the emergent cult. In my travels to college campuses and spring breaks, I have personally observed the moral filth that these college students are exposed to not only in the classroom, but in the emergent church as well. Birds of a feather flock together, as it were. I hear testimony of classes where the students are taught that sexual freedom and experimentation are good things. The virgin and those who wait for marriage before any physical union are castigated as fools. Yet, for many in the emergent church, even among leaders, sex outside of the covenant of marriage (between one man and one woman) is championed; specifically homosexuality, but even in some cases, heterosexual sex outside of marriage is at the least accepted if not condoned. This is an age old ploy of the Satanic Church, (do what thou wilt). Draw the people in allowing licentious behavior, do not criticize, for it grows the ranks of your little churchcoven.

Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, but the emergent cult wants none of that. In fact, to hear it said in many emergent churchescovens, sin is not why Jesus died. Jesus died so that all could be reconciled, all could be restored. There is no difference, whether you are earth, plant, animal, or human Jesus’ death meant that one day, regardless if human or no, regardless of what you believe, you can be saved. Emergent churches are reincarnations of the Bahai’ faith, believing that all religious paths through history just use different names, but it all points to the same God. In emergent churches covens, you will find religious practices of other faiths lifted up, like yoga, eastern meditation, breathing practices, and repetitive chanting prayers. You will hear that we can find Christ in the ‘other’. This is great for college age kids who have been taughtindoctrinated by their professors that all religions and practices are equally valid (or equally invalid, as the case may be). In the emergent cult, all religions and religious acts are acceptable, and sin is a non-issue. Truth is in the eye of the individual, and no one can push their truth on you.

Emergent cultists and college students enjoy the same things. They love, after a day of classes to go out and drink and party! At Christianity 21, the conference goers were encouraged to ’sample the Twin Cities’ Nightlife’ which, as they said, was excellent. According to the tweets, these included (and were not limited to) bars and nightclubs, some catering to a specific clientele- if you know what I mean (wink, wink). Lets just say it this way; I have preached outside of those same clubs, and am not allowed (In America, no less) to preach on specific ‘topics’ or it is said I am harassing a specific ‘minority group’ (see homosexuals). Emergent cultists would not dare encourage their followers to live ‘above reproach’, because, after all, their leaders are not! They are joining in on the frivolity.

that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,

The emergent church is a lawless church, because they serve a god that winks an eye at sin, and is all grace and love, not justice and wrath. Their practice is contrary to sound doctrine, and they mock those who hold to sound doctrine as legalist Pharisees. They are described well in Romans 1:28-2:11. They are unholy, profane, sexually immoral, practice homosexuality, and their doctrine runs counter (in many ways) to what the Bible clearly teaches. And, like the college students, the emergent church HATES the law and the Gospel. The law of God exposes them for their wicked works. They do not understand that Jesus wants to save them by His grace and mercy, but salvation requires repentance which requires a change of mind. The emergent cult wants no change of mind, rather, they go with the mantra ‘do what thou wilt’ or truth is relative’. Repentance and faith in Christ alone are neither encouraged nor preached. You cannot preach repentance unless you preach sin. You cannot have sin if your truth is only for you and for nobody else. If there is no absolute truth (like the Bible) there is no measuring stick. And therefore there is no salvation, for the proud and arrogant emergent cannot see their sin as wicked before a holy God.

May God have mercy and open the eyes of the blind.

I have come to the conclusion that the Emergent movement is fast becoming a cult, with its adherents moving towards a destructive and dangerous end.

A working definition of a cult is as follows:

Given this background, we propose a working definition of a cult as follows: theologically, a cult is a religious group which claims harmony with Christianity but which either denies or misinterprets essential biblical doctrines; [3] and/or, psychologically or behaviorally, a cult is a secular or religious group which tends to use extreme and unethical techniques of manipulation to recruit, assimilate, control and retain members. [4]

It should be noted with this expanded definition, that cults encompass not only ”traditionally” accepted new religious movements, but also fringe churches, as well as psychotherapy or self- fulfillment groups, New Age groups and secular political organizations.

HT Apologetics

The slippery things about almost all cultic definitions is that generally speaking, they are centrally located and take their marching orders from a central figure. The snake-like sliminess of emergent is dangerous in that they declare no leadership, and no real central core doctrines or beliefs. Tony Jones, when asked by me for a mission statement says “The Bible” The problem with that answer is that they can and do deconstruct truths in the Bible to make it shape their agenda. An example at the recent Christianity Apostasy 21 conference was the deconstruction of John 14:6 to say that Jesus was not THE Way, but a way. It is this same attitude that many emergents take towards the Kingdom of God, Sovereignty, the nature of God, the nature of Salvation, and the Atoning work of Jesus Christ, just to name few. The danger is that to those who lack any kind of discernment the emergent movement seems only about practice, and in that, it is very attractive to young, intelligent, and idealistic people.

