Emergent founder Doug Pagitt is my guest at 4:00 pm ET TODAY. Stream it LIVE here.
Doug Pagitt is a self-described “social and theological entrepreneur,” the founder of Solomon’s Porch in Minneapolis, MN, a founder of Emergent Village, and owner of a wellness center and production company. His mission in life, according to his website, is “seeking to find creative, entrepreneurial, generative ways to join in the hopes, dreams and desires God has for the world.” He thinks twenty years is a long time, which isn’t surprising when you consider Pagitt has written whole books on why things that were written 2,000 years ago are “foolish” and “expired” in a contemporary context.
Doug is the author of A Christianity Worth Believing (Jossey-Bass 2008), Church Re-Imagined (Zondervan 2004), Preaching Re-Imagined (Zondervan 2005), and BodyPrayer (Waterbrook 2005). He is the co-editor of An Emergent Manifesto of Hope (Baker Books 2007). He has contributed to numerous books, including The Post-Evangelical (Zondervan 2003), Practioners (Regal 2006), and Listening To The Beliefs of the Emerging Church (Zondervan 2007).
Dr. John MacArthur says of Doug Pagitt:
“Pagitt is a Universalist…It’s most helpful to go back and kind of recast how we view these people. He’s not a pastor. He’s not a Christian. That’s not a church.”
Hear my full interview with Dr. John MacArthur on the emergent church: Part One, Part Two
RELATED LINKS:
Doug Pagitt’s Blog
Unfortunately, st/d, you see the past through Barbara Walters filters…
The racist church we were brought up moved three times to keep out of reach of the blacks and didn’t allow blacks to join until the late 1980’s. It certainly did bus people in but looked down on the “bus kids” with contempt, mostly glad they could pad their attendance numbers to keep up appearances and maybe, just maybe “win some souls” (though that is not at all what the passage in Proverbs means). Yes, they gave to missionaries in foreign lands and I had the opportunity to see first-hand the luxury in which these “servants of God” labored amid the squalor of the Third World around them in the Philippines, Korea, and Taiwan. Immorality was rampant from the youth all the way to the top, but such dirty little secrets were swept under the rug rather than dealt with. True discipleship was not and could not be fostered in such an environment; all they could achieve was conformity to their subculture norms (and they couldn’t even hold on to that for long).
I, too, am grateful for the good God worked in me in spite of that rich, white institution. But make no mistake – it was the work of God in my life (and perhaps yours), not the effectiveness of that institution.Praise be to God alone for His unspeakable gift.
Suffer a sinner whose heart overflows,
Loving his Savior to tell what he knows;
Once more to tell it would I embrace—
I’m only a sinner saved by grace!
Yes! ST what a beautiful testimony…I know the Holy Spirit stands behind it and is whispering: Well done/said, good and faithful servant…
Pixel,
“Tom, here is the question: Are you “emerging” into an emergent? Hmmmmm”
Ahhhhh, No =) Emerging Conservative is where I stand. Too much withint “Emergent” that I disagree with to set up camp there.
ST, this recent post was beautiful. Thank you.
b/BO
I suspect that we were raised in similar environments. But I come out with a entirely different remembrance than you do. It was in these very churches you describe I was taught that I, as a gentile, was gifted an opportunity to be a part of the vine. We called it being “grafted” in. The office and work of the Holy Spirit was highly emphasized and His work was part of the transpired miracle that took place in the soul of a redeemed saint. We called that “indwelling”. We also were trained that He kept us, “sealed” us unto the day of redemption, and lead us into the ways of righteousness. That he would convict the soul of sin, compelling that soul to “repent” of said sin and “turn from his wicked ways”. We were taught that His work was the very instrument by which our eyes were opened. I also recall numerous offerings taken for the less fortunate, services being held for the down trodden at a local rescue mission, love offerings being taken for needy non-churched family’s, thousands of dollars being spent on “bus kids”, millions of dollars (sacrificially given) being sent to proclaim the message in in foreign land, Christmas baskets being gathered and delivered to a home so as to brighten a holiday. I recall in home visits of the lost just because we desired to “share” our Christ and His marvelous love for the “world”. We were taught to walk “circumspectly” so as to show the difference Christ had made in our life. As you suggest there was a strong emphasis placed upon soul winning, and that “he that winneth souls was wise”. But it did not stop there, nor did it facilitate an instant decision. Quite to the contrary of your experience we were given example after example of those who tarried long in prayer and life style in hopes of making a difference in someone else’s life. And further were encouraged to teach and mentor those we had the opportunity to encounter. It took guts, determination, and a willing spirit of sacrifice in those days. These are a few of the memories I hold of those “harmful” teachers. Yes we were taught that the truth was to be found within the pages of this book we called the “holy bible” and that the Holy Spirit would guide us into all truth through this vehicle. We were further instructed that this vehicle was to be highly esteemed. I was never taught to “worship” this book, but to love it’s author, message, and it’s power. We referred to that as being “sharper than any two edged sword”. I have not arrived yet, and unlike Job’s pals, neither am I the sum of all knowledge, but I can attest to the gratefulness in my soul for the burden that others had for my lost condition and spake unto me the glorious gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. I thank all involved that my coarse was altered.
