Is a New Church Denominationalism Emerging? Part 2

When I first became an evangelical Christian back in the early 80's a large majority within evangelical churches believed the Word of God as the inerrant and infallible word of God to be received and believed. Today that is changing and that even among evangelical churches and many Christian Universities. I wonder how many today believe in a literal 6 day creation as the bible declares. Surprisingly more and more evangelicals seem to keep embracing evolution as biblically based and acceptable regardless of what the bible says.

One General Superintendent said the following when I wrote and complained about a professor who is teaching evolution at one of our Christian Universities. “The difficulty we face is that we must make place for a wide range of views regarding these matters within the Church of the Nazarene. We do insist on the authority of Scripture. While we may differ regarding some of the interpretations of creation and human origins, we must not differ in regard to the reliability of Scripture”.

I know one thing for certain this statement does not hold water to defend the faith well, if at all. I say that in all due respect. Granted it is just one small portion of a 3 page letter, but we cannot have such a wide spectrum on such a crucial issue as creation and the first 3 chapters of the bible. When our general leaders don’t want to declare clearly what a denomination believes in a certain area then we open wide the floodgate for multiple views that bring crisis and confusion and we will quickly be headed for trouble.

I ask why we do we have to make place for such a wide range of views regarding the interpretation of creation and human origins? This type of answer I believe is the beginning of more of the same in the post modern culture and it will likely get worse before the return of Christ.

Do you remember when believers actually carried the Word of God with them to church and bible studies? Christians used to actual follow along and let the word speak to them while it was being preached and taught. Folks back then made notes in their bibles and wrote things in the margins. Heaven and hell were real places (still are), people knew how to find passages in the bible and folks actually cared about doctrine and had opinions about what they believed the bible taught. Being born again was essential as well as being spirit filled while awaiting the return of Christ and believing the end of the age was soon.

The difference then was what distinct doctrines one might believe from the inerrant Word of God different from the other believers in other denominations. Doctrine mattered because it determined how you lived your life, raised your family and how you lived and died. Now doctrine almost seems to be the last concern on folk’s minds as we become shallow in the name of tolerance. Since we are a tolerant society of so many harmful and objective things in life, tolerating doctrine that is objectionable can also be tolerated in the name of unity, friendships and personal self satisfying preferences about any given church. The following reply from someone from my Part 1 post I found to be enlightening, transparent and confirming and allowed for reprint for my part 2 post.

“Peter,

You wrote: “It seems that the new denominationalism may very well be defined by who is biblical or not. Since emergent proponents seem to have slithered into churches of all denominations changing not only methodologies but also scripture meaning and theological understanding of the scriptures. It now becomes harder to find continuity through what denominations use to provide in sameness of doctrine, worship and even programs. Finding those who just simply believe the bible as the inerrant and infallible word of God alone seems to be a more important common denominator than what label the church has or the group it is associated with.”

As I thought about your email, I wandered back in my memory (I know, dangerous) to a time when my wife and I were looking for a church after being uprooted from my home church – where my dad was pastor. We were so theologically ignorant that we had a difficult time finding a church, for many of the same reasons you state. However, we did end up in a Christian & Missionary Alliance church.

After moving from that area to the Carolinas, we began our search again. We ended up at a church that could seat 6,600 people. It was non-denominational. After some pastoral changes there, which we were not in favor of, we left and went to another non-denominational church. This one was probably 500 to 1,000 members over multiple services. This church now holds five worship services over the weekend with thousands of members.

Again, we moved away from that area into a suburb of Charlotte. The only “big” churches in the area were Baptist. We went there because we needed a place for our teenage son to connect. What we looked for in a church was also different than what we would look for now. And that is where I believe the difference is found.

What drew us to these non-denominational churches? Programs for kids and teens, great preaching, and exciting worship. What kept us at these non-denominational churches? Nothing! There was no glue that kept us there. Eventually the glamour and excitement wore off. The lack of holiness preaching led to a lifestyle of “sinning in thought, word, and deed” on a daily basis. We were powerless!

For many, Church has become just another entertainment outlet. People don’t come to learn more than they do to socialize, be entertained, to be seen, to make themselves feel good about doing some social justice project, or to have their consciences eased in “thinking” that their kids and teens are well cared for. “Corporate church” is the norm now, and that ideology seems to be killing smaller, holiness-oriented churches. Add the “emergent movement” to this mix, and the local holiness church is impotent to defend itself against the tidal wave of feel-good theology. Denominations are imploding over internal issues. Non-denominational churches are temporarily thriving as people jettison their faithfulness to their denomination of choice. The “common denominators” that held denominations together are now being challenged by the rapid growth of non-denominational churches.