A major danger is that emergent beliefs are seeping into our churches. There is no one denomination or group where all of emergent is located. In many cases, there might be several who hold to emergent beliefs infiltrating your church. One major method of infiltration is through youth groups from people like Rob Bell and his wildly popular Nooma video series, as well as the influence of Emergent authors (including Tony Jones) on groups like Youth Specialties. Many new youth ministers are influenced by emergent authors that are presented in their colleges, as well as the Contemplative Spirituality of men like Dallas Willard and the Social Justice causes of guys like Jim Ellis, Tony Campolo, and Shane Claibourne. Senior Pastors and elders would do well to guard the gates and maintain control over curriculum. Unfortunately, many in leadership take a laissez-faire stance as long as they observe numerical growth or do not have to worry about extra work dealing with the youth.

This same link provides this insight about cults:

Subjective: undue emphasis on experience and emotions
Esoteric: an emphasis on secret, hidden or inner truth.
Anti-Sacerdotal: lack of paid clergy and an emphasis on laity in leadership.

At the recent ChristianityApostasy 21 conference, there was more than one example of these very specific cult-like attitudes. There are many examples of emergents who emphasize experience and emotions over faith. In fact, the experience of doubt, as Tony Jones puts it- being almost agnostic at times- is emphasized and praised over faith. Experience in worship and in study of the scripture is something that the emergent strives for, which is why eastern mystic practices such as yoga, breathing exercises, contemplative prayer, visualization, and the Lectio Divina, as well as aesthetics such as candles, incense, and ‘mood’ music or chanting. These things used in public or private worship attempt to create an experience of God. If one does not have God, they need to produce a spiritual experience. These are the modern Pharisees, always looking for a sign. If they do not get one, they create one.

This emphasis of subjective experience crosses over into the desire to seek hidden truth. Many of these experiences that the emergent will have is an attempt to discover something new about God or experience a deeper relationship with him. Is it wrong to seek a deep relationship with God? Certainly not, as long as we do so in Spirit and in Truth. This hidden truth that emergents seek often takes them away from established Biblical orthodoxy. Most recently, emergents have jumped on the bandwagon supporting same sex marriage, and, in doing so have followed the ‘gay’ christian lead in mistranslating our rejecting the ’six’ biblical passages that speak about homosexuality. They also claim Jesus never spoke about homosexuality (though ultimately, He was the one who inspired the entire Bible). People who take the Bible for what it says are accused negatively as being modernists. God is accused of not knowing what He was writing about when he wrote the Bible- after all- (they have said) what did the Bible writers (God) know about homosexuality 2000 years ago? But this is not the only hidden knowledge. There is misrepresentation of Hebrew language on a regular basis (Rob Bell) to support their thoughts. They have taken their cue from Rick Warren as they also use multiple translations to support their own conclusions.

Lastly, an repeated theme of the Apostasy 21 conference, emphasized by Tony Jones, and repeated in the Twittersphere more times than I can count is a desire to have much more involvement of the laity, and less paid clergy. Emergent has always been a leaderless group (in theory) At Solomons Porch in Minneapolis, they have an open forum every Tuesday, where they discuss what they will have for a sermon this coming week. Any Tom, Dick, Or Jane can come in and have input on what they would like to see (one sermon I observed there was called Jewish/Muslim/Christian Iconography- it really didn’t have anything to do with scripture…) The Pastor, Doug Pagitt, sits on a stool at eye level (well, he is 6′8 or so) and hosts a conversation rather than preaching a message of truth from the Bible. Communion is not led by a Pastor or an Elder, rather, it looks more like a Corinthian love feast, where people break bread, pour wine (or grape juice) and have a party in the midst of the service. The problem they have with clergy is with those who would say ‘thus saith the Lord’ and would lead and teach them from the scripture. No, the emergent is far too wise for any of that.

And Dr. Enroth nails it specifically when he addresses a very specific type of cult:

Aberrant Christian: groups that claim to be Bible-based but which deviate in practice or belief, such as The Way International, the Boston Church of Christ and the Shepherding Movement.

The emergent cult is found in places like Solomon’s Porch and other ‘Missional Fellowships’ around the country. At least in these cesspools, it is easy to avoid. The problem is that there are people, members in our congregations, which are falling for some or all of the false teachings of emergent. Solomons Porch (and other fellowships like it) proudly strut their aberrant beliefs such as the practice of yoga and other eastern mysticism, along with the teaching of universalism and a lack of any right teaching about the cross, hell, salvation, sanctity of marriage, etc. Mix in their inter-spiritual beliefs, their belief that the ‘other’ can still have Christ, Add to that their refusal to participate in any conversation that does not support their views and you have yourself a cult.

