Trees?????
This past Sunday evening we did our third installment of exposing false teachings, a.k.a. heresy, at Crossroads Fellowship. That evenings message has me greatly concerned about the future of the C&MA and the church in America in general. Right now I am exposing heresy in videos that are called Noomas that are published by Zondervan and star Rob Bell. This past Sunday we looked at video number three which is called Trees. I would like to talk about that a little bit here.
What is it that is so dangerous about the teaching on the video Trees? The thing that I see as being so dangerous is that Mr. Bell is about 95% right on what he says. Basically the point of the video is that we need to be doing something as Christians. This is a great point, we do need to be doing something. He also says we need to be spending our lives in service, also a great point. However it goes astray about the middle of the video when Mr. Bell states that we are pretty much doing nothing if what we are doing is spending our time trying to get people to believe the way we do. Here is what I heard with his comments, as did the others at church without my prompting. They heard Rob Bell say that evangelism is a waste of time. Rather than evangelize Rob would assert that we need to spend our time bringing heaven on earth and partnering with God to restore this fallen creation and transform the world into the kind of creation God intended it to be. He states at one point in the video that an ancient Jewish saying says that our good works are the seeds that are planting the trees in Eden. He then pronounces a benediction at the end that encourages us to plant the trees of paradise with our good works.
Another disturbing thing is that Mr. Bell goes so far as to say that Jesus condemned the practice of teaching others to believe as we believe. My response is, "He did?" Is the Great Commission (Matthew 28:16-20) a condemnation of us teaching people to believe what we believe, or is it a command to do exactly that? Rob says a lot of Christians sit around waiting on a future hope, waiting for creation to be redeemed by Jesus. He says that he believes that Jesus is going to redeem creation as well, but he believes he will do it through us. However scripture says something totally different. Let's look at what scripture says here.
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works. Declare these things; exhort and rebuke with all authority. Let no one disregard you.
Titus 2:11-15
And he who was seated on the throne said, "Behold, I am making all things new." Also he said, "Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true."
Revelation 21:5
While it is plain to see that we are supposed to do good works as Mr. Bell asserts, we see that waiting for the appearing of Christ is in fact a Biblical mandate. Our reason for living holy, and being good, is because God is holy and good and is coming back for us, not so that we can restore the fallen world, because God is going to recreate this fallen world. Rob condemns this future hope we wait for as being a false motivation in the Christian walk. Scripture however declares it to be so (in far more places than that just Titus and Revelation). I am concerned for the church as a whole because this is a false gospel. Mr. Bell's church at one point during a phone conversation told me personally that the Gospel we believe in was not the Gospel. Granted the person I was speaking with was an Associate Pastor and not Rob himself, but none the less Mars Hill Bible Church said they didn't believe that what I was getting at was the gospel. So in this phone conversation what was I getting at. Here is what I said.
I am laying on the street dying from being run over by a car. I look you in the face and tell you that I am scared and that I don't want to die and go to hell. What would you say to me. The Pastor told me that they (Mars Hill) did not believe that was the Gospel. He then proceeded to tell me that the Gospel was learning to live in communion with God here and now and help restore fallen creation. Which is the exact message of the Nooma video called Trees. What does scripture say about that?
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel-- not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:6-9
So Mr. Bell teaches a different Gospel. What should our response be? This is why I am concerned for the church as a whole. But why specifically am I concerned about the C&MA. Well the easy answer is to point out that there are churches inside the C&MA that are extensively using Mr. Bell's teachings as sound, solid, biblical stuff. I would assert that this should not be so. That not only should this not be so, but his teachings should be forbidden from being used in any other manner other than for exposing heresy. But let's just go out on a limb and say that Mr. Bell's gospel is the same. What about his renouncing us waiting on a future hope? Well that teaching IS Biblical and the C&MA has long recognized that it is. Not only do we feel that it is Biblical we feel so strongly about it that we feel it is a VITAL truth. I present point 11 from our statement of faith for your consideration.
11. The Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ is imminent and will be personal, visible, and pre-millennial. This is the believer's blessed hope and is a vital truth, which is an incentive to holy living and faithful service (Hebrews 10:37, Luke 21:27, Titus 2:11-14).
Will we as a church, a denomination, and as individual believers stand up for the truth? Or will we continue to allow false teachings, heresy, to be taught in our churches? I know that I may get a great deal of response about this post. I will be more than happy to chat, and even happier to sit down and watch Trees with you. And this is only the tip of the iceberg. Mr. Bell has many other videos distorting the truth. Included is one named Bullhorn where Rob aggressively attacks evangelism, specifically aiming at stranger evangelism and street evangelism. A.W. Tozer became a Christian because of a street preacher preaching on the street. William Booth, founder of the Salvation Army, was a street preacher. Glenn Tingley (hope I spelled that right) was a street preacher and great Christian leader inside the C&MA. And our own founder, Dr. A.B. Simpson, founded the C&MA on street preaching to immigrant dock workers. Rather than attack evangelism methods used by these great men to produce lasting Kingdom results, we ought to be out using those methods which God says is calculated to bring about revival. No one is going to get saved from me doing good works, which are important, but they will be saved by the preaching of the Gospel.
For "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!" But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?" So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.
Romans 10:13-17
What is it that is so dangerous about the teaching on the video Trees? The thing that I see as being so dangerous is that Mr. Bell is about 95% right on what he says. Basically the point of the video is that we need to be doing something as Christians. This is a great point, we do need to be doing something. He also says we need to be spending our lives in service, also a great point. However it goes astray about the middle of the video when Mr. Bell states that we are pretty much doing nothing if what we are doing is spending our time trying to get people to believe the way we do. Here is what I heard with his comments, as did the others at church without my prompting. They heard Rob Bell say that evangelism is a waste of time. Rather than evangelize Rob would assert that we need to spend our time bringing heaven on earth and partnering with God to restore this fallen creation and transform the world into the kind of creation God intended it to be. He states at one point in the video that an ancient Jewish saying says that our good works are the seeds that are planting the trees in Eden. He then pronounces a benediction at the end that encourages us to plant the trees of paradise with our good works.
Another disturbing thing is that Mr. Bell goes so far as to say that Jesus condemned the practice of teaching others to believe as we believe. My response is, "He did?" Is the Great Commission (Matthew 28:16-20) a condemnation of us teaching people to believe what we believe, or is it a command to do exactly that? Rob says a lot of Christians sit around waiting on a future hope, waiting for creation to be redeemed by Jesus. He says that he believes that Jesus is going to redeem creation as well, but he believes he will do it through us. However scripture says something totally different. Let's look at what scripture says here.
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works. Declare these things; exhort and rebuke with all authority. Let no one disregard you.
Titus 2:11-15
And he who was seated on the throne said, "Behold, I am making all things new." Also he said, "Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true."
Revelation 21:5
While it is plain to see that we are supposed to do good works as Mr. Bell asserts, we see that waiting for the appearing of Christ is in fact a Biblical mandate. Our reason for living holy, and being good, is because God is holy and good and is coming back for us, not so that we can restore the fallen world, because God is going to recreate this fallen world. Rob condemns this future hope we wait for as being a false motivation in the Christian walk. Scripture however declares it to be so (in far more places than that just Titus and Revelation). I am concerned for the church as a whole because this is a false gospel. Mr. Bell's church at one point during a phone conversation told me personally that the Gospel we believe in was not the Gospel. Granted the person I was speaking with was an Associate Pastor and not Rob himself, but none the less Mars Hill Bible Church said they didn't believe that what I was getting at was the gospel. So in this phone conversation what was I getting at. Here is what I said.
I am laying on the street dying from being run over by a car. I look you in the face and tell you that I am scared and that I don't want to die and go to hell. What would you say to me. The Pastor told me that they (Mars Hill) did not believe that was the Gospel. He then proceeded to tell me that the Gospel was learning to live in communion with God here and now and help restore fallen creation. Which is the exact message of the Nooma video called Trees. What does scripture say about that?
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel-- not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:6-9
So Mr. Bell teaches a different Gospel. What should our response be? This is why I am concerned for the church as a whole. But why specifically am I concerned about the C&MA. Well the easy answer is to point out that there are churches inside the C&MA that are extensively using Mr. Bell's teachings as sound, solid, biblical stuff. I would assert that this should not be so. That not only should this not be so, but his teachings should be forbidden from being used in any other manner other than for exposing heresy. But let's just go out on a limb and say that Mr. Bell's gospel is the same. What about his renouncing us waiting on a future hope? Well that teaching IS Biblical and the C&MA has long recognized that it is. Not only do we feel that it is Biblical we feel so strongly about it that we feel it is a VITAL truth. I present point 11 from our statement of faith for your consideration.
11. The Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ is imminent and will be personal, visible, and pre-millennial. This is the believer's blessed hope and is a vital truth, which is an incentive to holy living and faithful service (Hebrews 10:37, Luke 21:27, Titus 2:11-14).
Will we as a church, a denomination, and as individual believers stand up for the truth? Or will we continue to allow false teachings, heresy, to be taught in our churches? I know that I may get a great deal of response about this post. I will be more than happy to chat, and even happier to sit down and watch Trees with you. And this is only the tip of the iceberg. Mr. Bell has many other videos distorting the truth. Included is one named Bullhorn where Rob aggressively attacks evangelism, specifically aiming at stranger evangelism and street evangelism. A.W. Tozer became a Christian because of a street preacher preaching on the street. William Booth, founder of the Salvation Army, was a street preacher. Glenn Tingley (hope I spelled that right) was a street preacher and great Christian leader inside the C&MA. And our own founder, Dr. A.B. Simpson, founded the C&MA on street preaching to immigrant dock workers. Rather than attack evangelism methods used by these great men to produce lasting Kingdom results, we ought to be out using those methods which God says is calculated to bring about revival. No one is going to get saved from me doing good works, which are important, but they will be saved by the preaching of the Gospel.
For "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!" But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?" So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.
Romans 10:13-17
177 Comments:
Preach the word of God everywhere and to all people. Use words only when absolutely necessary. It's like I've said before many times, words are cheap. If you're not walking the talk then it's best to just keep quiet about the whole thing because your words will be false and hollow and people will see right through it. The old saying of 'I can't hear your words because your actions are screaming at me' holds true as well. The most believed Christians by Non Christians are the ones who simply go about their day, living their lives completely in the Presence of God and being an extension of that Presence to others by their words and actions.
By Unknown, at 11:18 AM
Alice,
Good thoughts, I am glad that you can see that scripture actually commands us to use words. I agree that living a godly and upright life is important. But I have never had a person get saved because I was living for the Lord. They got saved when I told them what Jesus had done for them and they repented and believed. My lifestyle is just a platform from which to preach the word. Which I think is what you pointed out so well in your last sentance. A verbal witness without a lifestyle is useless, a lifestyle without a verbal witness is also useless. Thanks for your comments.
By Pastor Jerry, at 11:27 AM
I think that it was painfully obvious from about the second sentence out of Mr. Bell's mouth that he has taken the Bible way out of context. First of all, Revelation is pretty clear about what will happen to the earth in the end times. I guess if you call war, plauges, earthquakes, all of the water turning to blood, etc. a good place to live then you can follow Rob Bell. I like the part where it says that God creates a NEW EARTH. Second, didn't Jesus say to go and preach the gospel to the nations? Isn't that what He did? I think if we need to do anything it would be to get over our pride, stop being scared and actualy witness to people. How does anyone think that others are going to hear about the salvation they can find in Christ if no one tells them. It's very sad to think that people are so unfamiliar with Gods word that they would fall for such an obvious mis-truth.
By Anonymous, at 8:15 PM
Jerry,
You are my hero, I will say it again.
By pastorboy, at 7:50 AM
Nice job Jerry. Your information shows again that Rob Bell's neo-liberalism is more concerned with the bankrupt social gospel than with preaching the actual Gospel of Jesus Christ.
And that’s because Bell doesn’t believe in the genuine Gospel as we can see by what you were told by a pastor at his emerging church.
By Ken Silva, at 7:12 PM
I am sorry you feel the way you do about my church. I corrected your wrong assumptions on my blog!
If you have any questions about my church in the future I would love to answer them. In fact you are welcome to visit at anytime and we would love to take you out to dinner!
Grace and Peace to you!
By Anonymous, at 10:04 PM
I am not sure what Erica's comment means. I don't know what blog she is talking about.
By Pastor Jerry, at 10:18 PM
It is a truncated gospel that focuses on the salvation of the soul alone. Certainly the saving of the soul is important it is not the ONLY purpose have in this life.
We are to be good stewards of the earth. We are to concern ourselves with the here and now as well as the sweet by and by.
In fact a road paved with good works is probably a better path to reaching our world than the road so many evangelicals take...a road that only has fire insurance salesmen traveling it.
Your "gospel" and your view of "evangelism is colored by your eschatology. For those of us who are not of your persuasion..........we tend to see things over the long term. If Jesus could come at any moment there is no sense in doing any good works on this earth. Let's just get people ready to go the rapture.
Pastor Bell may be a lot of things, heretic he is not. You dishonor a godly man by this accusation.
By Anonymous, at 10:36 PM
I think Bruce has forgotten that it is God who calls the sinner who cannot come to Him because of he is dead, it is God who calls us to repentance, it is God who supplies our faith, it is God who sanctifies us who are saved, it is God who changes us from dead to alive-to being a new creation in Christ Jesus.
The good deeds, as called to in Titus, are the fruits of a true conversion, again provided by God, prepared in advance, to those who submit and surrender their will.
As evidenced by his latest tour, "The gods aren't angry," Bell is indeed teaching heresy.
By Anonymous, at 12:06 AM
Sorry Doc,
I don't buy your Calvinistic spin on the gospel. Been there, done that.
And I don't think I said anything about salvation being by works.
Are the gods really angry at everyone? How about you, Doc? Since you are one of the elect, was God ever really angry at you? Why did it matter since you were one of the elect?
Bruce
By Anonymous, at 1:01 AM
I agree with you. I came out of a C&MA Church. They are into the whole gamut of New Age Christianity. Tozer threw fire bombs at the false church organization. He would be ashamed to see what his denomination has come to. I also agree with Alice, but with this difference, even if the preaching of insincere people isn't the ideal, as long as it is the truth, people can still believe it. Even a Bible verse on a plastic comb is better than one without. Many "good deed" doing Christians were brought to the Lord by hirelings. Real Christians are even coming out of the Catholic Church. I'm not sure how the Holy Spirit works it out, but it does happen. I know that sounds cheap, but truth can come out of the mouth of an ass. Jesus said, "leave them alone."