Yet, I remain optimistic. I personally believe it is in these times that we must remain firm to the message of heart-holiness and to preach it all the more. It is, I believe, the pathway through which God builds his church. Why? Because heart-holiness is centered on the love of God that fills us. Programs will come and go, new and faddish tools will excite people for a time, but in the end it is one-on-one relationships built on the love of Christ that will prevail. These relationships will carry the day when all of the glitz and glamour fade.

Relationships are key to weathering the storms that are here and now and the ones yet on the horizon. If the community of faith is not building relationships, then it will cease to exist or at least cease to impact the community in which it resides. We may not now impact thousands of lives every weekend, but the ones which God has given to our care will be best served by our confidence in the message of heart-holiness”.

Today is a different day for sure. People shop for churches like a new car, verses praying about what God wants them to do and where to serve others. When did looking for a church based on what a church believed stop? Since we are a consumer culture, folks look for programs, music, comfortable size congregations, service time options, friends, and a great communicator in a pastor and then maybe doctrine.

Many do not realize it yet, but there is a new agenda (doctrine) moving through all religious circles today including the evangelical church. It is being formed by governments, government controlled educational systems, media, political leaders and social reformers. It's a Social Gospel that uses buzz words like social justice, living justice, emergent, emerging, missional, compassion, green, environmentalism, mystic, ancient faith, paths, relational tithe, prophetic Imagination etc.

Its agenda is to transform and save the world and redeem the earth and its people collectively. Many new words within Evangelical Christianity are popping up through sermons, books and publishing house curriculum. Deconstruction and reconstruction of words and terms are happening all in the name of post modernism and emerging relativism. This is happening on many fronts beyond just religion as well, but especially there as many claim we are on the dawn of a new reformation and the revolution is coming into a new global environment. Truly a one world government agenda will require the cooperation and convergence of many groups around the world including all religious sects to come together in some form of harmony.

Recently I was reviewing a new National Geographic magazine called “Water”. The whole magazine was about how people use water and how much they use, waste and pollute. It mentioned how hard some tribes and people in different lands can’t get water. If you looked at the magazine as a whole it has an agenda. The agenda is propagating the fear of lack based on projections of the world’s population growth. It is written in such a way to cause the reader to see the world and its people and water supplies from a one world perspective to solve problems and its forthcoming programs.


I am not trying to be insensitive to people groups of other nations and lands who have water problems. It’s just that each country, each area, each location needs to work and seek solutions as it can. However, a one world government and its perspective is being painted now to condition a generation in their youth to look at everything as a whole and the best way to get folks to look that way is through all the religions of the world getting on the same page by way of teaching a social agenda for solutions.

Within Christianity this agenda is painted as a “Emergent Church” or “new gospel” or a “Social Gospel” where people are presented to solve the bigger picture as a whole. In the past the emphasis has always been on transforming the individual and now it is about transforming the society or a community as the whole. Jesus and the Gospel writers warned about what would happen in the last days before the return of Christ. They warned there would be false Christ, false teachers and false prophets. They would be ever learning and never attaining the truth. They would slip in among the believers like wolves in sleeps clothing.

So what does this have to do with a new denominationalism? Today it is all about the TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL. Folks will need to ask themselves in these last days, is the church they attend a bible believing and proclaiming church? They will have to discern the spirit of the church and look past programs, music, buildings, locations and personalities and look for bible believing people with the true gospel and beware of this new social gospel.

If church leaders are solid then they will stick to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If they are whitewashed with “another gospel” agenda then you will still find truth here and there, but it is likely polluted with a different agenda as well. The new agenda is all about transforming the culture, the community, the environment and the planet and helping folks along the way get help for their problems. It's a warped kingdom now position that many believe will eventually help usher in the Savior. The great commission has always been and always will be about going and making disciples. Yes we are to do deeds of kindness along the way by visiting the sick, those in jail and giving a cup of cold water in Jesus name. But we do it all with the soul and repentance in mind and not just for the acts of compassion alone as the end result of fulfillment.

Finding a church where the Cross of Christ is lifted up and Jesus is proclaimed and the blood of Christ is pleaded and prayed over folks may soon be a forgotten gospel among a shrinking remnant if the masses of professing Christians do not discern the times with the Word of God.

Many pulpits have become nothing more than a Jesus flavored self help pep talk with scriptures peppered in here and there to flavor there topical messages of the hour. Rarely do we here of people mourning over their sins and confessing unto true repentance. Many of our churches have become centers of entertainment verses a holiness people of worship with a fresh anointing from on high with power. Sermons are becoming more illustrated with the latest skits and movie clips to identify with the culture than introducing the lost culture to the Gospel of Jesus Christ with His timeless relevant truth that still speaks through the power of the Holy Spirit. I believe we must use multimedia as a tool that this present generally relates to, but not so much that we do not rely solely on the power and anointing of the Holy Spirit.