God for his plan and forgiveness, Christ for his shed blood, the Holy Spirit for his illumination, and my sinner brethren for their examples set, that this sinner was snatched from the fires of a Christ-less eternity. Please forgive me if I still love this book and continue to find my answers therein. It holds a dear place in my heart, it contained the solution to my dilemma.
Tom, here is the question: Are you “emerging” into an emergent? Hmmmmm
Hey pixel,
I am enjoying our conversations as well. One correction though….call me emerging all you like but please, please, please…..don’t call me Emergent =) It’s like finger nails on the old chalkboard.
Nancy,
“Doubt of the Word was one of the first weapons Satan used to bring about the break in our relationship…did God really say…”
What does that mean, strict literal interpetation(6 day creationism, 6000 years ago, etc), moderate interpetation(Old earth,etc), or liberal interpetation(many metaphors for the ultimate truth)? or one of the many flavors in between? It’s these types of proclamations that Jesus basically said, you that law that the pharisees think they are so good at keeping? Yeah I say love the Lord God with all your heart, soul…..and love your nieghbor as yourself.
Does questioning issues that one finds in scripture make a person open to Satan’s attacks? Does God not encourage us to be seekers of truth? When I hear people say that sort of thing, I think it is fear of asking really critical questions. The more one understands how power is wealded, it starts to make sense why the church would put forth those claims.
I hold scripture as very authoritative for my life, I cannot with honesty say it is “innerrent” as one can go to scripture and find errors. by definition inerrency is not acheivable at that point.
“That is SO much like the Pharisees of old, and only a few of them made it into the kingdom because they couldn’t allow for such a thing. It’s a narrow gate that leads to this life, and few there be that find it.”
Bo,
I am with you on this, I look at modern fundementalism and it is a mirror image of the pharisees. It is so nice to have fellow emergent(although I don’t know if I completely fall in that catagory) like Bo and tsfgodguy.
Pixel, I am humbled that you spent time on the blog and I am not surprised you resonate with the words you quoted that you placed above. I hope to have more talks.
As far as how I came across this post, good question. I surf alot on Emergent/ Conservative topics and probaly found it through a tag search.
Bo, As a person who blogs with people a decent amount, I find that often there are misunderstandings and it appears people try to put words in your mouth. What we loss with writting is being able to relate face to face and there are often misunderstandings. It often takes three or four times back and forth to give a full understanding of your heart. I don’t know if that is the case here or not but just thought I’d throw it out.
However, to pick up on your last point….I think there is an elemnet of truth to your point that Emergents are calling out to the church to come back to some areas we are missing. The concern I have is they almost have rubberband snapped back to another far extreme that is just as scary. The gate is narrow and I don’t think ultra emergents are any more the answer than the ultra conservatives.
That said, I would agree that calling someone a “crackpit” is the start to any healthy scommunication.
Bo…I think I might have worded the ‘Doubt of the Word ‘ comment a bit better so you would better understand what I meant…I realize you have a good background in the Word of God…and it is not the Word that you take issue with. However, the Emergent position on the Word can be very confusing for someone who does not have that background and. Especially when the actual meaning is called into question. Even true believers can be caught up in this. You definitely have a different view point than a new believer who has no basis in the Word of God.
I am not KJV only however I do believe we need to keep a good watch on the “new” translations or rewordings so we don’t end up with an end product similar to the whisper game played by children. This is what many fundamentalists are so militant about and rightly so.
While I do have a Calvinist word view…I do not wear a BDU skirt…*: )…my hair is long and I don’t ‘usually’ wear make-up…not because I am under fundamental mind control…I just don’t like it!
Questioning the answers is not fundamentally wrong…it is in fact healthy…moving the ancient boundary stones…now that’s where you can get in to trouble…there is a reason this in mentioned in scripture.