Steve Blackwell
By Anonymous, at 5:32 AM
Bruce,
Wow your blog is out of control. I clicked on your name and the filth that is on your blog with all the cussing in the Many Christian Men article is out of control. Also I can fully understand why you think Rob Bell is godly, because I read the article where you said you don't believe in the inerrancy of the Bible. I think that is where the problems start. If scripture can be wrong then you can not believe the parts you don't like. The doctrine of innerancy comes from the bible where it says:
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.
2 Timothy 3:16-17
I would encourage everyone here to just click on Bruces name which is blue and underlined. It will take you right to his blog site and you can see what I mean for yourself.
By Pastor Jerry, at 6:27 AM
Ok after hunting I found Erica's site. Erica apparently goes to Mars Hill. She is pretty fired up about what I wrote. I am ok with that. Here is where you can find her blog. If you are shy don't go read it cause she bashes me pretty good, and one of her blog commentors actually says I am lying.
http://www.joemartino.name/erica/2008/01/more-people-pla.html
By Pastor Jerry, at 6:29 AM
P.S.
She says in the first paragraph or to of this article that evangelism is a waste of time. Here is a quote:
" They heard Rob Bell say that evangelism is a waste of time.
Evangelism is a waste of time I could not agree with pastor Bell anymore on this one! The gospel is not saving people from Hell. To go around preaching this is a waste of time."
It is pretty amazing how she leaves out in her article every reference Jesus makes about people going to hell.
By Pastor Jerry, at 6:32 AM
I think there is a huge difference in bashing a person or attacking their logic or writing. I attacked you personally but I did question your motives and attitude. I am sorry if I came across that I was attacking you. Grace and Peace to you.
By Anonymous, at 7:10 AM
That was suppose to say I did not attack you personally! I added the link to your blog back in. It got lost in the editing process last night
By Anonymous, at 7:14 AM
Hi Jerry,
I'm curious, Do you have a name for the guy or girl you talked to?
By Anonymous, at 7:49 AM
Alice,
What do you think this verse means?
Matthew 5:16
In the same way, let your good deeds shine out for all to see, so that everyone will praise your heavenly Father.
Just wondering?
Grace and Peace be with you!
By Anonymous, at 8:22 AM
Hi i got saved when i was 15 i'm 41now "backslidden" since 23ish,so i'm no raving Calvinist barely a Christian,ive argued with S Camp,DT blog,with Ken & Ingrid till i got banned..
Butttt
One thing i will say is where do emergents leave me,other then where i already am?
I appreciate people dislike the ideas on the blogs i mentioned,so i will name someone who is respected across the board Brother Yun...
Now tell me how emergent ideas would of possibly helped a guy about to be tortured,because he dared to read a PAGE of the bible? What you going to tell him "dude that page isn't even 100% truth,why bother getting tortured over it?
Erica some of us are dying,ive tried to find God fully for 25 years till i'm sick in my stomach with frustration,so how are u going to help me? Take me to starbucks? Its laughable!
By Anonymous, at 8:45 AM
The Gospel is not simply a fire insurance policy, which - for all intents and purposes - is what much of modern Christianity - especially the ‘Reformed’ branch - tends to treat it as. When the first complaint about a Gospel message is that it didn’t talk enough about ’sin’ and ‘hell’, then it’s missed the point.
If you examine Jesus’ teaching, his number one subject was ‘the kingdom’ - not ‘what happens when you die’. The kingdom is a living issue, not a dying one. When your acceptance of the gospel is based on hope of heaven or fear of hell, then you’ve not fully accepted the message of the Gospel or your place in the kingdom. If it is all about “there, then” and not “here, now”, then Christianity is no more than a mental exercise.
This is not to say that the resurrection is not something desirable, or an ultimate goal - as Paul says in Philippians 3 - but the Gospel is a call to live the life of one already saved, not to wait around and die to obtain salvation.
What Bell is talking about is very much in line with the Hebrew mind and context of Jesus rather than the later Greek/Western interpretations which solidified during the Renaissance (in the Catholic Chruch) and the Reformation.
For example: When does eternal life begin? Too many churches I know would suggest that it begins when we die. Rather, ‘eternal life’ begins when you have accepted the Gospel of Jesus and its accompanying grace.
As for you "contacting a pastor" at Mars Hill - I call shenanigans, unless you can produce the name of the person you talked to at Mars Hill, and I can guarantee they aren't a pastor there (if you actually talked to someone there).
By Chris L, at 8:57 AM
Andy,
While I'm not "emergent" (or "emerging"), I can say you're pretty much created a strawman out of what most ECM churches teach.
By Chris L, at 8:59 AM
Pastor (sic) Silva,
I missed your comment - which, as usual was pretty much a lie from beginning to end. But hey, why let the truth get in the way when you need to slander folks to put food on your plate?
By Chris L, at 9:19 AM
How so Chris??? Its all i ever hear from them here in the UK, blah blah blah pass the latte..
You the watchmens watchman dude?
What message would you give Brother Yun a smuggled bible with half of it crossed out?
By Anonymous, at 9:21 AM
Ok let me ask a point blank question here. Does a person have to personally repent of thier sins and put thier full faith and trust in Jesus in order to become a "real Christian" and have eternal life? Please everyone who comments please answer yes or no only. That way we can all start at some point. If someone says no don't bash them if someone says yes don't bash them.
Again the question in order to be "born again" (Jesus term not mine) does a person need to personally repent (flee from) from sin (breaking God's moral law) and put thier full faith in the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ on the cross and his subsequent resurrection. Please just yes or no. Once we get that central issue announced and decided for everyone then we can go on with a polite discussion. No name calling please. :-)
By Pastor Jerry, at 9:30 AM
What message would you give Brother Yun a smuggled bible with half of it crossed out?
I'm not sure what you're referencing here.
If you're asking about by belief in the Bible - I believe it is 100% the inspired word of God. Here's a bit more on my view of hermeneutics.
If you're asking about what I would tell a brother who was being persecuted for reading the Bible, I would say:
"Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you."
and to take comfort in the words of Jesus to the church at Smyrna.
Be faithful, even to the point of death, and Jesus will give you the crown of life.
By Chris L, at 9:32 AM
PJ,
1) When does 'eternal life' begin?
2) Is the primary thrust of the gospel focused upon what happens when you die or how you live before you die?
3) Was Jesus life, death and resurrection ONLY a substitutionary penal atonement for individual sin, or is that just one aspect of it?
By Chris L, at 9:42 AM
Jerry,
I will be happy to answer your question, after you answer mine. What was the name of this person you talked to at Mars?
By Anonymous, at 9:42 AM
Then cool!! Because every Emergent i speak to,seems half scared to make a clear statement,its like word acrobats..
Like i said ive had my share of problems with the blogs listed..
Through email i would say Ken is my friend,we don't agree on much..But the funny thing is i email him a question & he answers,may not be the reply i like,but he answer's and wowee in one paragraph
By Anonymous, at 9:44 AM
Yes
By Anonymous, at 9:46 AM
Joe,
It was about a year ago when I talked with this man. I was running a camp program for a denomination that wanted to use your Pastors material. When I asked him I never thought a year later I would be having this conversation via the net so remembering his name was not important to me then. In hind sight I wish I would have.
So the answer is I do not remember. How I got in contact with him was by calling your churches number that was listed on the website and telling the person who answered the phone that I wanted to ask some questions about what your church believed and they put him on.
I am sure at this point you might accuse me of lying about talking to him and I am ok with that. I answered yours, your turn.
Must you personally repent of your sins and trust Jesus to have eternal life?
By Pastor Jerry, at 9:48 AM
Andy,
I would say to you:
Die to yourself! Lay everything in your life at the feet of Jesus! Believe in Him, His work on the cross, realize your are a sinner in need of a Savior and pray that God changes your life. Find someone who can live Jesus to you and watch God transform your life!
Grace and peace be with you!
By Anonymous, at 9:49 AM
Chris,
Here are the answers to your questions in return answer mine please.
1) When does 'eternal life' begin?
The easy answer for me without getting into a long debate is you recieve eternal life at the moment you repent and have faith in Jesus alone.
2) Is the primary thrust of the gospel focused upon what happens when you die or how you live before you die?
Neither one is a complete answer. The primary thrust of the gospel is summed up in Matthew 28:19-20 Make disciples of all people. They gotta be a convert to be a disciple. Teach them to obey all of Jesus commands, include the one to make disciples (which again requires the be converted before being a disciple).
3) Was Jesus life, death and resurrection ONLY a substitutionary penal atonement for individual sin, or is that just one aspect of it?
I would have to be a fool to say it was ONLY that. However someone else would have to be a fool to say that it was not the most important aspect of it. It was Jesus primary task. Here is a quote from Jesus:
For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost."
Luke 19:10
Ok your turn. Yes or No?
By Pastor Jerry, at 9:56 AM
You are right Jerry, I struggle to believe that a person violated a rather well known church policy. Which brings up a whole new list of questions for me.
1. Why post something a year later without any corroborative evidence? Especially, when you had to know that some would question you.
2. What credence should I give a guy who can quote some mysterious staffer?
3. How do we know that this guy still works at the church (if he ever did?)
Jerry, have a good one. Without a name, what you have to say doesn't mean much to me.
Oh and to answer your question. I have lots of verses that I'd like to share, but I won't. I will abide by your rules for this question and say "yep."
By Joe Martino, at 9:56 AM
Erica,
Is that a yes or no?
By Pastor Jerry, at 9:57 AM
You have a church policy at your church for staff to not discuss your doctrinal beliefs with outsiders?
By Pastor Jerry, at 9:58 AM
Cool Erica sooooooo what exactly is the differences between you and Jerry then? awwww ive soothed it all out ;-p
By Anonymous, at 9:59 AM
Let's leave the mysterious church staffer out of it then. Have you ever watched Trees where Rob says that teaching other people to believe like we do is a waste of time? I don't need a staffer when he says it on a recorded video that he sells regularly.
By Pastor Jerry, at 10:00 AM
Must you personally repent of your sins and trust Jesus to have eternal life?
Since you've not yet answered my questions, I will have to give you two answers:
1) IF you believe that eternal life begins on earth before you die:
Yes, you have to repent of your sins (at least the ones you recognize, allowing that the Holy Spirit will continue to reveal more to you as you mature) - otherwise you would be living with the consequences of the ongoing sin and it would hinder you from being in the kingdom here and now.
2) If you believe that eternal life is only about what happens when you die, then No I would not agree with that statement, because it is only by grace that we are saved and not by any works (which would include repentance) of which one could boast. [However, I would have to question whether or not I truly believed in Jesus' life, death, resurrection and message if I was not willing to repent.]
Since I believe that eternal life begins now, and not when I die, and that salvation begins now, and not when I die, then yes, I believe that repentance is required.
By Chris L, at 10:01 AM
Yes I do
By Anonymous, at 10:02 AM
Chris,
ok I am guessing or posts crossed without knowing. I did answer your questions before you answered them for me. Scroll up and look above your last post and you will see my answers?
By Pastor Jerry, at 10:04 AM
Jerry,
Come on Man, you build an entire post around this mysterious staffer to castigate my church, call a friend of mine and my pastor a heretic (it is a series on false teachers, right?) and you want me to just say, "Well, Ok I'll forget the fact that you can't name this person."
Jerry, I'm trying really hard to be nice which is why I said for you to have a good one. As for the policy, it is normally done in person and they don't talk about NOOMA's. What's it matter? You talked to some mysterious dude. I'll still probably check this as my wife is obviously involved here and at her blog, I've answered your question about repentance, but Dude you and I are probably done. Amending the post with the fact that you have no reference for your "deepthroat" character (That's a reference to Watergate for all of our non-history people) would be a good place to start for credibility. If you want to build your case off of the video go ahead. If you had done that, I probably wouldn't have said anything here, but you didn't do that. You used some "mysterious staffer" to bolster your case.
Again, Have a good one
By Joe Martino, at 10:07 AM
"Let's leave the mysterious church staffer out of it then"
hmmmmmm now i think ur on shaky ground Jerry, after all we wouldn't be posting here if you hadn't had the conversation,maybe it was a spiritual entrapment lol
One point Eica and thks for replying..What exactly does this mean > Find someone who can live Jesus to you and watch God transform your life!
Where does that idea come from aj
By Anonymous, at 10:10 AM
Ok most everyone has answered. So we all agree that you must repent and have faith to be saved or born again or whichever term you prefer.
So if that is the case then shouldn't our primary task on this earth be to tell others about this "requirement" so that they to can be saved? I agree that our faith needs to do something. However our good works are merely a platform from which to share our faith and the gospel message. Faith without works is dead, we know this, works would include personal evangelism as well. Remember Paul told Timothy not to neglect the work of an evangelist. Also Paul admonishes the church at Rome to "preach with words" the gospel.
For "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!"
Romans 10:13-15
So while doing good works is important we can not neglect the lost and dying masses who, if they die in their sins, go to hell.
Would you all agree that a person who dies without personal repentance and faith in Jesus goes to hell?
By Pastor Jerry, at 10:10 AM
Andy,
I am not saying there is a difference between our beliefs. I believe the same way my pastor does! It is ponderous than isn't it?
By Anonymous, at 10:11 AM
Read the original post everyone. The entire case is built on Rob Bell being a heretic with Nooma videos not the staffer. One tenth of that orignal post at MOST was about the staffer.
By Pastor Jerry, at 10:13 AM
Andy,
Check out Matthew 5:16. Tell me what you think after you read it. The bible talks about how the disciples studied under Jesus. Peter was studying to be a Rabbi and learned the entire OT most likely and than became a disciple of Jesus. Paul studied under some name I can not pronounce!lol
I think the entire bible talks about the importance of reproducing yourselves in other people lives!
By Anonymous, at 10:15 AM
I will invite everyone back next week around Tuesday or so as we talk about the false teaching in the Nooma video Sunday...and you can keep coming back for weeks to come as we expose the heretical teaching in these videos. Again the whole thing is built around Rob and his heretical videos....not the staffer. And that is a fact.
By Pastor Jerry, at 10:16 AM
The Peter rabbi thing? Where did that come from? I am not sure I have ever heard that Peter was studying to become a Rabbi. He actually was an outcast for the Rabbinical circles because of where he was from as far as I have ever understood. I am not saying I am right, I just wanted to know what book or such you read about him studying to be a Rabbi cause I would like to see that because it is new for me.
By Pastor Jerry, at 10:18 AM
Jerry,
You have a good day bud. I pray that God richly rewards you for your efforts on this post.
;)
By Joe Martino, at 10:19 AM
PJ,
We cross-posted - I saw that right after I hit "publish"...