Unfortunately I perceive that a New Denominationalism will not be about which doctrine you believe as much as which Gospel you receive. That may be a new thought to many, but it certainly was not to the early apostles. Paul wrote in Galatians 1:8 “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that, which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed”. Now those are some stern words for us as well and especially the clergy who will answer for what we do with the Word of God in teaching and proclaiming.


Doctrine is important and far from secondary, but the shift that is emerging today is a shift from proclaiming a personal message of hope and holiness to transform lives to a message of cultural redemption and mandates to save the world as a whole. “Another Gospel” is the self help message that conveys all that God wants to do for you.


People need to know the true gospel from "another gospel" or they may be sweep away into the cultural vortex of social reform at the expense of their own souls.


I never dreamed 20 years ago when Jesus said in Luke 18:8 "However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?" how this could be possible. With multimedia with its repetitive emotional impact ability deception seems far easier in the hands of the misguided, deceived and wicked than I ever could have imagined.


What does this imply about the final days before His appearing? If you find yourself looking for a church in the future you should seek God's divine guidance and throw all the marketing mandates out the window. Listen to the voice of God with your bible in one hand while maintaining a careful listening ear to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit. He promised to lead His people into all truth and He who saves is faithful to the end.

Is a New Church Denominationalism Emerging? Part 1

A New Denominationalism!

A few weeks ago I attended a two day conference at Northland a church distributed in longwood, FL. I was at a Dave Ramsey sponsored conference called Momentum. At the conference there were about 50 in attendance. It was truly a great conference. I was the only one there along with a layman from my church that was from a Church of the Nazarene. Many were from different denominations and many others from non-denominational ministries.

At lunch I meet a pastor from a local church that runs 1500 between two campuses (churches). He and I discovered we both had the same theological understanding of the scriptures (Wesleyan / Armenian). Earlier I asked someone working at the conference questions about the host pastor and found out he was Methodist in his earlier training days even though he was now an independent pastor of a church running around 10,000 distributed. When a denomination name is drop It becomes a source of identity or at least it use too.

While having lunch on the second day the other pastor and I spoke about what we believed and talked about the host church and its beliefs as much as we thought we knew. Since the host church was independent then the theological belief system about the church we presumed were initially determined by the senior pastor. At least in its original formative years we would assume.


After the conference the gentleman from my church and I decided we wanted to experience a worship service at Northland. We ended up attending their Monday night worship service and it was packed. As I sat there having never heard the pastor speak before or even read about what Northland believed I wondered why all these people came here and what drew them. Was it the music, the pastor, the location, the programs or a combination of several, or could it be doctrinal clarity?

I could not determine what their doctrine was by association with a denomination because they were independent. The message was biblically sound, but his style was very different( more teacher )from how I preach and it ended without a clear invitation. People were invited to pray up front, but no specific “place” to really connect and pray was defined. I never observed anyone carrying a bible to church and nobody looked in their own bible while the scriptures were being listed on the screens from what I could tell. Searching the scriptures was not encouraged or even time given for folks to follow along if they had their own bibles. The chairs were like those of a movie theater and there were no books or bibles anywhere accept in the bookstore for purchase. To give a donation, you had to do such on your own in the foyer by credit card, check or cash.

I felt comfortable as if was at a hotel or mall, but it never really felt like a church in so many other familiar ways that I am use to. It was not that I was against it, but it just felt like any other modern everyday cultural building so that it felt normal.

So I ask, is Church supposed to feel culturally normal? Some would say yes and others no. I see Jesus as someone who leads folks to be counter cultural in so many ways and since our culture is far less Christian than 50 or more years ago I got to wonder where we are headed as the church both theologically and practically in the developed world.

In days past denominations helped you identity who believed the same doctrines, had similar styles of worship, etc, etc. In this post modern society I am not sure those same rules apply anymore or at least less frequently now then in the past. I suppose with the internet many people can check out a church well before deciding to attend an actual service. A few years ago while on vacation our family was trying to decide where to attend a local church service. Since there were not any Nazarene churches close to us I began a search online. It was very hard to decide on a church since we were looking for a holiness theologically based church over style of worship or programs.