I certainly don’t want you or Pixel to think I am trying to attack you…I am very confident of my stand and have had a LOT of years and background with many view points…I have always questioned the answers…Jesus has always answered the questions…wisdom and understanding are highly elevated in the Word of God…go for that, but be careful not to move the foundation stones.
Pixel…I can’t pass this one up:
…a convenient method for clergy to keep the laypeople in check…
It ain’t working in this age of http://www…they better get another plan…*: ) Gores’ environmental views and inventions have really become problematic…*: )
Bo, Scott McKnight on next broadcast, 4:00pm, how did you pull that off? I will be listening…..
“Why We’re Not Emergent by Two Guys Who Should Be” looks like a good read.
Nancy,
Once again someone is putting words in my mouth and then deriding it. You know I never said that. It’s a common tactic used by others, but I didn’t expect it out of you because usually you try to be more gracious than that.
That said, while “kingdom living” is clearly as old as the words of Jesus, this is not what the fundamentalist, dispensationalist, and reformed camps that I grew up with focused on; instead it was all about getting people into heaven when they die with lip service to the teachings of Jesus and worship of the writings of his late apostle Paul.
There was no connecting the kingdom of God with the OT promises, nor the notion of the NT church being a JEWISH thing that the Gentiles were invited into. And that’s what I hear echoed on this blog site by many, so in that sense “kingdom living” is quite new here.
And when we include Jesus’ very first message (based on Isaiah 61) as the starting point, folks start running and bad-mouthing because he was about social and political justice (no, not the social gospel), freedom (not license), and healing (physically, emotionally, etc).
Lip-service to the everyday work of the Holy Spirit, to the teachings of Jesus, and to the over-arching master plan of God… these are things I see that frustrate me enough to reply, but I’m trying dang hard to do it in the love of Christ, full of grace, seasoned with salt.
And while the Emergents may not have invented it, they are calling the attention of the church BACK to it for the good of the church and the good of the world. I’m grateful for that, so even if I don’t label myself as emergent I am sympathetic with what they are trying to do and resent people falsely accusing brothers and calling them “crackpots” because they don’t really understand and don’t want to. That is SO much like the Pharisees of old, and only a few of them made it into the kingdom because they couldn’t allow for such a thing. It’s a narrow gate that leads to this life, and few there be that find it. 🙁
Tom, I love this comment on your blog
“Sometimes, within ministry, it seems there are only two options…..to be a believer of the Scripture and be seen as being self righteous, judgmental, and hyprocritical or believe you have to water down the Bible to being loving, merciful, and full of grace. Well, I fall in the middle of all that…I am an emerging conservative. I am in love with the community and relational spirituality as seen in the Bible and the ministry of Jesus Christ and believe we can have it here today! Join in on the conversation, won’t you?”
You are so right and I think this goes to the concept of dualism, which so many us fall into. Right v Wrong, Right v Left, Republican v Democrat, Biblically sound v watered down. I think I fall in the middle, in that I can’t stand the judgementalism that comes from being a fundementalist, yet I am not going to go to the far left and give up on biblical truth. I think that my new position puts people on a higher plane than many who adhere to the doctrine of total depravity. I do think that we can’t measure up to God and his glory but I question whether god put us here to beat up on ourselves or if that doctrine is a convenient method for clergy to keep the laypeople in check. There are many other questions that I have along these lines. The freedom to ask them without the fear of lightning striking is refreshing.
BTW Tom, being from Ohio, how did you find this blog?
Tom,
I do have a blog but it is very stale, I have been consumed with other stuff and I actually prefer to comment on other people’s blogs. I visited your site last night, I will take more time later and post some comments from time to time.
That quote is interesting, and it reminds me of the statment that I mentioned earlier of McArthur’s ad. He said “we need to develop a relationship with God’s Word.” What about a relationship with Christ? I respect the Bible but I don’t hold it up as an idle like many fundamentalist seem to do.
Bo,
Just some wisdom…the Emergents did NOT invent Kingdom Living nor it’s principles…just read the Bible and do it!…*: ) It’s not new and it’s what the Christian community has always been about. However, I would submit that relationship with the Father was what Jesus came to restore. Doubt of the Word was one of the first weapons Satan used to bring about the break in our relationship…did God really say…
Pixelmaster,
Do you have your own blog? I’d like to read some if I can. If you get bored, mines http://www.tomhypes.com. It just seems like a simular path. It’s amazing how I am sometimes accused at being too liberal and other circles I’m the token conservative. Not because I waver on my convictions but it just depends on the audience.