By Chris L, at 10:22 AM
I agree with you Jerry. However, in your post you gave the illustration of someone laying on the street being afraid of dying and going to Hell and you asked a staff member about this remember?
I believe that if we live a life separated from Jesus we will spend eternity separated from him! Is it in literal fire. Most likely! However I would not give my life up on this. I would however give my life up on the fact that Jesus Christ lived a perfect life and died on the cross paying my debt. He tells me to believe in Him, realize I am a sinner and take up my cross and follow him! That is what I share with others! Jesus did not die to save us from Hell. He died that I might have life! Why not share the good news of what Jesus did instead of the consequences?
Jesus changes lives! That is what I believe and that is what is preached at my church on a regular basis!
By Anonymous, at 10:23 AM
Why would you keep preaching on something that is not true?
By Anonymous, at 10:25 AM
Erica i will read it tks..
My friends a Messianic Jew,interestingly she as serious issues with Rob and his ideas on Rabbinic Judaism (right term?)..
I don't know Jerry from a hole in the wall, but i know her and respect her highly..Rob seems to upset a lot of people..
By Anonymous, at 10:31 AM
Erica,
Have you watched the videos? All of them? If not let me know and I will buy you a set. Rob says what I qoute him as saying. If it is not what he means he ought to look into changing the videos because that is certainly how he comes across. He literally says in one of the other videos that Peter sank on the water NOT because he lacked faith in Jesus but because he lacked faith in himself. The word faith there, if we go back to the original Greek language means lack of faith in Christ. Many people are being led astray by these videos and I am trying to equip my church to expose these false teachings to thier family and loved ones so that they do not die in their sins but so that they can come to truly know the savior.
This is because I love people, not because I am a Rob Bell hater. I would encourage you to keep checking back here in the weeks to come as I post, and then you can counter post the other side of the coin and people can decide for themselves. We will be a team of sorts. Sound good?
By Pastor Jerry, at 10:32 AM
I learned it in Bible College but you are more than welcome to checkout this site!http://cometozion.org/Torah%20Scholar.htm Jewish boys learned the Torah! When they were older they would than study under a Rabbi! You will also hear about it in the Nooma video Dust.
By Anonymous, at 10:35 AM
Have you ever watched Trees where Rob says that teaching other people to believe like we do is a waste of time?
I would suggest that your question is a bit of a straw man, in which you have mischaracterized what Bell said.
Faith without works is dead, we know this, works would include personal evangelism as well. Remember Paul told Timothy not to neglect the work of an evangelist. Also Paul admonishes the church at Rome to "preach with words" the gospel.
I think part of the problem here is that you're cherry-picking "evangelism" (which yes, IS mentioned as a work we should be doing) from a MUCH bigger and more extensive list of things we are commanded to do as part of the kingdom - things that too often get shunted aside as "the social gospel".
To quote missionary E. Stanley Jones, who I believe Bell has quoted before, though:
An individual gospel without a social gospel is a soul without a body and a social gospel without an individual gospel is a body without a soul. One is a ghost and the other a corpse.
The point of trees was that much of the focus on modern evangelism stops at the individual implications of the gospel (belief, repentence), and misses the purposes for which we were saved.
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
When your focus is simply on evangelism, paying lip service to the overarching purpose of that salvation, you're not doing much more than participating in a viral marketing campaign for fire insurance.
By Chris L, at 10:37 AM
Sure we can do that!
BTW, I have see a lot of them. I have not see this particular one but one of the men in our house church has all of them so I will watch and get back to you! How does that sound?
I think understand the Jewish history will help you better understand the Nooma video dust! That site I suggested has a lot of good things in it. Check it out when you get a chance. Check out this site as well!
http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com/2008/01/11/i-now-have-the-dust-of-a-rabbi-on-me/
and if you still have time, you can read my thoughts here
http://www.joemartino.name/erica/2008/01/nooma-dust.html
Let me know what you think!
Grace and Peace be with you!
Oh BTW, we are doing a verse by verse study on Philippians. Are your teachings online?
By Anonymous, at 10:42 AM
Jerry,
You're also mischaraterizing what Bell said in Dust. I happen to know where he got that particular teaching - a Reformed pastor who took him on a tour of Israel & Turkey back in 2003.
The source of that particular teaching is Ray VanderLaan, who picked it up from a number of Messianic Jewish sources and commentaries on first-century understanding of the relationship between rabbi (pre-70AD) and talmid.
From this source:
The decision to follow a rabbi as a talmid meant total commitment in the first century as it does today. Since a talmid was totally devoted to becoming like the rabbi he would have spent his entire time listening and observing the teacher to know how to understand the Scripture and how to put it into practice. Jesus describes his relationship to his disciples in exactly this way (Matt. 10:24-25; Luke 6:40) He chose them to be with him (Mark 3:13-19) so they could be like him (John 13:15).
Most students sought out the rabbis they wished to follow. This happened to Jesus on occasion (Mark 5:19; Luke 9:57). There were a few exceptional rabbis who were famous for seeking out their own students. If a student wanted to study with a rabbi he would ask if he might 'follow' the rabbi. The rabbi would consider the students potential to become like him and whether he would make the commitment necessary. It is likely most students were turned away. Some of course were invited to 'follow me'. This indicated the rabbi believed the potential talmid had the ability and commitment to become like him. It would be a remarkable affirmation of the confidence the teacher had in the student. In that light, consider whether the disciples of Jesus were talmidim as understood by the people of his time. They were to be 'with' him (Mark 3:13-19); to follow him (Mark 1:16-20); to live by his teaching (John 8:31); were to imitate his actions (John 13:13-15); were to make everything else secondary to their learning from the rabbi (Luke 14:26).
This may explain Peter's walking on water (Matt. 14:22-33). When Jesus (the rabbi) walked on water, Peter (the talmid) wanted to be like him. Certainly Peter had not walked on water before nor could he have imagined being able to do it. However, if the teacher, who chose me because he believed I could be like him, can do it so must I. And he did! It was a miracle but he was just like the rabbi! And then...he doubted. Doubted what? Traditionally we have seen he doubted Jesus' power. Maybe, but Jesus was still standing on the water. I believe Peter doubted himself, or maybe better his capacity to be empowered by Jesus. Jesus response 'why did you doubt' (14:31) then means 'why did you doubt I could empower you to be like me'?
That is a crucial message for the talmid of today. We must believe that Jesus calls us to be disciples because he knows he can so instruct, empower, and fill us with his Spirit that we can be like him (at least in our actions). We must believe in ourselves! Otherwise we will doubt that he can use us and as a result we will not be like him.
This is not a prosperity-gospel or self-esteem gospel message.
By Chris L, at 10:45 AM
Andy,
Check out he Agendaless love site!
By Anonymous, at 10:46 AM
cool.
Yes what I teach is online. However only the last four weeks on a rotating basis. So basically next Sunday the oldest sermon will drop off and the newest one will be added. You can go to www.xroadsfellowship.com and click on the sermon link on the left to get to the sermon page. We have all the older stuff archived so if you wanted to get some of it you would just need to let me know. Some of it may not make as much sense as each week builds on what was previously taught.
BTW it is all just audio. No cool video stuff, we aren't that high tech......yet!
By Pastor Jerry, at 10:47 AM
Thats not correct Erica,rabbi came into existence in 7 AD..
Even Ben Witherington as pointed out this error in Robs teaching
quote "Having spoken of the promise of his writings and speaking engagements and videos, it is necessary in all fairness to turn around and talk about the problems. I will stick to a few major ones in the way he handles the Bible and issues of orthodoxy and orthopraxy. First of all it seems clear that Rob, in his valid attempt to read Jesus and the NT writers in the context of early Judaism, has not used good enough sources to really help him understand the difference between Judaism prior to the two Jewish wars in the first and second centuries A.D, and later Mishnaic and Talmudic Judaism.
Jesus was certainly not a rabbi in the later Mishnaic sense, much less like modern ordained rabbis. It is telling that the only time Jesus is ever really called rabbi by any of his followers is when Judas does so when he is betraying Jesus with a kiss. Jesus' approach to the Torah is not like later rabbis in various ways, not the least of which is that he does not cite (indeed he often contrasts his teaching with) the oral traditions of the elders, such as Hillel or Shammai and the like. Jesus spoke on his own independent authority. At times Rob seems too uncritical in his reading of sources like the truly dated works of Alfred Edersheim, and apparently he spends too much time listening to folks like Ray Vanderlaan, a local teacher in the Grand Rapids area who doesn't really much understand the differences between medieval Jewish rabbis and the context and ethos of teachers in early Judaism of Jesus' day. Rob needs to read some viable sources on early Judaism, for example some of the work of Craig Evans or George Nickelsburg or Jacob Neusner if he wants to paint the picture of the Jewish Jesus using the right hews, tones, and features.end
Training would of been to be a Pharisee not a Rabbi,and i doubt Peter took training in that,but yes Paul did..
As my friend as also pointed out its very questionable if Jesus would of been considered for any teaching with his questionable parenthood
By Anonymous, at 10:49 AM
Andy,
It has been pointed out (to BW3, as well) that 'rabbi' was a term used pre-70 AD for learned teachers, though most scholars will differentiate these from post-70 AD mishnaic rabbis by calling them 'sages'.
In the pre-mishnaic sense, Jesus was a rabbi (he is even called this by six different social groups in the Bible!) or a 'sage'. The teaching system Rob outlines is well-documented by a number of Christian and Jewish scholars working in Israel - including Brad Young, David Bivin, Roy Blizzard, marvin Wilson, Roy Moseley and others.
So, some of the criticism of Bell's use of "Rabbi" in this teaching is because of the confusion in terminology between pre-70 "Rabbi" (aka sage) and post-70 "Rabbi" - which is carried on in Orthodox Judiasm.
There is more on this here and here.
By Chris L, at 11:03 AM
Jerry,
Thank you for the kind words.
Not I, nor my blog, is out of control. You may not like what you read but it doesn't mean I am out of control.
While you may not like my use of THREE words (and I noted I was using hyperbole throughout the post) it doesn't mean I have committed any sin. If you think the words are inappropriate, then by all means do not use them. Certainly you should not offend your conscience.
What I find interesting is that you focused on the words I used and never say a peep about the real issue.........Steve Camp and people like him ravaging the Church in Jesus name with their hateful, judgmental speech and writing.
Did you actually read my post on inerrancy? My primary issue is with the word and what it conveys to the people. It gives them a false sense about the Scripture and it conveys a meaning that it not true.
So when you use the word inerrant.....what do you mean?
Jerry, I assume you have got some education and know what a circular argument is? To say that scripture attests to itself is a circular argument.
Now, I happen to believe that the Bible is the Word of God. Did I write otherwise?
You see if you can make me into a "he doesn't believe the Bible" person then you can dismiss me. Sorry, I believe it. What verse would you like to talk about?
As to Erica's comment about evangelism. Evangelism as most Evangelicals don't do it is a waste of time. Most Evangelicals never do anything evangelistic. The few that do do it use methodology that is ineffective and most often drives people away.
Tracts, street corner preaching, attractional evangelism certainly reach a few but they are not effective in the postmodern world. The message doesn't change but the methodology does.
In another post you mention using "movies" That is a "new" methodology....one which Tozer in his book "The Evils of the Religious Movie" condemns. I for one think you are using an excellent method for reaching people.
Jerry, you have got a "picture" of me built up in your head. I submit you have been watching to much fantasy island and you have me mixed in with the images :)
Bruce
By Anonymous, at 11:05 AM
I really don't have to say much more! Chris L, is far more knowledgeable than I am on the subject and I was hoping he would pipe in! Thanks Chris L!
Bruce, that was a great way to explain Evangelism! You are right!
By Anonymous, at 11:27 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
By Anonymous, at 11:35 AM
Jerry,
One other thing you might consider with this particular "series" - are you truly being a 'charitable listener', or are you specifically looking to find fault in a Christian brother?
Not every difference in opinion is heresy - particularly the further you move away from belief in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus and the closer you move toward systematic theological teachings. I would suggest that what you labeled "another gospel" is nowhere near what Paul was describing in those serious terms.
Rather, I would suggest the the closer you hold theological 'systems' to the level of inerrancy of scripture, the closer it becomes to becoming "another gospel".
In the case of "trees", a call to fulfill being a disciple, and emphasizing ALL of what that entails (which is much larger and broader than making converts) is not 'another gospel' - but living IN the Gospel of Jesus and his teaching of the kingdom.
By Chris L, at 11:36 AM
Hi Chris i meant 1st cent....
Yes your correct,the confusion comes from the meaning of the word ie teacher or a Rabbi that as received Rabbinical ordination..
The term Rabbi was first used in reference to the Rabbis of the Sanhedrin during the first century C.E. When the term Rabbi is mentioned it should be spelt harav to implied scholarship and not just wise one.
If Rob means that Peter or Jesus trained to be Rabbi's he is incorrect..One why would the Word need to be taught the mea
ning of the bible,and as Pharisee metamorphised into the Rabbi around the 1st Cent,it would mean they trained to be Pharisee's,which strikes me as odd considerng their conflict with them..
Paul describes himself as once a Pharisee and not a Rabbi,unless your arguing there were two schools one teaching Rabbis and another Pharisees?
By Anonymous, at 11:40 AM
Correction If Rob means they trained to be "Rabbi's" in the Pharisee's line, i guess he could be correct..
By Anonymous, at 11:44 AM
Andy,
There were two major "schools" of thought in the first century - 1) that based on the priesthood and Torah only, and 2) that based on all of the Tanakh (as we know it now) and its oral interpretation (which was not one interpretation, as we may think, but a body of interpretations).
The first one (priesthood) had two branches - the Essenes (who became separatists) and the Sadducees (who were beholden to Herod and Rome). The second - called the hasidim, "pious ones" (a positive connotation) had two major branches - zealotry (which believe that the kingdom of God would come via political and military force) and pharisee (which believed that the kingdom of God came through belief and service, not political intrigue).
Within phariseeism, there were (at least) seven types of pharisee (see more here), of which only one was considered truly following the way God desired. "Pharisee" could be used both to describe one's theology or one's political affiliation.
Jesus' theology most resembled the theology of the "seventh" (good) type of pharisee (for more discussion on this, see Brad Young's "Jesus the Jewish Theologian" and "Meet the Rabbis"), and it should be noted that Hillel and others of this "Seventh type" said MUCH worse things about the pharisees, in general, than Jesus did, with 'hypocrites!' being the standard hue and cry against them.
So, with a few key differences (based on WHO Jesus was and his interpretation of 'kingdom'), his theology was very similar to the ideal "seventh" type of pharisee, but not the political designation of "pharisee".