Most of the churches were either too far left denominationally (theologically) for us to want to attend, so I started searching for the non categorized churches (non denominational). I finally found one church that seemed interesting, but very little about their doctrine was listed. We ventured out and worshipped in a building that was a former theater turned into church. The worship music was good and the preacher was good. After the service they offered a free CD to visitors of the message. On the way out I introduced myself to the pastor and mentioned I was a pastor as well who was on vacation. When I asked him what his theological background was he refused to answer directly. He kept saying we are non denominational. I told him I understood that, but just wanted to know where he stood theologically as either Calvinist or Wesley Armenian or maybe something other.

He did not answer me directly and kept saying no doctrinal position on such. I thanked him and walked to the car. My wife and I spoke about how he took a position by not declaring one through his refusal to state what he believed. Doctrine is so crucial because eventually it does carry over in our belief system at some level of growth within the church life of any church.

It seems that the new denominationalism may very well be defined by who is biblical or not. Since emergent proponents seem to have slithered into churches of all denominations changing not only methodologies but also scripture meaning and theological understanding of the scriptures. It now becomes harder to find continuity through what denominations use to provide in sameness of doctrine, worship and even programs. Finding those who just simply believe the bible as the inerrant and infallible word of God alone seems to be a more important common denominator than what label the church has or the group it is associated with.

Part 1

Why is The House Studio promoting Shane Claiborne and Relational Tithing?

      Many within the Church of the Nazarene may not be aware yet but there is a new Publishing arm of NPH. I have not read all the books, but I have read one so far and to be quite honest that was more than enough if that is the taste of books to come. After reviewing the titles and some of the content of the other few books I can see a theme coming forward and it is not holiness of heart and life. The House Studio is building there “House” foundation on sand as a message of a social gospel is emerging.

             

                 Recently I discovered two more books on their website by the name of “Economy of Love”. Subtitle is, Creating a Community of Enough by Relational Tithe; video sessions with Shane Claiborne.

Having been aware that Shane is a social gospel advocate who runs with the social liberal left emergent crowd, I was just blown away that NPH is allowing these type of heretical authors and messages to come forward.

Why I am so alarmed? I wish I did not have to write what I am about to write, but biblical justice must be expressed by someone who sees a fire burning in “The House”. Shane Claiborne is misguiding from the original intent of many scriptures and stories to support his own personal agenda to end poverty.  If this book and video material is taught to a fairly substantial amount of people in our churches many more problems will be forthcoming and eventually the message of Holiness with be a twisted social gospel only fitting well into the landscape of a social form government. 

    Those who are running The House Studio are either blind, ignorant, deceived or aligned with a different gospel other than that which NPH was built on. Shane Claiborne is so confused and biblically misguided it is amazing that the Nazarene church would even associate with his name let alone his videos.

One of Shane’s quotes is “rebirth demands redistribution”. This just does not settle well with my spirit or the biblical teaching of tithes or offerings.  Since the term ‘Relational Tithe’ is not in the bible as well it being a new term to me, I had to go research what it meant and found a video by Shane describing it.

Please watch his video for yourself with a bible in one hand and your finger on the pause button and really listen to what this yahoo is really teaching the next generation. If ‘The House Studio’ is trying to cause a revolution with provocative speakers and writers like Shane Claiborne then they have a mission accomplished with me.  If I and our local churches were to adopt Shane’s anti biblical philosophy of ‘relational tithing’ along with the entire denomination then headquarters will shut down soon for lack of funds.

Shane says, “100% of the tithe goes directly to meet the needs of those relationally connected”.   This is biblical incorrect. The tithe was originally designated to go to the priest:

 "Moreover, we will bring to the storerooms of the house of our God, to the priests, the first of our ground meal, of our [grain] offerings, of the fruit of all our trees and of our new wine and oil. And we will bring a tithe of our crops to the Levites, for it is the Levites who collect the tithes in all the towns where we work. Nehemiah 10:37

Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this," says the LORD Almighty, "and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have room enough for it. Malachi 3:10

And unto the children of Levi, behold, I have given all the tithe in Israel for an inheritance, in return for their service which they serve, even the service of the tent of meeting. Numbers 18:21

Shane also teaches that the early church eliminated poverty using the text Acts 4:32-35

The truth is that that scripture was referencing the body of Christ sharing as needs arouse among the brotherhood in the church and not the entire population of all people around them as Shane implies.

“Once we really discovered how to love our neighbor as our self capitalism as we know it won’t be possible and Marxism won’t be necessary”.  Shane Claiborne.

Shocked again by the another  liberal release coming from “The House Studio”.

Emergent leaders Deconstructing the Scriptures into Mumbo Jumbo

Keeping things simple is the way I enjoy understanding life. I realize life gets complicated, but when God speaks to me it is usually simple and easy to follow. He speaks to me from Scriptures and speaks to me by His Spirit. Thank God He speaks and by the grace of God I hope and plan to always listen.