Here’s a quote from the book I recommened above that resonates with me…..
“For every fundamentalist who loves the Bible more than Christ, I’m willing to bet there is one emergent Christian who honors the Bible less than Christ did” from “Why We’re Not Emergent by Two Guys Who Should Be”
Pixel…I can answer two of your questions without even looking…Yes Jesus is far more merciful than any of his followers and Yes God is bigger than ANY theology; bigger and more merciful that any of us can understand. Even so, without His Living Word and the Holy Spirit to guide us…we could easily degenerate into thinking God is a baked potato and we are all french fries. Our understanding has to be tied to His Word… Undiluted and unchanged.
tsfgodguy,
I agree, it does sound like we are in the same boat. i also agree that the emergent have fallen prey too much to post modernism. I think post modernism has some value but not completely. I also agree that McLaren asks a lot of thought provoking questions, many that I have had in the past but never found the courage to openly express. Much of the modern church with it’s marketing mentality and it’s tie to the right wing political system has made me mad to the point of rage. The emergents, not all, give me an outlet to vent and still hold on to a faith that I hold precious. I have been viewed on the blog as leftists, I don’t think I am because I hold the positions of the right wing on social issues, much like Tony Camplo does but I think the answers are unworkable, illogical and unchristian.
Hey Pixelmaster,
It sounds like we might have some in common. One thing I will say about McClarion is he’s great at asking questions but not the best of offering up many possible answers. One thing I have found in Emergent is they are great at deconstructing things (which does have some benfit to it) but usually stop there. It gets water down, there is hardly anything left, and then nothing is constructed.
I think the Bible can handle the tough questions, the emotional challanges, the strain of doubt and search. I call myself (if we all most have terms) an Emerging Conservative because I agree with Emergent on that basic principle. However, unlike them, I see no reason to go to the other far extreme of not having any certainity. Many of thier views on the Bible are pretty disappointing to me.
In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
I like the notes to that podcast, “if you like to nail jello to a wall listen to this”.
I used to be in your camp on the conservative side of the issues, I used to think that being “biblically based” was the correct way, the christian way. Until I stated to read some of the emergent material, McLaren is a very good writer and makes a lot of great points, I have never read Pagitt. They allow themselves to actually ask the real tough questions. I have wondered this for many years, is it possible that Jesus is more merciful than his followers? I know it makes us feel better to have all the answers in a nice little package. Is it possible that a buddists who “loves his neightbor as himself and loves the lord God with all his heart(as he knows God)” gets in to heaven over a ‘born again” preacher who makes a living from critsizing(and lying in the process) everyone outside of his tiny version of a large faith community? Is God bigger than a “born again” theology? I stick to my understanding of how I know God but I would love it to know that God is bigger and more merciful that my current understanding of him is……To many, to even ask these questions shows heredical leanings, I say to that, God gave me a mind to ask critical questions, I am going to ask them with a heart of humility, a love for God and neighbor…..
Bo,
I listened to Way of the Master interview, Pagitt is a crackpot. You can have your emergents. Just more liberalism, or even cultism. He is weird.
http://www.wayofthemasterradio.com/podcast/2007/10/22/october-22-2007-hour-1/
You have fun, I wish you well. I am not going there.
I concur with b/Bo, McArthur’s BOLD proclaimations are not from confidence they are from arrogance, he would not have to build straw men to make his case it is were based on confidence. People liek McArthur count on many of their followers not validating their claims, and many don’t. Just like the pharisee’s they were so confident in what took place with the giving of the law to Moses, they knew the Word, they did all the right actions, they were confident. Jesus came along and showed them the humble way to truth. If Jesus were here today he would look at the McArthurites and rebuke their overconfidence in “knowing” God.
BTW, tsfgodguy, I agree that display by Pagitt backstage was shameful, he should have shown more grace towards McArthur.
Ed, that’s not confidence, it’s arrogance. I used to get the two confused, too.
There is no way that MacArthur can know it all, and I am sure he will admit that. But he can boldly proclaim what can be know with confidence. He stands firm on what can be firmly understood from scripture much better than Pagitt, and I agree with MacArthur’s assertion that Pagitt is a Universalist.
Wow, between Pagitt or MacArthur…..where does that leave me? I don’t find either one very appealing. MacArthur often lumps everyone into one boat to condem it without really exploring into the complexities of any situation. Paggit uses the appreance of humility to try to cover up his lack of any real theological foundation. I think I’ll be happy to find Christ’s heart somewhere between the two of these.