As to his relationship with his talmidim and the way they interacted with other people in Israel - it is consistent with the practice of the Second Temple 'sages' (hasidim), but different in a number of ways from later mishnaic rabbinism.
By Chris L, at 11:51 AM
Ok this could very well be semantics..
So Chris simple question,when you were "qualified" in Rabbi school of Jesus time,did you become a Pharisee?
By Anonymous, at 11:51 AM
If Rob means they trained to be "Rabbi's" in the Pharisee's line, i guess he could be correct..
I think that's the point I was trying to make :)
Both Rob, RVL and others don't always distinguish between pre- and post-70 AD rabbinism in their shorter teachings (like NOOMA for Rob). Being familiar with RVL moreso than Rob, though, he does outline this in much more additional detail in his 2-day seminars.
By Chris L, at 11:53 AM
Your missing my point..Your arguing that Peter was schooled or Peter's teacher was schooled i.e Jesus..
My question is who were they schooled by,and what was the hopeful destination of these students!
I'm saying they were "enroled" in Pharisee school and that was there hopeful distination..
By Anonymous, at 11:55 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
By Anonymous, at 11:57 AM
okkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk we got there.So i wouldn't be doing Rob a injustice,to says he says Rabbi because he dislikes the connotation they were trained by Pharisees?
By Anonymous, at 11:58 AM
when you were "qualified" in Rabbi school of Jesus time,did you become a Pharisee?
You could be a "Pharisee" without completing training under a sage/rabbi - more like a political affiliation. Paul, being a Pharisee of Pharisees, was making a positive statement laying out his qualifications as a "qualified" (using your terms) instructor, and identifying his belief with the "seventh" school of pharisee thought.
I'm not sure there's a modern equivalent way to explain it (at least in a short fashion). Let me see if I can think of a good analogy...
In the meantime, consider this:
In the Sanhedrin, the Sadducees had 65 seats and the Pharisees had 5 seats. Of these 5 seats, we know 3 by name - Niccodemus, Joseph of Aramathea and Gamaliel. Each of these three was either a follower of Jesus, or at least showed some sympathy to his followers. As Pharisees (politically), they could hold these seats on the Sanhedrin. However, if they held all of the same beliefs (pharisee theology) but didn't hold an affiliation with the title "Pharisee", they would not have been able to.
Its not a perfect example, but maybe it gets the point across...
By Chris L, at 12:01 PM
So i wouldn't be doing Rob a injustice,to says he says Rabbi because he dislikes the connotation they were trained by Pharisees?
He says "rabbi", as that (or 'hasid') was the word they used (before it took on MUCH more connotation). I don't know if it's the connotation he's avoiding though. I suspect its the former, rather than the latter
By Chris L, at 12:03 PM
noooooooooooooooo its a wonderful example!!! Because as you rightly say they couldn't be there unless they were 1) trained in "pharisee school lol or political connections or were Sadducee's..
By Anonymous, at 12:04 PM
OK ive got one question for you Chris..
If Jesus passed through this training..Why were the Pharisees so amazed at His knowledge,why did they say we know this guy,we know His mum and His brothers and sisters...
Why didn't they say "wowee he always was a great student ;-)
By Anonymous, at 12:10 PM
All of this argument over words is really silly. It is this kind of thing that just serves to divide the body of Christ even further. We can disagree on the minor points while still getting the big picture...and that is the Gospel. And yes...the Gospel is a very specific thing...repent from your sins and believe in Christ the Son of God our Savior. Period...all the semantics about whether it is for here on earth or purely for the after life are pointless. From my view point we are obviously supposed to live out a Christ-like life. That is a Biblical truth. I also believe that the Holy Spirit will push us towards that end. We, as fleshly people, will always fall short and cannot live like that of our own will. We have to lay our total dependence on Christ. I also believe that, and this is sort of where I have an issue with "emergents", that the end goal was not bringing the kingdom down to earth in a social gospel kind of way. Why would that be the point when He is going to destroy this world? The point is that people come to know Christ...end of story. We get so bogged down in these things that we forget the point of it all. Preach the TRUE Gospel and people will turn from their sin that leads to destruction/hell and trust in the Savior. Stop arguing and agree on that! If you are so caught up in this and you just know you are right and have a hard time letting go than at least follow the words of Scripture...do not cast your pearls before swine. Let it go there. Remember the words of 1 John 3:11 "For this is the message that you heard from the beginning, that we should love one another"...as believers love Christ first and love your brothers in Christ in the same fashion.
By Anonymous, at 12:31 PM
Drew,
There is a social component to the gospel. Matthew 25 makes that very clear. How will we be judged some day? Quoting Keith Green's song on Matt 25 "by the things we did and did not do."
Eschatology lies at the heart of this issue. If you believe in the imminent return of Jesus, the rapture then it seems logical for you NOT to concern yourself with social issues. "Gettin ready today, pullin out tomorrow"
For those of us who are of a postmil or amil persuasion we see things differently. We tend to have a longer view of the future.
For example, I do not believe in the imminent return of Christ.According to 2 thes 2 (there's that Bible I don't believe) there are things that must take place first. Those things have NOT happened and as a result the return of Christ can not be called imminent. It could be soon but not imminent.
I have written a more complete explanation on the evangelism issue on my blog.
Bruce Gerencser
By Anonymous, at 12:50 PM
Drew:
I also believe that, and this is sort of where I have an issue with "emergents", that the end goal was not bringing the kingdom down to earth in a social gospel kind of way. Why would that be the point when He is going to destroy this world?
What was Jesus #1 preaching topic? The kingdom. As he taught, it is both now and it is to come. When you examine the descriptions of the world to come in their original context, you do not get a picture of "God will obliterate this world and replace it with something else" - rather, you are given a picture of "a new heavens and a new earth" - in the same fashion that if we are in Christ, we are a "new Creation". This picture of renewal is one in which He remakes everything in the world, removing the vestiges of sin and chaos.
The kingdom has a manifestation here and now which is a shadow of what is to come. Paul's epistles expand on Jesus' teaching in the concept of tikkun olam (literally "world repair"), which is brought about by God through the mitzvot ("good works") He prepared for His people, those whom He has saved through His grace.
The point is that people come to know Christ...end of story. We get so bogged down in these things that we forget the point of it all. Preach the TRUE Gospel and people will turn from their sin that leads to destruction/hell and trust in the Savior. Stop arguing and agree on that!
No, you've completely missed the point and given HALF of the the gospel. You were saved for a purpose, and that purpose is not simply a viral marketing campaign for fire insurance. By completely ignoring the social component, you end up missing the point, which is beyond the individual.
By Chris L, at 1:03 PM
If Jesus passed through this training..Why were the Pharisees so amazed at His knowledge,why did they say we know this guy,we know His mum and His brothers and sisters...
I think you're partially blurring the borders between Jesus' theology and Jesus claiming to be the Messiah.
The first part (being amazed at his questions when he was in the temple at age 12) dealt with his wisdom and his age. The second part (knowing his family) dealt with his messiahship.
His wisdom was recognized, because he taught in the way that one with authority (S'mikah). Very few rabbis had authority to teach new interpretations of scripture - they had to have authority (S'mikah) to do so. When they did teach "with authority", the method used was "you have heard it said (X), but I tell you (Y)". When questioned on where he got his authority, Jesus' answer (through question format in Matt 21) was that he received it from John (a prophet), and therefore, God.
By Chris L, at 1:13 PM
"When questioned on where he got his authority, Jesus' answer (through question format in Matt 21) was that he received it from John (a prophet), and therefore, God"
haha where you get that from John?? thats so vague..
I have to go out its Sat and being English the pub calls ;-)
By Anonymous, at 1:28 PM
Bruce and Chris,
You both completely missed my point. No where did I say that the kingdom was not the point at all. I never once said the point was to prevent people from going to hell. BOTH are part of the picture...but NEITHER can happen apart from Christ. That was my point. If you aren't preaching Christ's Gospel which was to repent and believe that He was the Son of God then it is all pointless. Anyone who is a faithful student of the Word sees the social aspect...it is obvious to all true believers. The problem is that this social aspect can be carried out outside the realm of Christianity. You can see it in Hollywood all the time...crusaders for social justice left and right. Unfortunately Christ is left out of it. You cannot come to know the Father without first knowing the Son. The social aspect will come from your love of Christ and conviction of the Holy Spirit. This is my last post on the subject...I'm not concerned with arguing over this...my concern is for souls. If I'm wrong on some parts of it then God will lead me to the correct parts. If you want to continue to debate over these issues that's fine...but please do not divide the body over this and do not avoid preaching the Gospel to those who are lost because you have to be right.
By Anonymous, at 1:35 PM
Jerry Breedlove is the most consistent person in terms of preaching the truth in and out of season that I know.
While others were off Golfing or playing at Disneyland or Universal studios last May during their free time, Jerry was preaching the Gospel. In a room full of over 3000 pastors and missionaries, Jerry was the first to share with security and other workers at the convention center.
And while the presentation of the Gospel is not the WHOLE STORY it is an entrance point which we all must pass to become disciples so we can do those Good works that God has prepared in advance for us to do.
I don't appreciate you calling him names, but Jesus does. He promised Jerry and me and other true Christians that we would be persecuted for His names sake.
Jerry's presentation is fair, and it is for the purpose of warning his flock. You watchkittens of the emergent persuasion are HYPOCRITES! You criticize ingrid and ken for the very same thing you are doing here, going after a small church across the country that has nothing to do with you. Jerry is a lot more gracious than I will be here- you are HYPOCRITES! SNAKES! If you are not a part of Jerry's local church, then you have NO RIGHT to go after him by YOUR OWN STANDARDS!!!
Jerry, you are my hero.
By pastorboy, at 1:41 PM
Wow Pastorboy,
Where did anyone go "after" Jerry? Are you reading the same discussion here?
If anything Jerry went after me but I assumed he didn't mean to do that. I asked some questions and they went unanswered. I have tried to participate in the discussion....
No one is going after Jerry.....repeat no one. Jerry criticized Rob Bell. His criticism may be justified? If he does it on a blog and he allows for comments.........where is your beef? You are allowed free reign to comment any way you want on all the blogs of the commenter's here (and you do so) Is it any different here?
If it is Jerry should say so and we will all go away.
Pastorboy you let the REAL issue slip in your diatribe.
Me and Jerry.........true Christians.
I can figure out where that leaves the rest of us.
I am glad Jerry evangelizes. Where did anyone question his integrity in this area? Please show me? Questioning methods is not the same as questioning motive or integrity. While I consider street evangelism a waste of time I did it for 11 years, 3 times a week, 52 weeks a year. Handed out hundreds of thousands of tracts. The problem was my method not my motive.
Bruce Gerencser
PS And I appreciate all the kind Christians trying to get me saved by sending me links to sites that preach the true gospel.(this is sacasm btw)
By Anonymous, at 2:18 PM
"When questioned on where he got his authority, Jesus' answer (through question format in Matt 21) was that he received it from John (a prophet), and therefore, God"
haha where you get that from John?? thats so vague..
Let's look at the text:
Jesus entered the temple courts, and, while he was teaching, the chief priests and the elders of the people came to him. "By what authority are you doing these things?" they asked. "And who gave you this authority?"
Jesus replied, "I will also ask you one question. If you answer me, I will tell you by what authority I am doing these things. John's baptism—where did it come from? Was it from heaven, or from men?"
So here, he refers to his baptism by John (which also recalls John's pronouncement about Jesus) and asks where John's authority came from - heaven (God) or men. As in most rabbinic questioning, the answer to Jesus' question about John (seemingly unrelated) is also the answer to their question.
When John proclaimed Jesus to be the lamb of God who comes to take the sin of the sin of the world, this was someone recognized as a prophet (with prophets having been missing from the land for 400 years) prophetically proclaiming Jesus to be the Messiah. This is then followed by God's own words from heaven that Jesus is his Son.
To the Jewish people of the hasidim, this would provide the witnesses to cement Jesus' authority (s'mikah) to make new interpretations.
By Chris L, at 2:38 PM
Pastor Jerry,
Please keep on exposing Rob Bell.
Rob Bell is attempting to reconstruct everything fundamental to the true and sure Faith. He is brilliant and subtle, and these NOOMA videos are influencing an entire generation of young Christians. I am afraid for what the church will become when these young men and women become church leaders and elders. It is a scary thought for me.
Somebody get a concordance and find out how many times Jesus is called "Rabbi" or "Teacher" in between Acts and Revelation and compare it with how many times Bell uses it in his writings. I'll tell you - you won't find it in the Scriptures. The last time Jesus is called "Rabbi" or "Teacher" is by Judas along with a kiss on the cheek.
Once my Lord was revealed for everything He was and is, calling Him "Teacher" would have been an abomination to the Apostles. The fact that these modern day men and women continue to address Him as such, reveals how little they know Him and the Holy Scriptures.
Surely, on the last day you will change your tune. You will call Him 'Lord, Lord', you will cite your many works, but it may very well be to late for you. I encourage you to repent of it.
Marcus Borg has heavily influenced Rob Bell - Borg is footnoted in the Velvet Elvis book and the parallels are striking. Borg slanders my Lord by equating him to a Buddha, a 'teacher'. Bell does the exact same thing.
Pastor Jerry - YOU are an inspired teacher. Please keep helping us with these teachings. We need more men and women like you to stand up against the conventional wisdom and expose the wolves.
Peace in Christ,
By Anonymous, at 4:16 PM
Isadtheomad,
What on earth was that gibberish you just wrote? Between the silly guilt-by-association (with Borg) and the admonition to slander other Christians, perhaps you'd do better to look in a mirror.
Nobody here is suggesting works-righteousness, nor is Bell, and the insinuation is incredibly uncharitable for one claiming the name of Christ.
As for the term "rabbi' (or teacher), apart from Judas' usage, there are 6 different groups who refer to Jesus in this manner, including his disciples. I'm not exactly sure what its appearance (or lack thereof) in Acts or the epistles has to do with the price of tea in China.
Once my Lord was revealed for everything He was and is, calling Him "Teacher" would have been an abomination to the Apostles.
Really?
Apart from a reference in II Opinions, what is your scriptural reference?
Slandering other Christians is a sad thing, and that's pretty much all in evidence in Pastor Jerry's current series.
Slander.
By Chris L, at 4:41 PM
Hypocrisy.
That is what the posts are from the anti-ODM's.
Hypocrisy.
Isad...
Amen. You (and our congregations) are the reason Jerry (and I) expose guys like Bell and Jones and Pagitt so that Christians of this generation can see the clear deception, and so future generations can see the teachings for what they are.