As a pastor I find people need and want life and lessons presented with simplicity so they can grasp the wonderful grace of God. When it comes to words and there meaning I find having a dictionary handy if words get to fuzzy for me.   Throw a bunch of fancy words at me and I run to the dictionary to make sure I know what is meant and where it is going. The first time I heard the phrase "Deconstruction" as it relates to Christianity I had to shake my head a couple times to make sure I heard it correctly. Then I said. “What does that mean?”  I knew construction meant to build something so I suppose to "de" construct meant to take it apart and then reconstruct meant to rebuild it, right?

 Well just so we are on the same page here is Webster online definition of the Word de`con`struc´tion   Pronunciation: dė`kŭn`strŭk´shŭn  A philosophical theory of criticism (usually of literature or film) that seeks to expose deep-seated contradictions in a work by delving below its surface meaning. This method questions the ability of language to represent a fixed reality, and proposes that a text has no stable meaning because words only refer to other words, that metaphysical or ethnocentric assumptions about the meaning of words must be questioned, and words may be redefined in new contexts and new, equally valid and even contradictory meanings may be found. Such new interpretations may be based on the philosophical, political, or social implications of the words of a text, rather than solely on attempts to determine the author's intentions

Now if you apply that word and its definition to Christianity you have a formula for heresy.

In this modern ago let's use the word  house ( home)  as an example of what is happening with the Word of God and the Bible as it relates to mankind.

A house is constructed for what purpose?  I know it seems ridiculous to even ask what the purpose of a house is for. But for the sake of this article hang tight with me so I can show you how we must be careful in this day of post modernism.  A house is for people to live in. People take shelter from the elements and live in their homes. Inside the confines of the structure they find safety from the elements, rest for their bodies and a place to eat meals together.  The house structure provides many things including but not limited to safety, protection and rest. Then comes the Emergent one and they say lets "re"construct the meaning of the home from what has been the traditional purpose or intent of the home. So now the emergent one might say, here is a home constructed and what do you feel the structure is for"?  How do you feel about it? How does this structure speak to you? This home can mean anything to you since its structure is all relative to you.

So in essence an emergent post modern perspective is: the house can mean whatever you want it to mean for you. If the house speaks to you as a structure designed to house hundreds of plants to stay safe from the harsh elements of the outdoors where cats and dogs can live at peace under the roof, than that is the purpose of the "house" for you. Personally I would call that a greenhouse with a formula for a mess, but if that is what someone wanted to call a house then they would deconstruct it from the original meaning and reconstruct it to mean something other than it’s original meaning and purpose.

So many today are taking this kind of deconstructive approach to the 'Scriptures". To "de"construct the Bible is for it to mean to YOU whatever it speaks to you about. Even if the original author meant one thing it is acceptable now to let it "speak to us" another meaning than its original purpose. Thus we now live in the era of  ”deconstructing" the meaning of the Bible and its Words.

A good biblical example of this is the creation in Genesis chapter 1-3.  Genesis 1:3-5 says  and God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.  God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning-the first day.

Now right here the Word of God gives anyone with common sense the impression God just created light and separated it from darkness and now there is morning and evening – Day 1. Then he created for 5 more days and then he rests on the 7^th day. Now we have a full week.

Then in Exodus 23:12 we have this record in scripture. "Six days do your work, but on the seventh day do not work, so that your ox and your donkey may rest and the slave born in your household, and the alien as well, may be refreshed.

These two scriptures verify 24 hour cycles and a full week of time as we know it.

In order for any other understanding of scripture one must deconstruct the meaning of certain words and then reconstruct them to mean periods of time or any other assortment of meanings to have another gospel understanding of the God of creation.

Children can grasp a simple story taught about God creating the world in 6 days. But when they get older they get a deconstructed and reconstructed version of the story of the true meaning of how long it took God to create if they even leave God in the how. The original meaning that was conveyed for generations has been that God made all that is within 6 days and rested on the 7th day.

The bible story is "constructed" to convey the miracle and majesty of Almighty God creating the world as we see it and know it in less than a week.  The modern man comes along and presumes they have uncovered deeper truth and proof that the world as we know it could not have been constructed in 6 literal 24 hours periods. So they begin to "deconstruct" the chapters and words of Genesis to mean something different to them than what it was "constructed" to mean to all men and therefore they "reconstruct" the meaning of the scriptures from its original intent and purpose.  Within the walls of this new "deconstruction" they develop new meanings to the word 'Day ' so now it means periods of time. They place millions of years between the "days" so that God's Word can still fit into there meaning and perception of how they believe things were created  or evolved and the time line of man.

