(first published March 24, 2009)
The following article is excerpted from WHAT IS THE EMERGING CHURCH? By David Cloud, ISBN 978-1-58318-112-6. This is a thorough examination of the emerging church, a name that describes a new approach to missions and church life among some “evangelicals” for these present times. Nothing has made us more conscious of the vicious battle that is raging for the very life and soul of Bible-believing churches than the research into the emergent church. It is frightful, because so many are falling into devil’s trap and so many more will doubtless fall in the coming days. At the same time, it is exciting, because it reminds us that the hour is very, very late and we need to be busy in the Lord’s service and always “looking up.” I have made a great effort to understand the emerging church. In the past several months I have read more than 80 books and a great many articles by emerging church leaders and their teachers. In reality, the emerging church is simply the latest heresy within the broad tent of evangelicalism. When the “new evangelicalism” swept onto the scene in the late 1940s with its bold repudiation of “separatism” and its emphasis on dialogue with heretics, the door was left open for every sort of heresy to infiltrate the “evangelical” fold, and that is precisely what has happened. The Bible does not warn in vain, “Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners” (1 Corinthians 15:33). OUTLINE: I. What Is the Emerging Church? II. A Great Blending and Merging. It is difficult to draw a strict line between the two streams of the emerging church, because there is a blending and merging going on that will cause all lines to be blurred eventually. III. The Liberal Emerging Church and Its Errors. IV. The Conservative Emerging Church and Its Errors. V. Cain the First Emerging Church Worshiper. VI. Charles Spurgeon Exposed the Emerging Church. VII. Index. 489 pages, available in print and eBook editions from the Way of Life online bookstore.

JOEL OSTEEN CELEBRATES GOD’S WORK IN OPRAH WINFREY’S LIFE (Friday Church News Notes, November 25, 2011, www.wayoflife.org fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) - When Oprah Winfrey and her television producer visited Lakewood Church in Houston on November 6, Pastor Joel Osteen enthused, “Awesome to have you. We’re so honored to have you both here, and we just celebrate and pray for you guys with what God is doing in your lives” (“Joel Osteen Welcomes Oprah,” Christian Post, Nov. 7, 2011). Nothing could better illustrate Osteen’s apostasy and spiritual blindness. He is one of the heaps of teachers described in 2 Timothy 4:3-4 who are scratching people’s ears with a new type of Christianity and celebrating their desire to live according to their own lusts while still thinking of themselves as Christians. Oprah’s 2005 book Live Your Best Life described her philosophy that everything is one and man is divine and man can create his own reality. Her gospel is that man is not a sinner, God is not a judge, all is well with the universe, and I just need to surrender to the flow. In a nutshell, Oprah’s gospel is the gospel of ME. She says, “God wants you to love yourself. It starts with you.” In 1998, Oprah featured one of her many panels on the New Age, this one composed of Betty Eadie, Sophy Burnham, and Dannion Brinkley. Oprah said: “... one of the biggest mistakes humans make is to believe that there is only one way. Actually, there are many diverse paths leading to what you call God.” When an audience member disagreed, testifying that she believed that Jesus Christ is the only way to God, Winfrey got upset and said that she didn’t think that someone would go to hell because they don’t believe in Jesus. She stated emphatically, “THERE COULDN’T POSSIBLY BE ONLY ONE WAY.” On the same program Oprah said: “I was raised a Baptist and we were too hung up on traditional ways. I was sitting in church and heard that God is a jealous God. I asked ‘Why? Come on--let’s get over it!’ ... I believe in the FORCE--I call it God” (“The Gospel according to Oprah,” Vantage Point, July 1998). Oprah worships the god that most American Christians worship, which is the non-judgmental god of The Shack.

I often hear the charge that fundamentalists of old did not defend the KJV. This claim is commonly made in the context of trying to refute today’s KJV defenders. It is said that KJV defense is a new thing and that fundamentalists of old accepted modern textual criticism and did not make an issue of Bible versions. This claim is made in From the Mind of God to the Mind of Man. It was made by Rolland McCune in “Doctrinal Non-Issues in Historic Fundamentalism” (Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal, Fall 1996). It was made by Mark Minnick in the tract Trusted Voices on Translations:

“The view that only one Greek New Testament (the textus receptus) or only one English translation of it (the King James) is the preserved Word of God was not taught by the majority of past conservative Christian spokesmen” (Trusted Voices on Translations, 2001).

One hears this repeated in many places. Following is a version that was distributed to an e-mail list in Canada:

“… the view of preservation that makes preservation synonymous or the equivalent of inspiration is the flawed one and a very rare one historically in Baptist circles. This was not the position held especially by those who took the lead with the separatist stance at the turn of the century that helped produce most of the twentieth century Baptist and fundamentalist churches (i.e. J. Frank Norris, John R. Rice, Bob Jones, T.T. Shields, certainly J. Gresham Machen, etc.).”

