ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 3504
01/17/13 12:24 PM
Interact
Posts: 5420
01/18/13 7:18 AM
Believe it or not, these things above are creeping into our fundamentalist churches. 40 years ago when I was a young convert, I attended (visited) a local Alliance church. It was convicting, full of hell, fire and brimstone preaching and the cross of Christ was its central theme. Last year upon returning for a visit, it was obvious that no one carried a Bible,the pulpit area housed a massive sound and lighting extravaganza, no preaching of the gospel and many evil eyes were upon me because I had a Bible in hand. Then upon talking to a person I used to know who now went there, after I tried to talk about the Lord to him, he simply said "yeah, whatever" and changed the subject to the great sound system they had.
01/18/13 12:50 PM
Posts: 317
01/19/13 6:16 PM
Administrator
01/19/13 6:28 PM
Posts: 1433
01/19/13 10:24 PM
Cym98 wrote: The Emergent church apostasy is why so many (including me) have become disillusioned with the very idea of church practice. But that is only part of the problem.....even the more traditional, conservative churches have become infested with materialism, market driven approaches (seeker sensitive) and the contemporary at the expense of the traditional in their drive to engage the young, whilst the older generation leave in droves, and no one really notices.
01/22/13 6:55 AM
01/22/13 7:22 AM
01/22/13 9:41 AM
01/23/13 7:02 AM
steelmaker wrote: Again, you are exactly right, Art! And this is an exact, literal fulfillment of the following prophecy:1 Tim. 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
While I am not trying to justify some of the new ideas of some of the different faith movements today. Does not every generation make claims that an emerging church is attempting to change the existing body of believers that follow their own tenants and goals that make them a different sect then the one down the road?
The denominations of Pharisees and Sadducee, two of the many that existed when Christ came during the first century reformation looked at the Nazarene denomination as an emerging church , and the Nazarene denomination changed over the years from what it is today Just as in the same way the Catholics believed the Lutheran sect under covenant theology was an emergent church and Lutherans’ have changed into what it is today which seems to leans more towards dispensationalism.
Other than by walking by faith, seeing we are not to seek the approval of any man or group of men, as two walking in agreement, how can we be sure?
01/23/13 7:45 AM
01/23/13 9:26 AM
Art wrote: The thing you are forgetting in your theory, Garee, is that it is foretold that just before the Lords return, a great apostacy (falling away) (2 thes) would occur. Whats happening today is unlike any other minor apostacy of the past. It is because the devil knows his days are numbered and his time is short, that he is unleashing every trick in the book to deceive the nations. What was fundamentally sound 40 years ago, is now just a large social gathering c/w a watered down gospel, a watered down fear of God and a watered down bible.Osteen, Warren and many of our beloved tele preachers are capitolizing and making merchandise of us, while we inch by inch drop off the landmarks of the faith and make shipwreck our testimonies in our Lord Jesus Christ. But there is a remnant who are fully aware and are we part of that remnant?
01/23/13 11:43 AM
01/24/13 2:22 AM
1 Tim. 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. While I am not trying to justify some of the new ideas of some of the different faith movements today. Does not every generation make claims that an emerging church is attempting to change the existing body of believers that follow their own tenants and goals that make them a different sect then the one down the road? The denominations of Pharisees and Sadducee, two of the many that existed when Christ came during the first century reformation looked at the Nazarene denomination as an emerging church , and the Nazarene denomination changed over the years from what it is today Just as in the same way the Catholics believed the Lutheran sect under covenant theology was an emergent church and Lutherans’ have changed into what it is today which seems to leans more towards dispensationalism. Other than by walking by faith, seeing we are not to seek the approval of any man or group of men, as two walking in agreement, how can we be sure?
01/27/13 6:36 AM
Garee, Art is speaking of a movement that actually calls itself the "Emergent Church" What we should see is just WHAT this movement is emerging from
.
Thanks Steel , so unlike the various new age movement they identify themselves as the emergent Church. If that is what you are saying, I agree.
It is emerging from CORRECT, TRUE doctrine, replacing it with the false doctrines of men, some old apostasy, and some new apostasy they invent along the way. OTOH, we believe, and KNOW, that the ONLY true doctrines of worship come from SCRIPTURE, and nothing else, including man's interps and "takes" of Scripture.
What is OTOH?I think most denominations would like to believe they have that kind of perfect authority as their guiding principle and if not look for another place of fellowship, or challenge a difference they might have, like as Luther did during the fifteenth century reformation.. But each denomination whether coming on the scene today or a thousand years ago do have a differences in the tenants and goals that give rise to their differences than the church down the street. In the end because we walk by faith its man’s interps in a living hope they are seeking God according to their takes on scripture, as their personal understanding between them and God, as two walking together. Or at least that is how I understand scripture teaches we can seek an understanding from God.