The list can go on and on of how men are deconstructing the bibles in this present generation.    We need to be careful that in this day and age we do not allow the "emergent mystic preachers, teachers, professors and writers to "deconstruct” and “reconstruct” the bible to mean anything other than what God intended it to mean to us.

The bible is written to easily convey Truth and Salvation to all men. When things begin to sound fuzzy to your ears then they probably are. When someone asks "How do you feel about this scripture?" be careful because they may be about to "reconstruct truth right before your eyes to mean something different than what God meant.

Since God called us to live by faith it really does not matter how any of us feel about the bible. It matters that we trust the Scriptures as the divine words of God as it was constructed to be. Thank God for the simplicity of His Word and the meaning of His Word. Remember John said in 1 John 2:26-27 I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit - just as it has taught you, remain in him

Be careful what you read and who wrote it as there are many today deconstructing Christianity and then reconstructing it into heresy.  If it sounds like mumbo jumbo then it probably is.

Word association – Emergent verses Biblical Holiness

                        I am not advocating a new denomination or a new group but I see the makings of one in progress by default. In January 2009 within a month of settling into my new home and pastorate in FL I received a packet mailed to: All Florida Pastors. Since it was not personal I was not in a hurry to open it, but because it was not junk mail I was not inclined to just throw it away since it had a steep price tag for postage on it. I thought, someone has something to say to send and spend this kind of money to all the Nazarene Pastors in Florida. So one night I opened it up and started reading this well thought out research. At first when I read the adverse comments about Rick Warren and his book “The Purpose Driven Church, I was inclined to shut it down, but I continued to read along anyway. After I finished the packet I was challenged to research and verify for myself that the info about the Emergent church move was true and more widespread than one might realize.

                                    Since I hunger for the truth and desire to follow God in holiness and all His ways, I began doing exactly that: RESEARCH. The more I read the more alarmed I was and dismayed at how I had missed so much of what was happening within Evangelical Christianity in North America and within the Church of the Nazarene. Now some 18 months later I am far more keenly aware of not taking teachings for granted because others I trust say so. I try not to be a skeptic on everything that is said or written either. I truly do measure more diligently then ever all things against the Word of God. I am ashamed to say, but I will confess that I was truly buying into things as a postmodernist without balancing it out with the Word of God.  

        I am thankful for the folks who spent the time and energy researching the Emergent Church movement because it helped touch this pastor's heart, and God used it to awaken me to the deception that is happening in the church on multiple fronts with regards to doctrine and teachings. Finding a balance without becoming an alarmist or extremist is such a delicate balance as well.

       As I reflect on the beginnings of the Church of the Nazarene I can see how God drew conservative holiness people together from different groups and parts of the country and other denominations to those who were like minded with His passion and purpose. Then within a short time The Pentecostal Church of the Nazarene was born and named such as it merged two large groups. Within a few short years controversy arose within the modern church of that day on the use and misuse of the gift of tongues. Before they knew it they had to define themselves as Nazarenes more clearly by in 1917 by dropping the name "Pentecostal" because it had become so strongly associated with those who said one HAD TO speak with tongues as an evidence of the Holy Spirit and being entirely sanctified believers. The word Pentecost or Pentecostal was never evil or bad, but the word association became more associated with a false understanding of the gifts of the Spirit, so much so that a change was made necessary.So today Emergent is associated in the same controversial manner.

                        So here we are as a denomination that has crossed the great barrier of 100 years of age as a group. We are 2 million members strong in 157 counties of the world with (officially) 47 Nazarene’s who have died for their faith as modern day martyrs. God is pouring out His Spirit and anointing preachers and workers around the world for some of the greatest harvests in the entire world.  The mission is still great before us all and yet the Church of the Nazarene is being infected with distractions away from the focus of the great commission, and mostly so in the more civilized world and the strongest economic hub of the Church of the Nazarene (North America). A younger generation is growing up in our midst who are being polluted by the current liberal culture and mindset with another word association in the wrong path yet again. I find so many who embrace the new thinking called Emergent. Emergent is not a new word, but by association with many liberal thinkers, philosophies  and writers it has indeed become associated with the liberal agenda more than a conservative holiness one. Likewise there are many words being used and redefined in ways of bringing about the deconstruction of the Church. My wife received her masters’ degree in social work back in the late 80’s. Her minor was in "social justice". Those two buzz words together, “social Justice”,  are not new today at all, but yet amongst liberal thinkers and even within the political landscape it is being used and  redefined and associated with a range from social work and environmentalism, to socialism.  