What do we say to this?

The Friday Church News Notes is designed for use in churches and is published by Way of Life Literature’s Fundamental Baptist Information Service. Unless otherwise stated, the Notes are written by David Cloud. Of necessity we quote from a wide variety of sources, but this does not imply an endorsement. For instructions on how to unsubscribe to this list or to change mailing addresses, please consult the information paragraph at the end.

PANSPERMIA EXPERIMENT CAPUT WITH LOSS OF RUSSIAN SATELLITE (Friday Church News Notes, November 18, 2011, www.wayoflife.org fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) - The failure of Russia’s Phobos-Grunt satellite to leave Earth orbit has doomed an experiment that was intended to test the evolutionary hypothesis of panspermia: that life could have been seeded on earth from outer space. The experiment, called LIFE (Living Interplanetary Flight Experiment) and funded by the Planetary Society, consisted of a small flat capsule containing bacteria that was attached to the Phobos-Grunt satellite. The idea was for this capsule to accompany the satellite on a three-year journey, flying to the Martian moon Phobos, landing to gather dirt and rocks, then returning to Earth. If the microbes survived, it might have provided some evidence that life forms could survive a journey through space if they were protected inside of rock. Panspermia was first proposed in the 18th century by Benoit de Maillet, who believed that germs from space fell into earth’s oceans and grew into fish, which became amphibians, reptiles, and mammals. He was convinced that there are lots of such evolving germs in space. William Thomson (Lord Kelvin) proposed a similar idea in the 19th century, hypothesizing that life was carried to earth on “countless seed-bearing meteoritic stones.” In 1907, Svante Arrhenius of Germany claimed in his book Worlds in the Making that life wafts through space by means of “spores” that colonize any hospitable planet they find. Sir Fred Hoyle (d. 2001), noted British astronomer, also held the proposition that alien life enters earth from outer space. He believed that the earth has been repeatedly seeded with alien life, and that the seeding is a product of intelligent design by some unknown higher power with “an overt plan of planetary invasion” (Evolution from Space, p. 126). Francis Crick (d. 2004), Nobel-prize willing co-discoverer of DNA’s double helix construction, and Leslie Orgel (d. 2007), a British chemist, proposed the “theory” of “directed panspermia” in the 1970s, suggesting that the seeds of life were planted on earth by extraterrestrials. The Oxford University atheist Richard Dawkins said in an interview with Ben Stein that he also suspects that life was seeded on earth by aliens. This was published in the documentary Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. These men claim that the Bible’s account of creation is unbelievable and unscientific, yet they accept wild-eyed views of alien life and panspermia which are not supported by one scintilla of evidence.

As the inventor of the personal computer, iTunes, the iPod, iPhone, and iPad, as a mover/shaker in the Hollywood fantasy business (as owner of Pixar films and as a collaborator with Disney), and as a pioneer in the field of digital books, Steve Jobs had a massive influence on modern society.

Jobs represented the merger of New Age philosophy, the sexual revolution, the me generation, drugs, music, and technology.

According to his sister, Jobs’ last words were “Oh wow; oh wow; oh wow.” Many commentators have tried to figure out the meaning of these enigmatic words. They could have meant that he was merely high on pain killers or that he was having a glimpse into a beautiful afterlife or that he realized at the very end that he was going to give account to a holy God without benefit of the Saviour.

The Bible is the only book that allows us to look into the next life, and it plainly states that death is a journey and there are only two destinies, Heaven or Hell, the destiny being determined by one’s relationship with the only Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Jesus boldly testified, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). The Bible says of Him, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).

BAPTIST WORLD ALLIANCE LEADERS JOIN INTERFAITH SUMMIT (Friday Church News Notes, November 11, 2011, www.wayoflife.org fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) - Top leaders of the Baptist World Alliance (BWA) participated in the pope’s interfaith summit of peace and justice on October 27 in Assisi, Italy. This abominable event, which brings “Christians” and pagan religionists together for the sake of world peace, was begun 25 years ago by Pope John Paul II. Joining Mary-venerating Catholics, Hindus, Buddhists, and “a wide range of other religious adherents,” plus several agnostics, were joined by John Upton, BWA president, and Neville Callam, BWA general secretary. Upton praised Pope Benedict’s initiative in hosting the day of prayer and said, “It was good for Baptists to be there” (“BWA leaders bring ‘fullness of what it means to be Baptist’ to peace summit,” Associated Baptist Press, Nov. 4, 2011). Callum said, “It was fitting that religious leaders from around the globe should focus on peace ... as peace is one of the most urgent needs of our time.” If these Baptists really believed the Bible they would know that there is no peace for the wicked apart from salvation in Christ (Isaiah 48:22) and that the end-time peace movement is destined to failure as it will ultimately bring in the antichrist (1 Thess. 5:3). Did Upton and Callam explain this to the other participants? Doubtless they did not, as such comments would have disturbed the interfaith harmony! Further, if they really believed the Bible they would know that God does not allow the believer to yoke together with heretics and unbelievers in any spiritual forum (Romans 16:17; 2 Corinthians 6:14-17; 2 Timothy 3:5).