That is why we exegete scripture and train those in our congregation to do the same. I know I have a congregation full of critical ears, listening for truth.
By pastorboy, at 5:33 PM
John,
If you cannot see the difference between defending our pastor, and the stuff Ingrid and Ken do I'm not even sure you and I speak the same language. I never went after the man. I asked him to provide a name. When he could not do that, I told him my problems with it (1 time) and told him good bye. I was not rude, I did not attack the man in any way. Then you call me a hypocrite and a snake. I have a problem with that John. He wrote a piece about a A CHURCH I AM PART OF!!!!! I LIVE IN COVENANT WITH THE PEOPLE OF MARS!!!! (see i can use the caps button too) I'd give you the same defense if I came to your church.
Those people include Rob. I realize he's your friend but your response was really really lacking.
I am posting this comment here so that I can publicly respond to this tantrum like accusation on your part.
By Joe Martino, at 5:41 PM
That is why we exegete scripture and train those in our congregation to do the same. I know I have a congregation full of critical ears, listening for truth.
It's just sad you seem to be giving them what their itching ears wish to hear, rather than demonstrating Christian charity.
By Chris L, at 5:52 PM
Sorry Pastor Boy,
you can not use the whole "We are being persecuted for Christ argument! We are a bunch of Christians. Non believers persecute you for what you believe!
No one has attacked Jerry. What he is doing is wrong. Read the entire book of I Corinthians. It will be a useful tool in looking objectively at this situation. Jerry is simple being questioned about his teachings.
Could someone please answer this question? How is teaching how Rob Bell is a heretic helpful in building your congregation spiritual? Your in Tennessee we are in Grand Rapids. Teach the bible. Rob should not even enter a conversation. If you are teaching your people your interpretation of scripture on a weekly basis than you should have no worries what happens here in Michigan.
By Anonymous, at 5:53 PM
Hypocrisy.
That is what the posts are from the anti-ODM's.
Please, quote and demonstrate this. Where is it that we state one thing, yet exhibit the opposite?
By Chris L, at 5:54 PM
hi everyone the pub was great ;-)
By Anonymous, at 6:08 PM
Pastorboy,
Is there any reason you didn't answer one issue I raised?
I have asked numerous questions throughout this discussion. Almost everyone of them have been ignored.
Please be fair. You call us hypocrites. In a calm, friendly, as Jesus would do way, show us the hypocrisy. Is this not a fair request. If this forum is not the right place then email me. I will even allow you to write a post on my blog if you want to prove our hypocrisy.
Bruce Gerencser
By Anonymous, at 6:22 PM
This comment has been removed by the author.
By Keith Hatcher, at 7:11 PM
Couldn't agree more Pastor Jerry...we need more men of God like yourself getting the word out about what is happening to our Christian faith today all across America. False Teachers like Rob Bell are deceiving the lost and Christians alike. The emergent church is nothing more than a cult. It's a "hollow faith" that deceives people into believing if they live a good enough life...they can bring heaven to earth. Give me a break. Keep up the good work brother.
Keith
By Keith Hatcher, at 7:12 PM
The emergent church is nothing more than a cult. It's a "hollow faith" that deceives people into believing if they live a good enough life...they can bring heaven to earth.
Really? I call "straw man"...
Please prove this by taking an "emergent" Christian's words in context. All of the ECM folks I know just seek to balance orthodoxy and orthopraxy, to balance the individual gospel with the "social gospel" - not to completely jettison the former in favor of the latter...
By Chris L, at 7:22 PM
I am glad you enjoyed the pub :-)
Wife and I went to dinner with one of the elders of our church and his wife. Had a great dinner of catfish, chicken, shrimp, and all the fixins. The place is called Cock of the Walk and is in Nashville TN. Great eating. Anyone close enough ought to try it. It is located just off of Briley Parkway down close to Opryland Hotel.
By Pastor Jerry, at 7:33 PM
We're up here in the frozen wastes of Indiana - Nashville sounds nice right now...
By Chris L, at 7:35 PM
I have a lot of friends in the Nashville area
By Anonymous, at 7:38 PM
Chris theres no way on this green earth, that you can make that quote mean John was Jesus rabbi ive heard some hair brain ideas but that takes the biscuit!!!!!!!!!!
By Anonymous, at 7:58 PM
lol i did Jerry!! went with some guys from my church (well i say my, they go and i ponder)i kind of go to a Calvary here in England
By Anonymous, at 8:02 PM
3 in a row!! When i said "Through email i would say Ken is my friend,we don't agree on much..But the funny thing is i email him a question & he answers,may not be the reply i like,but he answer's and wowee in one paragraph"
I meant that as a compliment to Ken,i find it refreshing a person is able to say what he belives, and states it clearly..
I want to be veryyyyyy clear Ken is my friend,and i'm proud to say he's my friend,however much we disagreed back in the slice comment days!
By Anonymous, at 8:22 PM
@Chris L.,
This is long, please bear with me. But I've been unjustly accused of slander - a serious accusation.
Regarding Borg and Bell - if Borg is not in fact footnoted in Velvet Elvis, I will recant and ask for forgiveness for saying that he is. I do not own a copy of VE, but I read it a year ago. As I recall, Borg is footnoted by Bell and in fact is recommended by him. It's Bell's own words. But the stronger evidence is that Velvet Elvis reads more like a Repainting of some of Borg's most heretical statements on a mystical Jesus and Buddha, only softened and repackaged. Throughout the entire book, Bell suggests that the 1st century writers borrowed from non-Jewish religous traditions (such as his famous reconstruction of the word 'virgin'). Bell does the same with the doctrines of spiritual rebirth and resurrection. Bell does not name Buddha directly, of course, but the theological parallels are there.
Regarding the use of the title 'Rabbi' in the Holy Scriptures towards Jesus. I will assume that you are correct that 6 different groups call Jesus a 'Rabbi' in the Gospel narratives prior to His Resurrection. So what? The Gospels are explaining what happened historically. Some groups also called Him a blasphemer! The Gospels are also historical accounts, and truthful ones. The Epistles were sent out to teach people the truth and proper doctrine. Paul, James, John, and Peter and the other Scripture writers NEVER address Christ as Rabbi or Teacher. Not once, never. My Scripture reference is Acts 1:1 - Revelation 22:21.
So, my main point is that after the Resurrection, the true followers of Christ stopped calling Him 'Rabbi'. It's stunning, because Peter and John and the Apostles all called him that (or Teacher) frequently when they were following Him around (but in partial ignorance). After that time, something changed - drastically - in their thinking.
Let me put it this way. Christ saved them! Christ changed them! Christ ascended into Heaven!
Why would they call the supernatural Son of God a 'Rabbi'? It doesn't do Him justice. It is not correct. It brings Jesus so low. Jesus was SO MUCH more than a Rabbi.
They believed, they were transformed. They finally understood the most basic fundamental truth of Christianity. And I don't think Rob Bell gets it. And what makes this error so serious is the extent of influence he has. It is a serious error. The abomination climaxes when Bell states that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was somehow annointed by John the Baptist. This is a monumental error and heretical statement. John the Baptist SUBMITs to Christ and performs the baptism as an act of obedience - a direct order! John says he's not worthy! The Father God and the Holy Spirit are the ones who ANNOINT the CHRIST. To say that John the Baptist was the Rabbi of Jesus is an abomination. (And to make his point, Bell has to misquote the text.)
The good news for us who have stated these things out of ignorance, is that we can repent and turn from our unbelief and our prior denial of Christ, and put our trust in the Lord to save us, just as the Apostles did. Christ is so forgiving - but it begins with a broken spirit of repentance (Bell has also redefined 'repentance' in VE - also a serious error).
Regarding the "works righteousness" accusation. I never said anyone was preaching works righteousness. I was laying out what Jesus described on what would happen on the Judgement Day. Out of sheer desparation, people will cite their works on that day - but they will not save them. The important thing is not what works we do. It's not even the OUTWARD things we may say. These mean nothing.
The real question is: Does the Christ KNOW our inner self? Do we have a true FAITH IN HIM? Or have we made a god in our own image, suited to our own liking?
I submit to you, that if 'Rabbi' or 'Teacher' is what you think of when it comes to Jesus - and not SAVIOR, LORD, or CHRIST (I'm speaking of your inner mind and heart, now, not verbal treatments) then most likely you do not know Christ at all. I would argue, if this is the case, you haven't come to terms with the amount of your sin Christ took upon Himself, for you. What Rabbi has ever done THAT before?
Also - to be fair - calling Him Lord with our lips means nothing if we do not call Him Lord inside our heart - and our actions speak as a testimony to that very fact.
However, having said that, the Holy Scriptures say, "out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks". So I think we all need to measure our speech and see how it refects out heart. Myself included.
Peace in Christ
By Anonymous, at 9:17 PM
Andy,
Chris theres no way on this green earth, that you can make that quote mean John was Jesus rabbi ive heard some hair brain ideas but that takes the biscuit!!!!!!!!!!
That's not what I said - I said that John was a witness to Jesus' God-given authority (part of his role in 'preparing the way'), not that John was his teacher. The people believed John to be a prophet, so his word at Jesus' baptism carried weight to that effect.
Here's a couple of short (2 min) podcasts on the subject. Number one, Number two.
By Chris L, at 9:30 PM
Here is Bell on the virgin birth (From Velvet Elvis) I really think people miss what he is trying to do here.
“What if tomorrow someone digs up definitive proof that Jesus had a real, earthly, biological father named Larry, and archeologists find Larry’s tomb and do DNA samples and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the virgin birth was really just a bit of mythologizing the Gospel writers threw in to appeal to the followers of the Mithra and Dionysian religious cults that were hugely popular at the time of Jesus, whose gods had virgin births? But what if, as you study the origin of the word ‘virgin’ you discover that the word ‘virgin’ in the gospel of Matthew actually comes from the book of Isaiah, and then you find out that in the Hebrew language at that time, the word ‘virgin’ could mean several things. And what if you discover that in the first century being ‘born of a virgin’ also referred to a child whose mother became pregnant the first time she had intercourse? What if that spring were seriously questioned? Could a person keep on jumping? Could a person still love God? Could you still be a Christian? Is the way of Jesus still the best possible way to live? Or does the whole thing fall apart?…If the whole faith falls apart when we reexamine and rethink one spring, then it wasn’t that strong in the first place, was it?”
By Anonymous, at 9:40 PM
As far as Marcus Borg is concerned,
Should we reject everything that he says? Is he incapable of speaking truth?
The question should not be the spiritual condition of Borg but whether or not what he says is true.
As pastors, I suspect we have ALL used sources that are not "Christian"
Rob Bell made the mistake of being honest and showing Borg as a footnote. We who are more spiritual will hide our sources so no one knows we used an unapproved source.
By Anonymous, at 9:51 PM
isad,
1) Bell does footnote Borg in one chapter, but - contrary to lighthouse trails "research" - a footnote is not a wholesale endorsement of every belief. The whole stretch into "Buddah" is an imagination on your part, because Bell never wrote it, so any such insinuation IS slander.
2) Isaiah's prophecy of a virgin giving birth is fulfilled twice ("near and far") - once in his own time and once with Mary. In the first instance (in Isaiah's time), the meaning of the word used, almah, would properly be "young woman", though in the second instance, since it is affirmed by Mary as such, "virgin" is definitely the correct translation.
3) Actually, Peter and others who believed in Jesus called him "rabbi", which simply means "respected teacher". Per the earlier discussion in this thread (so as not to repeat it all), the meaning of "rabbi" prior to 70 AD does not have the same connotation as "rabbi" after 70 AD through today (in orthodox Judiasm). Many scholars differentiate between the two (even though both are called "rabbi") by referring to the pre-70 AD "rabbis" as "sages", instead. Bell and others do not normally make this distinction, except in longer teaching sessions. As for post Acts 1:1, I'm not sure what your point is - Jesus as "rabbi" was part of the Hebrew cultural context, not the Greek/Gentile context. Acts 1 - Rev 21 is primarily addressed to the Gentile church.
Additionally, the Gospel of Mark was written to the church in Rome, and was most likely written after Paul's death. The books of the NT are not written in chronological order of their writing - so, technically, Jesus WAS referred to as "Rabbi" within the writing of his followers long after Pentecost 33 A.D. (Once again noting that "Rabbi" today is different than "rabbi" pre-70 AD).
5) Why would they call the supernatural Son of God a 'Rabbi'? It doesn't do Him justice. It is not correct. It brings Jesus so low. Actually, it is not a "low" title, but a very respected title. Jesus told his disciples (talmidim) to go make other discipled (talmidim). Question: Who do disciples follow, according to Jesus' culture? Answer: A rabbi. If you have disciples, you have to have a Rabbi! Rabbi is much much more than just a "teacher", and disciple is much much more than a "student". A disciple wants to be just like their Rabbi in every way possible, with every last bit of passion - a disciple wants to live their life in the way lived by their rabbi.
Also, I would note that, with "low" titles, Jesus refers to God as "Abba", and does not discourage this practice. While "Abba" does translate to "Father", its actual translation is the least formal possible title for your Father - more like "Daddy".
Regardless - "rabbi" is NOT a low title. Instead, it is the title of the person you most want to be like - your teacher/mentor/example for how to live.
6) The abomination climaxes when Bell states that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was somehow annointed by John the Baptist.
Not annointed - announced and recognized by. Certainly, John submits to him, but John was also a prophet of God (the first in 400 years), and he heralded Jesus, announcing his authority and role. See the post above and the linked SHORT podcasts.
7) Bell has also redefined 'repentance' in VE - also a serious error Wrong, yet again.
Repentance is addressed in Velvet Elvis. The concept of repentance - t'shuva - he addresses as turning back from the sinful way of life. He addresses it from a Hebrew context.
There are some churches which address repentance as simply a mental exercise, but the actual meaning of the word in the original language (Hebrew in the OT and possibly the original source document for the synoptic gospels, and Greek for the rest of the NT) is a concept of 1) recognizing sin in your life and 2) turning toward God (and away from that sin) and walking toward God instead of the sin.
8) I submit to you, that if 'Rabbi' or 'Teacher' is what you think of when it comes to Jesus - and not SAVIOR, LORD, or CHRIST (I'm speaking of your inner mind and heart, now, not verbal treatments) then most likely you do not know Christ at all. This isn't an either/or practice. Jesus is all of those things - Rabbi (he wants us to be his disciples, meaning that we want to live just as he did). Savior (His death on the cross saves us from our sin, both now and after we die). Lord (we are to submit to him). Christ (Messiah - which encompasses Savior, Lord and Rabbi).