           I still embrace the Church of the Nazarene and still believe in the her biblical teaching of Holiness.  I am concerned about what many are turning to and accepting as gospel , and especially so because of the new redefining of former terms and words in this post modern day.  When I hear certain terms I try not to jump to conclusions but it is difficult. Those words and terms include, Emergent Church, emerging, Social Justice, post modernism, social restoration, mysticism, spiritual formation, meditation, among others that are being redefined today.  It seems that when I read about and hear these words it does end up being a liberal or compromising situation and I either confront it with biblical truth or I need to withdraw and run the other way.   

Trevecca Nazarene University last year added a Social Justice  major that really concerns me. Not because serving justice to society is wrong, but because of the new association the terms mean in post modernism. Who are they attracting or will attract with that major? Will the liberal post modernist start enrolling? Or will Nazarene parents who are educating themselves and aware of the new word association run in another direction with their tuition money because they perceive a more liberal university than they desire? Personally I think TNU is hurting themselves to choice that term in the heat of the battle of word means and associations if they want to be associated as a conservative Biblical holiness university.

      In these last days word association and terminology is vital and we need to be constantly clear with what we mean when we label and use terms so that we associate with biblical holiness and not the modern deconstruction of the holiness church and the ever increasing heretical liberalism.  

       As much as the early Nazarenes probably despised having to drop the name Pentecost from their official name in order to preserve biblical holiness in those early days, we Nazarenes may need to separate or re-associate a clearer term to progress and press forward with that ever lasting message of Holiness. Around the world these issues might seem trite and divisive and even the discussion might seem like a waste of time, but in the civilized world being clear about who we are and who we are not will be vastly important to who we will continue to be. If we are not clear we could easily end up in the mainline denominational camp that is the fastest declining segment of Christianity in the world. As it is now only 4% of Generation Y (under30) can even be found in churches each week in the U.S.  The Emergent movement may be trying to become all things to a younger generation to win them, but winning them to a deconstructed church and  Bible will gain us nothing for eternity.

So what terms we use and label ourselves with, and our ministries and efforts including in our colleges and universities, will truly determine who we will attract and become. May God grant us wisdom with the jargon we use and define ourselves.  If this even means dropping terms and names such as “Pentecostal”, by all means let us do so that we might win the lost and preserve the message of holiness in these last days.

THE FACE TIME THEORY OF CREATION

In the last few months or so I have read about so many authors, scientist, pastors and theologians who have all aligned themselves with a different understanding of Genesis than what is intended from the natural reading of the Word of God. Some professing Christians are so persuaded that science has proven evolution that they find themselves in a jam trying to reconcile their decades of faith in God and His Word with Science.

Now mind you, I am not a scientist or even remotely close to one. Matter of fact it completely bores me. A few months back our family went to Epcot and Animal Kingdom at Walt World Disney. At both these theme parks the science of evolution is presented as FACT that it made me sick to think how many children and young adults will allow that theory to persuade them as it is woven into even our entertainment world. Entertainment with God creating it all would have been so much more amazing than what they threw together.

For all the theories that man says” “this proved evolution” there are equally a group of scientist who blow holes in each theory and go back to the bible and say the Word remain true.

So where do we get the theory of Creationism anyway? We get it from the Book of Genesis and the book of Genesis (meaning the book of beginnings) was written by Moses while he spent time with God in his calling and Journey. So how did Moses know what happened in the first 11 chapters of Genesis that reflect all the origins of creation? Some say it was oral traditions that were passed down. Given the age of Adam through the next 8 generations, that would make perfect sense. Perfect sense that is, if you can accept that Adam lived to be 930 years old. Or that Noah lived to be 950 years old. (Genesis 9:28-29). Which I do accept, but I don’t think even Adam would have had the details Moses writes down prior to own existence. I suppose God could have told Adam and down the line it went, but I do not get the impression that Adam walked especially close to God as Moses did. So I believe even Moses had more details then even oral tradition would have passed down. So where did the detail info come from?

Did oral tradition get passed down or did he find the family heritage album or was there another method? Maybe he just imaged it as a good story to illustrate a deeper meaning since at the time they did not have the means to figure out evolution and the scientific process. Or could it be that God actual told him all the details and as a secretary he wrote it down word for word what happened? After all, Moses was hanging out with God for at least a solid 40 days and nights two times in a row.

So what evidence is there that the Creator Himself told Moses the details of the origin of man and creation? I can not remember how I was born or came into existence accept that someone told me the details. Even if Adam did evolve from an ape and then God dropped or impressed on that first official human being a spirit and soul to live forever, would not God had made sure that story was passed down correctly?

The following verses in Numbers are such a key to trusting God’s word (numbers 12:6-8) (NIV)
6 he said, "Listen to my words:
"When a prophet of the LORD is among you,
I reveal myself to him in visions,
I speak to him in dreams.
7 But this is not true of my servant Moses;
he is faithful in all my house.
8 With him I speak face to face,
clearly and not in riddles;
he sees the form of the LORD.
Why then were you not afraid
to speak against my servant Moses?"