I did find it interesting last year when I saw these two men being interviewed together on the topic of yoga on one of the news channels. MacArthur says it’s inviting demons in and Paggitt says what’s the harm if it makes people feel better. At the end of it, I noted that while I often disagree with Pagitt, he did come off more humble and loving than MacArthur. That was of course until I went to Pagitt’s blog and he had posted a recording he had with the segment producer after the cameras went off. He admitted she had no idea she was being recorded on his little recorder (which is a bad show in itself). However, the most disturbing was Pagitt ripping on MacArthur with her. Then Pagitt chooses to air it on his blog because it’s revealing and funny? That’s not humility….it’s one face for the camera and another on his blog.
I lost a lot of respect for McArthur when I started to understand what a strawman argument was. McArthur uses strawmen all the time, for a christian proclaiming “truth” it is shameful. Besides I think he has his priorities wrong. I listen to his commercial on WLQV and I hear him proclaim having a relationship with “God’s” word. I thought this was about Christ and not about how rigged we can be about the Bible. Of course he critisize anyone who doesn’t agree with “his” understanding of the “word” and of course he “boldly” proclaims it like the arrogant person he tries to claim he is not. McArthur and his crowd from worldview weekend critisize everything that anyone else says about God, Why? they phariseeically(not really a word) have him all figured out because they put him in the tiny box of scripture. At least Pagitt is honest in his approach to God and admits we can’t know and will never know everything therefore humilty and grace is needed in critical discussions.
“I am a good Muslim, where happens to my soul when I die?”
Pagitt couldn’t even answer this question! Pagitt is a Universalist!!!!
Doug has to earn the right to present his metaphors to me and he is failing the first test!
I enjoy Biblical Exegesis, commentary, etc. Many of the commentators present metaphors to enhance my understanding, but they have to be theologically correct first!! Doug flunks out on theology.
Sorry folks, I will stick with MacArthur.
Thank you ED…yours is a more specific example to the point I was making…and without question, I think we all know who the author of confusion is. Even true Christians can get caught up in confusion…but, our Sovereign God always brings us back on track…*: ) His grace IS truly irresistible!
fresh perspectives equal heresy when it comes to God because everybody has God all figured out, since he is 100% revealed in the Bible. Even though we have 1400 denominations reading from the same bible it is completely clear as to the things of God. after all many of those other folks have it wrong because the way I read it is right and they are wrong.
I advocate what Jesus did, humility when it comes to the things of God and not the approach of the pharaseeical approach of having God all wrapped up in a nice package with a bow on top. I am sure they did see the plank in their eyes when they we pointing out the splinter in others.
Ed,
You would have done better to actually read all of the above; then perhaps you wouldn’t have wrongly accused me of saying we needed to re-write the Bible. I’ll give you a break, though – I really have been in your shoes (other than the former-Catholic bit) and I know how confusing and annoying it can be to hear a different perspective when it’s the last thing in the world you want to hear. I mean, if a new perspective has any truth to it, then you have to re-think everything in light of it if you’re going to “test everything and hold on to what is good”. That’s a LOT of work that few are willing to do.
Bo,
A quick point here, I didn’t read all the above….
I am so glad you were not around to tell me I needed all this re-writing of the Bible when my local Baptist pastor with his KJV Bible was so glad to disciple me. I was saved out of a Catholic home, was very ignorant of the Bible, and I am glad you were not around to add to my confusion.
Did I need Pagitt to tell me the KJV was old, archaic, and so hard to understand that I would never learn anything spiritual? I say NO!! And I am glad there was no one telling me that!!
We don’t need Pagitt, we need discipling by those who have been there before us. I can attend churches that preach from the KJV, or the NIV, and still worship and be edified. I don’t need Pagitt mudding the waters.
Only God can open the eyes of the unsaved to understand truth, I don’t think Pagitt is making it any easier.
Ed
I have not heard the podcast yet but look forward to it. This said, I am uneducated on this so I will remain mute.
However, as someone who has studied the Emergent movement for quite sometime, someone who spent a week with many of their top speakers (including Doug) at the Emergent Summer Institute a few years back (at Doug’s church), and as someone who has sat and talked with Doug one one one, I will say the following…
Doug’s a heck of a nice guy
I would not go as far as saying Doug is not a Christian.
I will say there is much within Emergent that is Universalism including those saying you do not have to accept Jesus as Leader and Fogiver in your life but that Jesus will save all in the end no matter what your choices here. (Again this would be select voices since there is no set theological statement)
There is a purposeful misunderstanding between what is Emergent and what is the emerging church.