I see it sort of like their personal fingerprints, they might look alike but our agreement is not with each other in the end, because if it was we would seek the approval of men and not or God as He has so instructed us to begin with. And I believe each man will give an account of what they believe God has revealed as He teaches us, as to what they believe. Like with the apostle Peter, it’s not what do men say but how do we hear God, called the hearing of faith. And I believe it becomes whether or not a person adds or subtract from scripture through their interpretation of it. While adding or subtracting to scripture would take on what scripture calls “private interpretations” as to which direction they are loosed from. Where private interpretations as private revelations (new revelations) are not received from heaven they would be considered earthly of the devil as spoken of in James, seeing God is no longer brining new revelations, but would be ones that are inspired from earth, after men, which I believe scripture refers to as the “things of men” and not to be confused with the “things of God” found in the scripture alone which is sealed up until the end of time. Failure to try and try the spirits to see if they are of the things of God by trusting what we do believe as the things of men as trusting in men’s interps can be a stumbling block if we do not do as the Bereans search the scriptures daily to see if they are after God’s word, as the things of God.as God’s way of us staying in communication with Him first and then the denomination we shoes to fellowship with.
While the Catholic Church displays what they call “private revelations” boldly as if scripture was not complete, other denominations are more subtle in offering them through an interpretation, I believe.
I am not advocating the new emergent church which seems to lean more towards the Unitarian universal church that emerged in the late 18OO”s, which has also changed over the years like the Lutherans. Because that emerging church or the one that identifies themselves today as the emerging church there is great variety of styles as traditions of men and beliefs within the church itself, unity is also a problem on a larger scale for them that try an include the different traditions of men then maybe of a another kind of denomination that claims they are the unifying body as those who might restrict the tradition they have established, as after outward men walking by sight, and not after God’s word as to walk by faith.
01/27/13 7:05 AM
01/29/13 3:24 AM
Sorry, I was not trying to confuse the issue, Art. But I was offering something that I believed could help understand a little more the nature of new denominations that come on the scene, in most likely any generation..
In regard to the emergent church someone said it was the way they presented themselves as a way of being identified by calling themselves the "Emergent Church" as if something new was under the sun. My first thought was the new age, but was not sure they called themselves “new agers” or others did, or perhaps both at one occasion or another depending on the nature of the conversation.I am sure every generation experiences some sort of change to reflect “who is the greatest” in hope people will flock to their doors… some humbly with Godly intent, others according to pride, as a way of worldly gain. The disciples did by pride at one point. But it’s our responsibility, I believe, like that of the noble Bereans to search the scriptures daily to see if what is being taught can hold, what we believe is the water of the gospel, and join that likeminded assembly in worship if we do agree with their conclusions.
It’s like the word Christian. Some say the disciples who were called Jews in a spiritual way for thousands of years and were later called Christians as a derogatory name. While other believed it was a fulfillment of Isaiah 62, using Zion as a metonymy in lieu of the heavenly Jerusalem, described as the mother of us all, in Galatians 4. And to them that believed as Christians, it was not derogatory name to them at all but one that God named for a specific purpose according to the usage of name, Christian… which denotes residents of the city of Christ, the church, as His eternal bride.
To the first century apostate Jews from my standpoint, I believe that the majority most likely looked at the name Christian as “new age” and therefore a very derogatory name to them. But to some of the Jews like the disciples and now that the light of the Gentiles has come to the world they together became Christians during the reformation era because of light of the gospel, ( to borrow a phrase from scripture below) “as brightness, and the salvation thereof as a lamp that burneth”.
Christ having fulfilled all of the Old Testament prophecies that exclusively pointed to the cross as the light that revealed His righteousness from heaven as the one kind of righteousness all Christians will be found with. Seeing no man will not be found with a righteousness of his own, but of Christ which again is in accordance to His finished work that was needed to secure the eternal rest for His eternal bride, the church. Which even today remains as the light of the world, a City set on a hill or mountain that cannot be hid. Which I believe does speak of the heavenly New Jerusalem, called Zion, at times as the Christian city prepared as His bride the church.For Zion's sake will I not hold my peace, and for Jerusalem's sake I will not rest, until the righteousness thereof go forth as brightness, and the salvation thereof as a lamp that burneth.And the Gentiles shall see thy righteousness, and all kings thy glory: and thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth of the Lord shall name. Isaiah 62:1-2
01/29/13 6:56 AM
01/30/13 8:55 AM
01/31/13 6:40 AM
Share This