So of all the inspired Words of the prophets and writers of the O.T and N.T. Moses was Face to Face with God himself. If Moses writes down that Adam was created from dirt and God breathed the breath of life in his nostrils that is enough for me. If God said that He created the living creation from a void of mass in 6 literal days that settles it for me.
If science tells me there is evidence that the earth is 4 billion years old and it conflicts with God’s word then either science has it wrong or there is still something missing in science that they cannot explain. So when conflict comes based on theories or testimony I will still trust God’s living Word and the testimony of Moses and God before I will trust a bunch of men who are all fallible. Was Moses fallible in taking noted from God? NO. Face to face with God is a supernatural encounter and supernatural means enhancement above the natural world.

As I read about the lives of most of the current authors of scientific theories and even the Christian professing biologist (including Darwin) and their theories I find a common thread I observe. Most of those who have embraced evolution or intelligent design as a process beyond 6 literal days all seem to be doubters or backslidden from their Christian heritage if they even had one.

I find it interesting that those who today promote other than the biblical account as God intended have gone through doubt and abandonment to some degree or another when science became more authoritative than God’s Holy Word in their lives.

Will you choose the theories of man and science or a man who claims to have spent well over 40 solid days with God face to face? I suppose it takes faith to trust either theory. In my life time science has changed its evidence on things a number of times, yet God’s Word stays the same for several thousand years.

When you go to read about science and its theories ask yourself what the journey of the men writing about it is like. Most authors I have discovered who write about another way of looking at the beginning do not have a very strong spiritual background or anointing. However, the author of claims that I trust the most spent lots of FACE time with God himself unlike any human being since creation.

So whose inspirations and word’s should you trust? The men who spent little time with God, or abandoned God or spent no time with God or a man who spent Face to Face time with God and helped lead over 1 million people from bondage with a stick? Moses has the best testimony going and I am sticking with the testimony of the man of God who had face time.

Evolution: Does it Really Matter?

Over the past year I have spoken to a number of leaders and in conversation many times I have shared my belief in the God of creation who spoke it ( 6 days of creation) into existence in a literal 6 day period. Most leaders who truly love God say. " evolution or direct creation does not matter because God was behind it all anyway" On the surface this might sound non- threatening and acceptable, but in the long run we open up to ourselves and many people along with us multiple problems based on opening the door beyond what God says about the beginning. I propose that it really does matter. Once you break away from a literal 6 day creation as noted in Genesis you give the devil an open door to question so much more about the reliability of God's entire Word. Man has a tendency to want see things as it best fits his or her worldview, but as born again believers we must hold to what God says about history or we end up in deep trouble. Professor Karl Giberson of Eastern Nazarene College is an example of someone who once held a Biblical World view and exchanged it for a Scientific Worldview and who struggles to try to mix the two together. I believe you can read for yourself how confused Karl made his own life and the lives of others who accept his view when he veered off from what God says about creation.

I used to think that certainty mattered in life. Now I
don’t. I was a pretty normal Christian kid when I headed
off to college. I had been raised in a conservative evangelical
parsonage, and as a budding intellectual, I was into Christian
apologetics. It was important to me to be able to prove that
my faith was completely true.

I had various arguments at my disposal: fulfilled
prophecy showed that God must have written the Bible;
problems with evolution showed that creation was true; our
sense of morality demanded that there be both a moral law
and a lawgiver. Other world religions had serious theological
and ethical problems; and gays and secular humanists were
obviously following the devil.
All this combined to create a powerful conviction in
the deepest part of my soul that I could have 100 percent
confidence that my beliefs were right and that those with
different beliefs were wrong.
In my college years, this certainty evaporated. By
studying science, I learned that my belief in young-earth
creationism was about as credible as my earlier belief in
Santa Claus; I learned that the biblical texts were complex,
culturally conditioned, and even contradictory. From 180 by The House Studios.
page 84 under the chapter title "Giving Up On Certainty"

I find it interesting that someone who started studying science (man's discoveries and perceptions) confesses that his certainty in God Word evaporated. Science became Karl's new reliable source of faith and not God's entire Word as he has been raised.

Above is my comments about my background and perspective and below is another perspective with much more publicity with John MacArthur.

When John MacArthur appeared on Larry King Live to address the issue of same-sex marriage, San Francisco Mayor, Gavin Newsom scoffed at the concerns some have over the “slippery slope”—i.e., if you allow same-sex marriage, why not allow people to marry children or pets? (Click here to watch the video.)