Make no mistake, these are the foundations of the apostate one-world religion that we will see in the last days. If you stand with Christ, and the one true faith passed down to Us in the Word, you will be persecuted. The mish-mash emergent will surf freely from place to placed, tossed about by every wind of doctrine, and feeling no persecution whatsoever because they accept everything- to their eternal peril.

In my small community in general, and in our small church, marriage is suffering, and is under a great deal of strain. When on the golf course, or in other social situations, the common complaint I hear is about the marriage and how it is not satisfactory for one reason or another. In our church, the various struggles are a little different, but it comes down to bad teaching or a misunderstanding of what marriage is.

Marriage is supposed to be a covenant between one man and one woman for life. This covenant is a binding covenant before God whether a person is a Christian or not. A dissolving of that marriage is against the will of God, especially since most divorces are for selfish reasons.

And Christian leaders; Pastors, Elders, Deacons are so often the cause of a misunderstanding and the root cause of so many believers suffering in bad marriages. Misapplication and misinterpretation of scripture cause many problems. Even worse, marriage is rarely addressed in church anymore, with the cheap thrill of an occasional sex sermon series replacing it.

What is marriage supposed to look like?

Ephesians 5:22-33
Wives, a submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.

25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

Verse 22 is a struggle for most women today, because many people (especially their husbands and their pastors) have a false idea of what the word means. In verse 21, in context of how the church members are to behave towards one another, the word submit is used. We are to submit to one another why? Out of reverence for Christ. In the New Testament, Paul describes himself as a bond-servant of Jesus Christ. A bond-servant was a slave that, having been set free, returned to his master and told him that he desired to stay in the service of that master by choice. The master was so loving and kind and provided for that slave in such a way that the slave was willing to serve that master for life. Paul, out of reverence for Christ, submitted himself to His Lordship. The Greek for submit is Hupotasso, which means to subject one’s self. In the military, it was a term that meant to willingly give in, cooperate, and share in carrying a burden. In other words, a wife in the context of marriage is to willingly give in and cooperate with her husband in the same way she does Jesus. She is to submit to him in the same way she submits to the Lord.

But men are responsible for creating this attitude. Now, some men and pastors have interpreted submission of the wife as slavery, as mandatory. Many have failed to read the entire passage for what it says, and take submission to mean that the Husband is the Lord Ruler of the house and what I say goes! Is that how Jesus accomplished His Lordship? What they fail to understand is that it is the man’s responsibility to create a climate where Biblical submission can be accomplished. A climate like He created by loving us so much that He laid down His very life to save us. Note: Why does the church willingly submit to Christ? Because He laid down His life for the church. Men are called by Christ not to submit; rather, much more than that. They are called to lay down their very lives. We are to love our wives in the way that Christ loved the church by laying down our very lives.

For some that may sound easy, but Paul gives us further instruction as to how that looked for Christ and our responsibilities in the home. We are responsible to Jesus Christ (as husbands) to present a sanctified wife. This means that we must produce an environment where she is fed and nurtured by the Word of God, and by the example of a husband that is doing the same. Jesus Christ laid down his life for that purpose literally. This means that our marital relationship must be our top priority submissive only to our relationship to Christ. But the condition of our wives is a mirror of our own spiritual lives. If our spouse is miserable and unfed and unholy, the responsibility lies on the husband. This does not mean we force her to love the Lord or to be sanctified. But we are responsible for the spiritual atmosphere within the home, and our lives must be right and an example to follow as we follow Christ. She will be held accountable for her own choices, but the husband will be held accountable for the atmosphere. Did we lay down our lives so that our wives could be sanctified, or did we selfishly pursue our own interests?

More than spiritual, we must nourish our wives physically. What this means is that we lay down our own needs, our own demands, our own flesh so that she might be saved. The reason we do this is that, like Jesus Christ and His Church, we are united in one flesh. Just as we would care for our own bodies, we should care for our wife’s physical needs. In fact, we should care for her needs more than for our own. In Minnesota, it is cold six months out of the year (at least) Whenever my wife turns on the heat, it seems like I will melt away. She likes it warm. Her need to be warm and toasty must be subjected to my need to be comfortable. It is a silly, every day illustration, but it is a way that we can lay down our needs, our desires, our comfort for our wives to feel emotionally, physically, and spiritually cared for. This builds trust, which must be built by a human, and it creates an environment in which the wife can submit. In other words, if she does not feel cared for and loved, we make it difficult for her to submit ‘as to the Lord’.

We are one flesh, and it is a mystery that illustrates the relationship between Christ and His Church. What message are we sending to the world about Christ and His church when we fail to love our wives? What message are we sending when our families and our relationships are dysfunctional? Is Christ dysfunctional? Does He ever fail to love the Church? Our marriages are a testimony, good or bad, about the Christ and the Church. What does your relationship with your wife state about your relationship with Christ?