9) So I think we all need to measure our speech and see how it refects out heart. Myself included. Agreed. I think this also has to extend in being a charitable reader/observer of others. Most of what I tend to see in the "discernment" quarter is simply nit-picking searches which is entered with the intention of finding fault (contrary to Paul's description of love) and with the most uncharitable assumptions (as with your comparisons to "Buddah").
It reminds me of the old saying "If you enter into something looking for fault, you will always find what you seek."
By Chris L, at 10:09 PM
Chris L.
Technically speaking, I think you are behaving like a hypocrite.
You stated:
Most of what I tend to see in the "discernment" quarter is simply nit-picking searches which is entered with the intention of finding fault (contrary to Paul's description of love)
You critize me (and others) for nit-picking and fault finding - immediately after you've indexed and categorized 9 such nit-picks yourself.
Hypocrite:
a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
Every New Testament writer warns us to be wary of false teachers. Those are among the "good works" the Holy Scriptures speak of.
An earnest and humble approach to weeding out false teaching is a must for the true church. Right or wrong about Rob Bell - let's be clear on the importance of identifying false teaching within the church. That is the larger issue.
Question for you. When Jesus said, "I am the way, the Truth, and the Life. Nobody comes to the Father but through me." (John 14)
Did He say this as a Teacher?
Or did He say this as the Lawgiver?
The difference is monumental.
Isiah 33:22 states:
"The Lord is our Judge. The Lord is our lawgiver. The Lord is our King."
Bell says Jesus gives this advice as a Teacher. Take it or leave it.
In Velvet Elvis, Bell writes:
"I don’t follow Jesus because I think Christianity is the best
religion… [Jesus] teaches me to live in tune with how reality
is. When Jesus said, “No one comes to the Father but
through me,” he was saying that his way, his words, his life,
is our connection to how things truly are at the deepest
levels of existence.”"
Peace in Christ
By Anonymous, at 1:04 AM
You critize me (and others) for nit-picking and fault finding - immediately after you've indexed and categorized 9 such nit-picks yourself.
Disagreement is not "nit-picking", and unless I'm mistaken, I've not called you a "heretic" in my disagreement, nor a "false teacher", nor a follower of a "different gospel".
That's the big difference...
A difference of opinion does not require that the other person be anathema.
Did He say this as a Teacher?
Or did He say this as the Lawgiver?
Is he a teacher? yes.
Is he a lawgiver? yes.
So the answer is "yes" - you've created a false dichotomy (it's not an either-or question). Besides which, rabbi is much more than "teacher"...
Also, in Hebrew, the word Torah that we translate as "Law" actually means a combination of "law" and "guidance" - it comes from the word Yerah, which means "to guide", as you would guide an arrow to hit a mark. So - a teacher and a "lawgiver" both do the same thing...
Bell says Jesus gives this advice as a Teacher. Take it or leave it.
Perhaps you missed the context of this...
As you noted, Bell says that Jesus' way is the best way to live. He is not the ONLY way to live (just look at most of the people in the world), but he is the ONLY way to eternal life. Silva and others take this particular statement out of context, as if it were universalism, but miss the point - which is that there are many ways to live, but Jesus is the best possible way to live (and it is the only way to eternal life).
Jesus taught "I am the way, the truth and the light - no one comes to the Father but through me". This was his teaching. Because it is true, it is also "Torah". You're trying to make a distinction where there is none, and then trying to declare Bell a heretic for not dancing to your tune...
By Chris L, at 2:32 AM
To be a bit more clear - Jesus as a rabbi (teacher) with s'mikah (authority to make new interpretations) is, in essence, a "lawgiver", because his interpretation of Torah (law/guidance) has God's authority behind it.
By Chris L, at 2:35 AM
Also, just to reiterate:
Most of what I tend to see in the "discernment" quarter is simply nit-picking searches which is entered with the intention of finding fault (contrary to Paul's description of love) and with the most uncharitable assumptions (as with your comparisons to "Buddah").
My purpose in discussing with you is not to "find fault" in anyone (i.e. I'm not looking for a heretic). Rather, I am just defending a brother and giving the charitable interpretation of what has been said (primarily because of a similar background knowledge of first century context) and explaining how it is not heretical.
I am not trying to make an uncharitable assumption about what you've written, either.
So - I am not doing the same thing I criticized, if you read my specific criticism, above. Disagreement is not a bad thing - if we agreed on everything, all but one of us would be redundant! When disagreement (particularly when it is with a systematic theology and not the Bible, itself) is hastily run up the flagpole as heresy/false teaching/apostasy, as is in evidence in this entire "series", then it is no longer charitable, loving or Christian.
Love without truth is dysfunctionally enabling. Truth without love is abuse.
I can't say that the OP contains much of either truth or love...
By Chris L, at 2:44 AM
Ok just to clarify were i'm at,or this could go on and on!!
Jesus was called Rabbi yes,it may of meant teacher or wise person or it may of implied He was educated as one..Theres no obvious verse that states they were educated beyond what any child was,its frankly unknown..But thats not the point,Erica post implies they were taught as rabbi's as a fact,which is unknow..
Rob wrongly or rightly uses the word Rabbi to ward off the bad connotation of the word Pharisee,or he just means he was wise/sage etc, which i would agree with.....
Main problem with Rob,does he opened the all Rabbi thing so he can point to other Rabbinic writings and ways of thinking??
Not a bad thing in of its self,but could be problematic if we use them to validate un-biblical ideas,i'm not saying Rob does that,just saying theres a danger of that..
The idea of teacher/student lends itself well to the ideas of following someone,who better then to follow the person dishing out the kool aid??
By Anonymous, at 6:14 AM
Ladies and Gentlemen,
This thread is getting really long, which I think is great. However we are not even talking about what the post was about. The post was about the fact that I believe Rob Bell is preaching a different gospel. He states in the Nooma video Trees that spending our life trying to get other people to believe like we do is wasting our time. He says that Jesus actually condemned that practice. In Matthew 28:19-20 Jesus commands that while we are going through life we SHOULD spend our time teaching others to believe like we do by making disciples of them.
Rob would lead us to believe either purposely or accidentally to believe that the gospel is a social justice issue and that social justice is what we need to be about as opposed to converting and discipling people.
The fact of the matter is that no one on this thread can argue with that statement I made about Mr. Bell, though you will try I am sure, because it IS the statements he makes on the video. I don't, for the point of this thread, give a care what Rob thinks about Rabbi, I care what he thinks the gospel is. If you have not watched the video Trees, then your opinion doesn't matter on this issue because you have no first hand knowledge of what he said. If you have watched the video Trees and think that he is saying something different then you do have a valid opinion.
Rob is saying the gospel is a social issue, I am saying the gospel according to Jesus is a Spiritual inner man issue being right with God that has some social implications.
Rob is a heretic because he says that evangelism is a waste of time, and don't say he didn't because I have him on video doing exactly that. THAT IS WHAT MAKES HIM A HERETIC! Thanks and God bless everyone.
P.S. I am a Pastor of a church and won't be checking this any further today because I will be working.
By Pastor Jerry, at 7:22 AM
The idea of teacher/student lends itself well to the ideas of following someone,who better then to follow the person dishing out the kool aid??
Andy,
The point of the rabbi/student relationship in this discussion is to point out the Jesus is the Rabbi, and I don't think he's going to be passing out any kool-aid.
As to how they were organized during the first century, we do have extra-biblical sources which describe this in detail. Some of them (Josephus' works and Eusebius' later recording) were copied and passed down by the same people who were copying and passing down the Bible. Others were passed down by the same folks who had memorized all of the Old Testament, passing it down, as well. Are they scripture? By no means. Are they significantly more than guesses or fictions? Certainly.
By Chris L, at 8:31 AM
Hi all sorry if i took it off route!Though i thought it was an important point..
When i mentioned getting right with God,Erica mentioned a student/teacher relationship was important to that..
I think they see that relationship,as part of what the gospel is..
I'm just interested in what they believed,i find it intriguing.(though i shouldn't of hijacked your thread)
You say Rob thinks the gospel is a social gospel sooo? it is!!!
Helping people who are poor or downtrodden,is very much one of the truths of the gospel,its not THE truth,but surely its something that will flow from it..
By Anonymous, at 8:31 AM
The post was about the fact that I believe Rob Bell is preaching a different gospel.
With all due respect, Jerry, it is because that it NOT a fact, but is - in fact - a lie on your part and slander.
Please repent.
By Chris L, at 8:33 AM
Hi Chris i'm at work at my flat mates,i work for my best friend whos disabled,so i'm online a lot lol,not just glued to the thread (promiseee)..
I think we can move on from the rabbi thing,i think it was a matter of semantics!!
By Anonymous, at 8:35 AM
"The post was about the fact that I believe Rob Bell is preaching a different gospel."
Thats one way of looking at it,or is his idea of the gospel,just bigger then ours?
ok i better do some work!
By Anonymous, at 8:39 AM
Helping people who are poor or downtrodden,is very much one of the truths of the gospel,its not THE truth,but surely its something that will flow from it..
Andy - the social aspect of the gospel is one part of it, as is the individual salvation (which begins now). One response to the gospel is evangelism, but it is not the only one (and it is not so important as to overshadow and diminish all other responses - unlike what Jerry seems to be implying). All of these things - social, individual, evangelism - are taught at Mars Hill Bible Church.
And guess what? None of these things ARE the gospel message, so even disagreements on their order of importance do not constitute "another gospel".
Unfortunately, slandering prominent Christians over disagreements apart from the the core of the gospel seems to be a sport. The Romans used to do this to much more lethal effect. The pagans no longer need to though, because they have folks like Pastor Jerry to carry out the demonization for them.
By Chris L, at 8:40 AM
Andy - agreed!
By Chris L, at 8:40 AM
Unfortunately, slandering prominent Christians over disagreements apart from the the core of the gospel seems to be a sport. The Romans used to do this to much more lethal effect. The pagans no longer need to though, because they have folks like Pastor Jerry to carry out the demonization for them.
One wonders what is being done to Jerry, a man sent by Christ as pastor-teacher? He simply stated his personal opinion of Rob Bell based on his own viewing of a Bell video.
A video from which Jerry literally quotes and then clearly explains why Bell's own view - stated in that video - on "the core of the gospel" is, in very fact, heretical. The question is: Who's slandering who here...
By Ken Silva, at 10:14 AM
Ken, you are an expert at the practice of slander, but an utter novice at spotting it, which is not surprising, considering your track record at making a sport of gossip and slander.
By Chris L, at 11:40 AM
I think Ken as a point!!
I once quoted somthing Steve Chalke said,which annoyed some of his supporters,but one of them said "andy as a point if Steve didn't say these sensational things,he couldn't get called on them" If Rob as been quoted 100% correctly its not slander..
Ive re-read Jerry's original post,and it seems to imply (to me) that your church teaches Kingdom Now theology is that correct?
By Anonymous, at 12:15 PM
Hey Jerry and fan club,
I get now. You are right. You were right when you wrote what you did and you are right now. After all, you are a pastor and have REAL work to do.
I asked numerous questions and never got an answer? Why is that?
Perhaps you think of me as unconverted? If so then you REALLY owe me an answer of the hope that lies within you"
Chris does an excellent job of clearly dealing with the rabbi issue. You blow it off. You don't care. anther poster says it is semantics. I actually learned a few things from what Chris posted.
You raised an issue of an unnamed staff member at Mar's Hill. When challenged on this you did a hop, skip, and jump. Why not come clean?
Then, we end up with the good Reverend, who is an expert at hacking up the body Christ and spewing slander, chastising us for slander?
Here is my challenge. If I slandered anyone in this discussion I will repent. Just show me. If you can't, then stop propping up the straw man.
This is a reminder to me that it is almost impossible to have a friendly disagreement any more.Why is that?
Bruce Gerencser
By Anonymous, at 12:20 PM
The Kingdom IS Now
and the Kingdom is future
By Anonymous, at 12:21 PM
Jerry,
I just watched the whole Video twice. I assume your referencing the 10 minutes mark where to contrive your point about Rob saying that evangelism is pointless. Jerry, I find it hard to believe that any person who was honestly listening to that would come to that conclusion. Jerry, if you have Rob on video saying what you say he said it isn't on trees.
So far all you got is your misinterpretation of what was said and a mysterious staff person who's name you have conveniently forgotten. Maybe you're not a liar, maybe you are the most outstanding Christian there is, I don't know but you've really over reached on this one. Now, I know John got really mad at me yesterday and I'm sorry about that, but Jerry maybe you're the heretic. Maybe you're distorting the truth of what a Godly man said for your own agenda. Maybe you are a heretic because you're ignoring the social aspects of the gospel. Maybe the gospel is nothing more than getting people to say a prayer, then teaching them how to get others to say a prayer. There's probably a thousand "maybe's" but there is one thing for certain, and that is that there is a lot of fishy things with your story. Who knows maybe that will be the next NOOMA: Fishy
I don't know what else to say, I really hope you're not purposely misrepresenting this man. I'm just not sure.
By Anonymous, at 12:41 PM
We have discussed the concept of "Rabbi Jesus" a lot on this post. Per Pastor Jerry's request, here is how it ties together with the NOOMA video, Trees.
In Velvet Elvis, Bell states that the Rabbinical tradition gives Jesus AND his followers the right to make NEW interpretations of Scripture.
On page 50:
“What [Jesus] is doing here is significant. He is giving his
followers the authority to make new interpretations of the bible.”
To Bell and his disciples, Jesus has passed down this Rabbinical tradition to his disciples.
This is why I asked how I should interpet John 14: "I am the way, the truth, and the life..."
If I interpret this statement as a Rabbinical teaching & tradition, it is up for grabs to the next generation of Rabbis to "dream it up" as necessary.
On the other hand, if this is instead an eternal Truth, or a Spiritual Law (given by the Lawgiver) it is not up to me to change the interpretation or add to it as I see fit. It cannot change nor will it ever change - no matter how I choose to interpret it. My interpretation has no bearing on TRUTH.
In a previous post, Chris L. stated that John 14," I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me." Continues in this Rabbinical teaching tradition. He also said it was law. But you see - these ARE mutually exclusive. This has how Rob Bell has confused everyone.
Christ's statement in John 14, ALONG WITH ALL HIS OTHER TEACHINGS, according to Bell and his disciples, are just new and improved Rabbinical traditions to be carried down and changed, as necessary, by the succeeding generation of Rabbis.
This is why Bell says that the "Bible is a human product" in his Christianity Today interview. Marcus Borg makes similar statements.