Volume 12, Issue 43

GRAPHICAL PDF VERSION
The Friday Church News Notes is designed for use in churches and is published by Way of Life Literature’s Fundamental Baptist Information Service. Unless otherwise stated, the Notes are written by David Cloud. Of necessity we quote from a wide variety of sources, but this does not imply an endorsement. For instructions on how to unsubscribe to this list or to change mailing addresses, please consult the information paragraph at the end.

KIM KARDASHIAN: QUEEN OF THE ME-CENTERED POP CULTURE (Friday Church News Notes, November 4, 2011, www.wayoflife.org fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) - Since the invention the rock & roll pop culture it has been all about me. The overriding theme is be true to yourself, follow your own heart, do it your way. The Rolling Stones summed it up in their 1965 hit: “I’m free to do what I want any old time.” No wonder the onslaught of the pop culture has brought rampant divorce. The love of self is not a recipe for a successful marriage. Kim Kardashian, who had a televised multi-million dollar wedding and then divorced 72 days later, is the current Queen of Me. In her blog explanation of the quick divorce she said, “Everyone that knows me knows that I’m a hopeless romantic! I love with all of my heart and soul. ... I’m sorry if I have hurt anyone, but my dad always told me to follow my heart and I believe now that I really am.” The Bible sheds light on this type of love. “This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be LOVERS OF THEIR OWN SELVES, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, TRUCEBREAKERS, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, LOVERS OF PLEASURES more than lovers of God” (2 Timothy 3:1-4).

(first published August 19, 2008) (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article) -

For more on the following subject see our 180-page book Repentance and Soul Winning, which is available from Way of Life Literature.
__________________

Some men say that it is not necessary to preach repentance since we don’t see it in John 3:16 and Acts 16:31.

It seems to me, though, that this is a strange way to use the Bible, since it is so obvious from other passages that repentance is necessary. Jesus said it is necessary (Luke 13:1-5); Paul said it is necessary (Acts 17:30, etc.); Peter said it is necessary (2 Pet. 3:9). If preaching repentance is not necessary and we only need to preach faith, why did Christ Himself preach repentance?

The reason why verses such as John 3:16 and Acts 16:31 don’t mention repentance is that proper saving faith includes repentance and proper repentance includes faith. Repentance and faith are sometimes spoken of in Scripture as both being necessary for salvation (i.e., Acts 20:21; Heb. 6:1), while at other times only one or the other is said to be necessary.

Salvation is referred to as coming to repentance with no mention of faith in Matthew 9:13; 11:20-21; 21:32; Mark 1:4; 2:17; 6:12; Luke 15:7; 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 11:18; 26:20; 2 Corinthians 7:10; 1 Thessalonians 1:9; 2 Timothy 2:25; and 2 Peter 3:9.

Then in other passages, such as John 3:16 and Acts 16:31, salvation is referred to as believing and repentance is not mentioned.

By comparing Scripture with Scripture (rather than isolating Scripture, which is the method used by false teachers), I conclude that saving faith includes repentance.

The following is excerpted from our book New Evangelicalism: Its History, Characteristics, and Fruit, which was first published in 1995.

Let me emphasize my own conviction that old-line evangelicalism and fundamentalism at their best were biblically deficient. I am a fundamentalist insofar as I believe in biblical dogmatism and militancy for the truth and separation from error, but I am more than a fundamentalist. The goal of my Christian life and ministry is not to be a good fundamentalist (or even to be a good Baptist). My goal is to be faithful to Christ and His Word in all particulars. Following are two weaknesses in fundamentalism as a movement:

The first weakness is the transdenominational character that has characterized fundamentalism. I do not accept the philosophy that limits the basis of fellowship to a narrow list of “cardinal” doctrines, such as the infallibility of Scripture and the deity of Christ. While the Bible does indicate that some doctrines are more important than others (e.g., Matthew 23:23), all teaching of the Bible is important and is to be taken seriously. Timothy was instructed not to allow any other doctrine than that which Paul had delivered to him (1 Tim. 1:3; 6:13, 20; 2 Tim. 2:2). Paul was concerned with the “whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:27). This position on doctrine does not allow me to overlook denominational differences such as the mode of baptism, the manner of the Lord’s Supper, eternal security, the woman’s role in the ministry, or the interpretation of prophecy. I can accept as true Christians those who differ with me on such things, because these are not issues of “damnable heresy” (2 Pet. 2:1), but I cannot have joint ministry with them, because I do not believe the Bible allows it.