With this liberty, Bell goes on to reconstruct many core doctrines of Christianity in Velvet Elvis:
Doctrine of Repentance - now means we should remove Godly sorrow from a true sinners repentance, as Bell does in Chapter 6 of Velvet Elvis. He states "Shame has no place for a Christian. None." Page 143: “I admit it. I confess it. I thank God I am forgiven. I make amends with
anyone who has been affected with my actions. And then I move on.”. Unfortunately for Bell, the Greek word for Repentance, metanoeo, is "to think differently, reconsider, to feel compunction."
Doctrine of Christ Alone - Christ as the one and only Lord and Savior (John 14) - means Jesus is PRIMARILY a teacher and Rabbi and just the best of many true religions ("truth is everywhere" page 78)
Doctrine of Evangelism - now means socialist humanism as he defines in Movement 7 of Velvet Elvis (page 164-167), and also in the NOOMA video Trees.
So there you have it. Bell has redefined Evangelism BECAUSE he believes he is part of Jesus's Rabbinical tradition that gives him the freedom to alter the doctrines as necessary. Whatever the motivations - it is still heretical teaching. Evangelism by preaching and teaching the Word is in fact a core doctrine of Christianity.
Jesus Christ is the Lord, and the Lawgiver. He is not firstly or primarily a Rabbi - and neither are we. His laws and decrees are ETERNAL. As his creation, we have no right to create new interpretations of Scripture. Doing so, results in us creating a god in our own image.
The Apostles KNEW THIS. To adopt the Rabinical/Pharisaical tradition into Christianity would have been disasterous. This led Peter to write:
2 Peter 1:19-21:
And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a
dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of
Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
By Anonymous, at 1:22 PM
Rabbi issue No Name barely!! Whats ur issue with me? Chris and i agreed that it was a issue of semantic between us,not that i was belittling the subject by saying that..
I was 100% correct in my statement about schooled rabbi's (as we understand the word) was post Christ,the term Rabbi was first used in reference to the Rabbis of the Sanhedrin in the 1st cent thats a historical fact,Chris even agreed!
Your post is implying i was belittling Chris by saying that,i wasn't i was being polite..
By Anonymous, at 1:31 PM
Andy,
Then you have my apology.
BTW, I have NO issue with you. How can I....I don't know you
Bruce
By Anonymous, at 1:35 PM
isadtheomad,
No what we have is a good picture of how your mind works.
Here is what I would ask you to do. Please make a good faith effort to contact Pastor Bell and ask him directly. Make your questions as pointed as your assertions are here.
I believe you are dead wrong. You have misconstrued his position but really rather than having a never ending debate..........go to the source, I suspect he is pretty accessible? Where do you live? Are you within a day of Grand Rapids? Take a drive, go to the source. Find the Holy grail of heresy if you think it lies in Grand Rapids.
Of course your present course of action is much easier, albeit much less Christian.
By Anonymous, at 1:42 PM
Thats ok!!it was a shame the subject was on this thread,because it really was a nice conversation, and very illuminating by Chris...
I'm confused by this Bell fellow rofl..I went for my run tonight and listen to a pod cast,Mike Corley was interviewing Darrin Patrick from the Journey church seemed a nice guy(not a stranger to getting attacked by blogs)..
Who when asked to describe emergents,said there were three types 1)conservative right which would be Mark Driscoll 2) central people like Dan Kimble then 3) far left people like Doug Pagitt and Rob Bell,so that left me scratching my head!!
i give up hahah
By Anonymous, at 1:49 PM
"Here is what I heard with his comments, as did the others at church without my prompting. They heard Rob Bell say that evangelism is a waste of time. "
If this is how you and your congregation perceive what was said than Satan is telling you lies! That is not at all what he said!
Oh, BTW, I watched the video! I will be posting the accurate summary of what was said on my blog without my own words being added in for effect!
That video was awesome and that is all i will say! Jesus always used scripture in dealing with people who fail to listen to truth.
2 Timothy 4:3
For a time is coming when people will no longer listen to sound and wholesome teaching. They will follow their own desires and will look for teachers who will tell them whatever their itching ears want to hear.
You are not listening to wholesome teaching you are hearing only what you want to hear.
I Corinthians 2:14
But people who aren’t spiritual can’t receive these truths from God’s Spirit. It all sounds foolish to them and they can’t understand it, for only those who are spiritual can understand what the Spirit means.
This verse makes so much sense to me! No one wonder Robs teachings all sound foolish to you!
Ephesians 4:15
Instead, we will speak the truth in love, growing in every way more and more like Christ, who is the head of his body, the church.
My prayer for you and your people that you will grow more and more like Christ Jesus.
Peace be with you!
By Anonymous, at 1:53 PM
I- You need to get a bigger shovel for the manure you're spreading.
Actually, in VE, what Bell discusses in the section you're quoting is "binding and loosing", which is the right for local church communities to regulate - permit or forbid - cultural practices for their community, based on scripture - which is making new interpretations for the purpose of orthopraxy, not orthodoxy. To reiterate, the 'authority' (s'mikah) to make new interpretations is related to -praxis in the culture of the believers, based upon scripture, not contrary to it.
Christ's statement in John 14, ALONG WITH ALL HIS OTHER TEACHINGS, according to Bell and his disciples, are just new and improved Rabbinical traditions to be carried down and changed, as necessary, by the succeeding generation of Rabbis.
Bullfeathers. You won't find ANYONE from Bell's church that would agree to this strawman you've just built. Thus, the accurate charge of slander against your insinuations.
Unfortunately for Bell, the Greek word for Repentance, metanoeo, is "to think differently, reconsider, to feel compunction."
The Greek word, metanoeo, is the closest word for repentence, t'shuva, in the Hebrew (and was used in the Septuagint), which is where we get the concept of repentence. In either case, shame (which differs from guilt) is NOT in the equation.
The rest of your post is plainly crap, completely unrelated to what Bell actually said and wrote.
If 'repentance' is needed, isad, it is on your part for the misrepresentations, lies and slander you are exposing in yourself...
______
Andy:
If Rob as been quoted 100% correctly its not slander..
And, having seen "Trees" several times, and per Joe's comment above, Rob has decidedly NOT been quoted 100% correctly. Rather, Jerry has extrapolated Bell's comments to cover ALL types of evangelism and outside the context in which is was presented.
Per the general rules of "strawmen and slander" - if you paraphrase someone's words in a way that they would not agree with, you are misrepresenting them with a straw-man argument. If you make an unseemly accusation based upon that paraphrase, you are guilty of Slander. Ken Silva is a master at this method of straw men and slander, and Jerry's just taking a page out of that playbook.
Ive re-read Jerry's original post,and it seems to imply (to me) that your church teaches Kingdom Now theology is that correct?
I believe - and MHBC, from listening to their podcasts, teaches - that the kingdom began when Jesus was here and stretches into eternity beyond death.
This is different from "Kingdom Now" theology, which teaches that Jesus' return will be based upon an eventual reaching of perfection in the kingdom. This is NOT what Mars Hill teaches (no matter what Ken says).
By Chris L, at 1:54 PM
ok Chris thks thats clearer i would agree..
By Anonymous, at 2:34 PM
1) "Ken Silva is a master at this method of straw men and slander, and Jerry's just taking a page out of that playbook."
I didn't write this post in question. But oddly enough, whenever anyone diagrees with Chris Lyons this same accusation is forthcoming.
And 2) "This is different from 'Kingdom Now theology, which teaches that Jesus' return will be based upon an eventual reaching of perfection in the kingdom. This is NOT what Mars Hill teaches (no matter what Ken says)."
I do not teach that Bell teaches Kingdom Now; his eschatology looks to me akin to Jurgen Multmann's "theology of hope." A kind of at the Cross God reconciles the entire kosmos back to Himself in Christ.
Allegedly this reverses the curse so that eventually through preaching of the kingdom, God is now restoring everything back to the way he intended it to be. And this would explain that false view of the new heavens and the new earth as expressed by Lyons.
This view would alsoo see coming wrath of God as already having come, which would explain why Bell says that God is no longer angry. Very subtle, and very much heretical in its deemphasis on the need for proper preaching of the genuine Gospel of Jesus Christ in favoor of the repainted social gospel of Walter Rauschenbusch.
Jerry is quite right in his assessment of Bell's neo-liberalism; along with many other orthodox pastors, I might add. He is hardly alone in his interpretation of Bell's message. If this isn't what Bell is teaching, then he personally could very easily set the record straight by clearly articulating his position on the Gospel. But I'm not holding my breath.
By Ken Silva, at 2:37 PM
Ken,
You're dreaming, man, and no matter what you might think, holding a view of eschatology different than pre-mill dispensationalism (such as amill or its subset, Partial-preterist) does not heresy make - particularly in light of the relative youth (150 years) of the Pre-mil dispy position...
By Chris L, at 2:53 PM
I'm not "Pre-mil dispy." And the point is Jerry, a pastor-teacher, who gave an assessment of Bell's neo-liberal view of the Gospel.
Hardly slander; and it also happens to be an assessment that is also shared by a number of other pastor-teachers.
By Ken Silva, at 3:08 PM
it also happens to be an assessment that is also shared by a number of other pastor-teachers.
Proof by assertion is hardly proof at all, Ken. There's probably a lot more folks that think the moon-landing was staged by the CIA, but that doesn't make it so...
By Chris L, at 3:38 PM
this is a drive by posting - hey I would rather be honest & up front than let anyone wonder why I might not answer questions about my commments.
Here we go...
I would just like to say that words have meaning.
The bible is our standard in which we should measure everything against - after all it is inspired & inerrant.
The problem comes when someone says something that conflicts with what is in the bible.
For example...
The bible says to do A, B and C. However someone comes along and says dont worry about A or B. The choice you have is to follow what you see in the whole counsel of God
OR...
follow a man who changes what has been a stable foundation for over 2,000 years.
Too easy, but apparently lots of well meaning christians cannot compare what a person says against the bible. Sad but true.
For those would like to read an in depth review of Rob Bell's book "Velvet Elvis" check out this link...
www.sohmer.net/Velvet_Elvis.pdf
Its about the most honest and fair comparison of a person's word to the bible that I have found in a long time.
Lots of Rob Bell fans & followers will probably not like the review, but IF words have meaning, THEN what Rob Bell says is troubling, because it discounts the words of even Jesus Christ Himself. Jesus said that those who love me obey my commands. Rob Bell tells us that it doesnt really matter what Jesus said (perhaps He was saying that stuff only to hear Himself speak - I dont think so because the parables of Judgment are pretty clear cut). Jesus also said that "heaven and earth will pass away but me and my words will not pass away".
Oh how important it is to know and follow what is true & right according to God's word.
Rob Bell says our job is to bring heaven to earth, but God's word says this earth & the current heaven will go away.
Ummm...
I would encourage everyone to follow Jesus Christ, rather than any man. Be like the Bereans and search the whole counsel of God to see if what Rob Bell is saying is really true. If you find yourself defending him and not Jesus Christ and His word, then something is wrong.
Remember words have meaning and we are to worship God in spirit and in truth. If we are all "spiritual" like Rob Bell wants and are not grounded in the truth, dire consequences are ahead for many. The same goes for those who focus too much on the word (legalism) and have not the spirit of God, they too will be lacking at judgment.
Either way, each of us is accountable for every word, thot & deed. If we are found lacking, we cannot point to Rob Bell and say "Its his fault, he should have told me the truth!!!!"
There are no "do overs" at judgment day.
Anyway keep seeking God, listening & obeying Him.
Love you all,
steve
btw if you want, check out my youtube page, it deals with conforming to Jesus' image and not anyone else's...
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=hetgow
By Anonymous, at 4:22 PM
Steve,
There has not been a stable foundation for 2000 years. Only by ignoring huge chunks of Church history can you come to the conclusion that the church has always had a stable foundation.
In fact, the Church has never had a stable foundation. It is up to every generation to try and prove the teachings of Scripture. Certainly we give a bow to history and certainly we should not rashly reject historical precedent........
Let me give you just one.......If I asked everyone in this discussion if they believed in baptism FOR the remission of sins, most would say no. Yet, the historical Church has always believed in baptism for the remission of sins (unless you are a deluded Trail of Blood Baptist)
SO the Baptists come along and say "hey the historical Church got it wrong" Nary is a word said.
But, a Rob Bell, A Bruce Gerencser, or a Karl Barth comes along and challenges a commonly held doctrine or teaching and they are rejected out of hand. This is a double standard.
God's Word will stand up to the questions and truth will always prevail. Quite frankly I find the questions quite refreshing. No easy answers.
Bruce Gerencser
By Anonymous, at 4:43 PM
Bruce Gerencser & Karl Barth in the same sentance lol :-p
Theres a radio talk show in the UK,people are always writing in "i will never listen again"and the DJ and is team will say "we knowwww your listening,we knowwwww your listening"
Steve we knowwww your reading ;-)
By Anonymous, at 5:01 PM
In fact, the Church has never had a stable foundation. It is up to every generation to try and prove the teachings of Scripture. Certainly we give a bow to history and certainly we should not rashly reject historical precedent........
So Christ is unstable?
By pastorboy, at 6:08 PM
Pastorboy,
You know I didn't mean that.
In case you haven't figured it out. Jesus isn't the problem we are.
It is people who think they are as infallible as God all because they can read.
If the men who walked with Jesus for three years could have doubts I suspect people 2000 years removed can have doubts.
By Anonymous, at 6:22 PM
"If the men who walked with Jesus for three years could have doubts..." I think one will find that the Apostles did prior to Pentecost.
However, afterward they didn't become known the "men who have caused trouble all over the world" because they went forth whining about their doubts.
No, these "men who walked with Jesus for three years" were not murdered for the message of embracing mystery.
By Ken Silva, at 7:15 PM
Reverend Silva,
Does the Bible tell us they were murdered?
No, we can read in God's Word that they had doubts. We do not KNOW they never had doubts after that (that is unless you have had a word of knowledge) I suspect they did.
If you have no doubts Reverend Silva...........
By Anonymous, at 7:21 PM
My only doubt is if we are talking about the same Jesus....
By pastorboy, at 7:30 PM
"men who walked with Jesus for three years" were not murdered for the message of embracing mystery.
Excellent point, Ken
By pastorboy, at 7:39 PM
Pastorboy,
What have I written that would make you think we are not talking about the same Jesus?
Or are you just venting?
I accept everything the Bible says about Jesus. I may not accept your interpretation of those facts but I do accept what the Scripture says.
By Anonymous, at 8:03 PM
Thanks PB. And it doesn't seem at all like we're talking about the same Jesus.
And those defending Bell will say: "I accept everything the Bible says about Jesus. I may not accept your interpretation of those facts but I do accept what the Scripture says."
To which I reply: Ditto; so, now who's right?
By Ken Silva, at 8:08 PM
Hey everyone, we watched the Nooma video called "Sunday" tonight at church and talked about that.
Good news for the Rob Bell camp...we did not find any heresy in it.
Bad news for the Rob Bell camp...it did have some real bad teachings where Rob blatantly omitted parts of scripture from a passage he was quoting because it didn't agree with his point.
Check back around Wednesdayish as we will have the new blog article up discussing the false/bad teaching in this video. I am not going to discuss "Sunday" on this thread...you all can if you want...but I will do it on a different thread.
In a final note I will say this as a Pastor of a church I am supposed to be on guard for wolves trying to devour the flock. Is Rob trying to devour my flock, absolutely, he produces the Nooma videos so that people all over the country will buy them, watch them, and accept his teaching. You don't make videos just for the sake of making them. Rob, just like me, is trying to influence people for eternity. He is just trying to influence them with what I think is a bad, ravenous, message. Here is what is said about guarding the flock.
Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them. Therefore be alert, remembering that for three years I did not cease night or day to admonish everyone with tears.
Acts 20:28-31
Rob is very very very critical of the established church and its teachings, and he IS trying to influence them and draw them to what he percieves as the truth. It is my job as a Pastor to guard the flock. So as everyone bashes me for addressing Robs videos with my flock, keep in mind that Rob is the one trying to influence them by selling these videos. He didn't make them for Mars Hill, he made them for people all over the country and markets them as such.
By Pastor Jerry, at 8:58 PM
Jerry, as a brother pastor, I want to highlight this key point you bring out:
"Rob is very very very critical of the established church and its teachings, and he IS trying to influence them and draw them to what he percieves as the truth. It is my job as a Pastor to guard the flock. So as everyone bashes me for addressing Robs videos with my flock, keep in mind that Rob is the one trying to influence them by selling these videos. He didn't make them for Mars Hill, he made them for people all over the country and markets them as such."
I've said this about Mormonism, but it applies here also. It is in answer to the question: Why do you attack what we teach?"
The answer is: We are defending proper doctrine from those who attack the Church - whether from outside as the Mormons - or from the inside like Rob Bell. They are the ones who have gone on the attack.
I hope you don't mind, I just wanted to build upon what you said Jerry. Sola Deo gloria!
By Ken Silva, at 9:13 PM
And I would only add that Bruce, Rob, and other Emergent types are preaching 'another Jesus' and 'a different Gospel
Galatians 1:9 9As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!
By pastorboy, at 9:23 PM
And I would only add that Bruce, Rob, and other Emergent types are preaching 'another Jesus' and 'a different Gospel
Give it a rest, John - you and Jerry are guilty of enough slander for the day.
By Chris L, at 9:37 PM
What Slander, Chris?
Please be specific...it seems as though you are judging me.
Judge not lest ye be judged...whoops, I misinterpreted
By pastorboy, at 9:44 PM
Being specific - your general charge of "a different gospel" against other believers without evidence and a good deal of contra-contextual suppositions...
By Chris L, at 9:51 PM
contra-contextual suppositions, I would add, which have been refuted by first-hand knowledge with the subjects you have accused.
By Chris L, at 9:52 PM
It is a different Gospel!
I have slandered no one.
I will detail later....I have started with Doug Pagitt on www.thedowngrade2007.blogspot.com
I will get to Rob Bell later. After Jerry's church finishes with the videos, I hope he will lend them to me so we can watch them with a discerning eye and discover for ourselves if Rob Bell is preaching another Gospel...
By pastorboy, at 9:57 PM
Pastor Jerry - thanks for the summary... I hope you are going through all of the Nooma videos similarly... are you? I would love to read your take. So many sometimes well meaning people are missing the point! I personally know one who came up to me after many years of little contact -- when we ran into each other again he said "Have you heard of Rob Bell and Nooma? I almost fell for that!!" He had the most astonished look on his face.
Probably some if not most times when people are attracted to Mr Bell and his teachings, it's because they're 'dissatisfied' with the gospel and are looking for a different interpretation. I know this guy wasn't, and he eventually had his eyes opened somehow. (I need to get his story on paper one of these days!) PTL!
I know there are some CMA churches that are dabbling in some unbiblical things like Purpose Driven and Nooma and others... I thank the Lord yours isn't one of them!
By terriergal, at 9:58 PM
Oh, please spare me.
It's not Calvinism (praise the Lord), but that doesn't make it "another gospel".
He teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin, lived, taught, was crucified for our sins (and more), died, was buried, and raised on the third day, and that he will return. He teaches that Jesus' way is the way we should live, and that we are saved only by grace.
You happen to disagree with relational evangelism, but that does not define "another gospel".
But hey - go ahead and continue slandering and feeding the itching ears of your gossip-hungry congregants...
By Chris L, at 10:03 PM
This comment has been removed by the author.
By Chris L, at 10:04 PM
I know there are some CMA churches that are dabbling in some unbiblical things like Purpose Driven and Nooma and others... I thank the Lord yours isn't one of them!
This reminds me of something else I heard that went something like this:
'God, I thank you that I am not like other men—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.'
Peas in a pod. Thank you for proving my point...
By Chris L, at 10:07 PM
Jerry - I will be very interested to find out how you discovered a "motivation detector" to ascertain WHY a full exposition of scripture was given in an artistic work...
By Chris L, at 10:20 PM
Chris L said...
Jerry - I will be very interested to find out how you discovered a "motivation detector" to ascertain WHY a full exposition of scripture was given in an artistic work...
What?
By Pastor Jerry, at 10:34 PM
Jerry:
You said:
Bad news for the Rob Bell camp...it did have some real bad teachings where Rob blatantly omitted parts of scripture from a passage he was quoting because it didn't agree with his point.
I'm just waiting to find out how your "motivation detector" works, so that I can detect sins of omission based upon the hidden motivations of authors of artistic works...
By Chris L, at 10:37 PM
cool...thanks for clarifying
By Pastor Jerry, at 10:40 PM
Pastorboy,
Last comment from me. Here is my email address falsepreacher @ gerencser.net (trust me I'll get it)
You show me, prove to me, that I preach a false gospel. You have never heard me preach. You have never listened to a taped sermon. You have never read a printed sermon. I have never written a blog post that denies the central tenets of the gospel of God's grace.
SO send me the proof. If not please retract your evil statement.
I will even go father...........I will allow you a complete, unedited post at either of my blogs and you can expose me for preaching a false gospel.
You must prove this from first source material and you can not tar me with guilt by association. You can not present Calvinism as the gospel.......let's stick with the basics. So are you up to it?
Time to become pastorman rather than pastorboy.
Your response will show your character.
Bruce Gerencser
To Jerry,
Why would you have to protect your people from Bell and Nooma? If they are the scholars you suggest they are why do they need weeks of warning? Surely none of them would even watch the video's on their own? Sound doctrinal teaching wards off heresy. No need to teach the heresy so that they learn sound doctrine. Follow the Biblical pattern.
By Anonymous, at 10:50 PM
He teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin, lived, taught, was crucified for our sins (and more), died, was buried, and raised on the third day, and that he will return. He teaches that Jesus' way is the way we should live, and that we are saved only by grace.
Great, Chris. What does Bell say is the Gospel?
How is one born again?
Why does one need to be born again?
Is there a real heaven?
Is there a real Hell?
What Bell teaches about these things (nothing to do with Calvinism) constitutes 'a different gospel'
And what he teaches about Jesus related to these questions constitutes a 'different Jesus'
By pastorboy, at 10:50 PM
Jerry, don't worry.
God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life.
If you will just accept Jesus, he will give you health, wealth, prosperity, joy, peace love, eternal happiness, and a present kingdom.
It just matters what the word accept is.
By pastorboy, at 10:52 PM
Your right Bruce.
I have never heard you preach. I made that judgement based on blog posts on your site and others.
I am sorry for using the word preach.
I will take you up on your challenge, only if I can include your posts as illustrations for my contention.
I was wrong.
I repent and recant my use of the word preach.
By pastorboy, at 11:00 PM
Pastorboy,
You may use anything I have written. Please keep in mind you must show I have denied the gospel of God's grace. This can not be about Calvinism. You know I reject Calvinism, so unless your contention is gospel=Calvinism then you will need to how how I deny the gospel as simply presented in Scripture. This is not a trick. I just want to make sure we stay on track.
Keep in mind, my using a cuss word, or my view on the word inerrancy has nothing to do with it either. I affirm to you right here I believe the Bible is God's word.
You can't use my posts on baseball either. :)
Just focus on the gospel. I think you are going to find that I have not written much on the gospel.
Let me give you another option. You may give me ten questions related to the gospel. I will answer them. Please no Calvinism questions about which comes first regeneration or faith or where repentance fits in the ordo salutis. (ps I was a calvinist once )
Let's focus on the gospel preached by Jesus and the apostles.
Let me know.
Bruce Gerencser
By Anonymous, at 11:13 PM
Chris L wrote:
Actually, in VE, what Bell discusses in the section you're quoting is "binding and loosing", which is the right for local church communities to regulate - permit or forbid - cultural practices for their community, based on scripture - which is making new interpretations for the purpose of orthopraxy, not orthodoxy.
That may be one interpretation, but it is not inline with a systematic Biblical exegesis of the phrase "binding and loosing".
Bell has incorrectly eisegeted the BIBLICAL meaning of the term binding and loosing. He has simply applied the term the way the Pharisees used it, and superimposed it on top of Jesus's teachings. Very very bad hermeneutics.
On page 49 of Velvet Elvis, Bell begins to explain the New Testament
term “binding and loosing”. Bell explains, “The rabbis had technical terms for the endless process of forbidding and permitting and making interpretations. They called it ‘binding and loosing.’ To ‘bind’ something was to forbid it. To ‘loose’ something was to allow it.” (p. 49)
On this theme of ‘binding and loosing’, Bell explains several times that “The bible is openended. It needs to be interpreted.” (p. 46)
Bell then makes the huge leap that Jesus endorses his believers to continue in this tradition of making their own interpretations. He infers this from the way that Jesus uses the term ‘binding and loosing’ in two verses, Matthew 16:19, and 18:18.
Bell claims that the term "bind and loosing" means, “[Jesus] is giving his followers the authority to make new interpretations of the bible.” (p. 50)
Going on, Bell claims, “If we take Jesus seriously and actually see it as our responsibility to bind and loose, the implications are endless, serious, and exhilarating.” (page 51)
Endless and Exhilarating?
If we take Bell seriously, what he is suggesting is that the Bible is free to mean whatever you think it means for you. Since “Everybody’s interpretation is essentially his or her own opinion.” (page 53)
Well, it seems to me that Bell’s interpretation is all wrong on this one. To understand what “binding and loosing” means to Jesus, we should first find out where the phrase is used elsewhere in the Bible because it’s also used in Luke 13.
Like most of Jesus’ sayings, Jesus uses the Pharisees term of ‘binding and loosing’ to explain a spiritual reality, and not a physical/legalistic/worldly reality. Jesus is always talking about spiritual Truths. Because nobody else that ever lived has known them like he has.
Let’s take a look at how Jesus uses the term ‘binding and loosing’ in Luke 13.
Here’s the context. Jesus has just freed a woman from Satan on the Sabbath, and the Pharisees find fault with it. For they themselves had ‘bound’ healing on the Sabbath. Here’s what Jesus says to their accusations:
Luke 13:16: “Then should not this woman, a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan has kept bound for eighteen long years, be loosed on the Sabbath day from what bound her?"
This use of the phrase "binding and loosing" has NOTHING to do with Scriptural interpretation as Rob Bell suggests in Velvet Elvis (other than rebuking the very same concept). It has to do with saving souls. It has to do with freeing people from oppression by Satan, and loosing them to glorify God.
Clearly, Jesus is explaining the “binding and loosing” as a spiritual matter in this passage – a matter of being a servant of God or a possession of Satan. If anything, Jesus seems to be finding significant fault with the Pharisees own version of ‘binding and loosing’.
So, it seems that Jesus himself is ‘repainting’ the Pharisees concept of binding and loosing into something much bigger, something much deeper.
This is the deeper message: Those that are bound on earth – are slaves to sin and Satan. Those that are loosed on earth, are freed from sin and set free in Christ. And those that are freed from sin on earth will be freed from it in Heaven. Those that are bound to their sin on earth, are bound to it in Hades. This is the deeper meaning of Matthew 16 and 18 AND Luke 13!
This is exactly what the church must do. The misson of the church is to distribute the keys to the kindom - planting the seeds of the Word of God - NOT primarily planting the "Trees" of the 'social gospel'.
By Anonymous, at 12:01 PM
Actually, Isad, Bell got the concept of Binding and Loosing correct, per a good bit of exegetical and archaeological scholarship.
I would suggest reading "Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus" by Bivins & Blizzard, "Jesus the Jewish Theologican" by Brad Young, "Jesus" by David Flusser, or a number of other authors who have identified this interpretation in the original context.
Also - it is not a freedom to interpret anything any way. Rather, it is a way to interpret - based on scripture - what you should permit or prohibit in your church. The Jerusalem Council ruling in Acts 15 is a good example of this in practice.
By Chris L, at 2:34 PM
Jesus loves you --
but - do you know who loves you also right now? Satan. Why? The more time you spend arguing amongst yourselves the more souls he gets. So, do you truly love Jesus as much as each of you claims, or do you love being right for yourself?
I can only pray that each of you pray for guidance before opening your mouths (or your fingers in this forum) so that you know for sure that what you're saying (typing) is from the Holy Spirit and not from your own heart or mind or that of your "spiritual leader."
The only word that should be binding is the Bible, not works written by other authors, no matter how "Smart" they are, they're not God and they're not Jesus. It's good to read others "interpretations" but remember they are just that "interpretations." The Holy Spirit will guide you in what to believe, but understand Satan will try to pursuade you to understand what he wants.
I don't know if the Holy Spirit is putting this on my heart or if this is my own feelings at this point, but "gossip-hungry congregants"? Ummm, I need not say another word.
May God, His Words, and only His Word be with each of you.
True Love from a very new Christian who loves Jesus!!!!!!!
By Anonymous, at 3:27 PM
Alright. Anonymous has a great point. I have been considering locking this thread since yesterday morning. Gonna lock it know because it is getting nowhere. And as I follow some of your guys blogs this has been going on for months between most of you. Thanks to all who participated in this discussion.
By Pastor Jerry, at 3:50 PM
<< Home