I highly warn people away from Emergent.
I have blogged about my experiences and concerns within Emergent within the context of my visit there on my site if you care, http://www.tomhypes.com . However, I think that is the most I will put here for now.
I will say this, there was one book recommendation above. Please let me leave another. The book is called “Why We’re Not Emergent by Two Guys Who Should Be”. Wonderful indepth and fair study of many of the leading voices of the emerging church movement.
Enough said for now…Blessings!
st,
“…the sum of all error…” ? I clearly didn’t suggest that regarding KJV-ers, though I did say it’s a harmful position (partly because it’s wrong, and partly because of the spirit in which it is defended). I’ve been guilty on both counts in the past.
I don’t doubt God’s ability to keep accurate records and I don’t see where you could infer that from my post. All I said was that Timothy pretty much only had the OT, that he didn’t have the book (really, a scroll) that you referred to in Revelation, and that the scroll in question might be the Book of Life, but who really knows and what does it matter if we know or not anyway?
Anyway, it’s like wasting time arguing about how old the earth is or which eschatological position is correct – per Nancy’s quote “…I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit—fruit that will last…”, not to get into arguments over words (see Paul’s epistle to Timothy about that). “By this shall all men know you are my disciples: by your reformed theological position that will be formulated about 1500 years from now…” 😉
I also have something in common with Jesus. We have the same Father.
The point to be made on the “book” is this; He keeps records and has written down that which He choses.
I’m not what you define as a “KJV-er”. But if that is the sum of all error you may feel free to count me with that number. At least those folks believe that God is all powerful enough to keep a accurate record. What a deviant position.
st (and others),
“What would you suggest be preached in order to please God?”
I suggest the gospel of the kingdom that Jesus proclaimed (not the “you’re a sinner, admit it, pray this prayer, and you get to go to heaven when you die” stuff). It’s good news for both now AND eternity. Nancy, I LOVE the gospel and I LOVE Jesus and what He accomplished on the cross; but the real GOOD news is BIGGER than merely paying for my sins, and different aspects of the atonement are able to meet individuals where they need God most.
“Whatever this book is, it is important enough to be in God’s right hand. Care to speculate? Reckon Timothy had this one at his disposal?”
I would speculate that Timothy did not have this book at his disposal, and that this book is not the 66 books of the Bible as we know it today. Perhaps it’s the Book of Life.
“BTW, what is a KJV-er, anyway? Sounds evil.”
King James Version only, as though God inspired the translators. Perhaps it’s evil; it’s definitely harmful.
Greg/Nancy, from what I’ve read of the Emergents, Emerging, and Missional types, I do not see a universalism at work at all; I think that is a straw man propped up because people don’t understand what they’re really saying; cultural conditioning can leave you seeing but not able to perceive. They don’t fit into the reformed/evangelical mold, true. But they’re talking about a larger reality that I find tries to take in more the whole scope of scripture and to do it fairly in the context the original audiences understood and adapted to our current audiences.
For example, if the “Holy Spirit as a goose” metaphor helps people in Minnesota understand better than a dove, so be it; just because that metaphor isn’t used by the writers of scripture doesn’t mean it isn’t valid. But I’ve learned that I’m unable to help people that are “metaphor-impaired” understand that kind of thinking. Jesus had the same problem: “The kingdom of God is LIKE…”
b/Bo,
Welcome to this blog, and appreicate your perspectives, sounds like you are a christian in every sense but don’t but into fundamentalism as it is sold to the modern believer.
Does theology determine truth? or Truth determine theology? I think the modern church exercises the former and those who challenge these paradigms try to adhere to the latter.
….. “Timothy probably hadn’t even seen much of what we call the New Testament yet.”
So what, does that negate it from being truth?
….”And sure “Thy word is truth”, but in John 14:6 Jesus says that HE is THE TRUTH; knowing Him personally is to know THE TRUTH”
“But I understand now that there are many ways God reveals himself to us, scripture being just one of them.”
Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. (also)…
…it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
What would you suggest be preached in order to please God?
….”The “doctrines” are the interpreted applications made up by MEN over the years”……..
….” Please, please, please read Scot McKnight’s “A Community Called Atonement” – “…. “to quote the prolific Bill Mallonee “Reason -”
I get it now.
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2The same was in the beginning with God.
3All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made…..
14And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals.
Whatever this book is, it is important enough to be in God’s right hand.
Care to speculate?
Reckon Timothy had this one at his disposal?
BTW, what is a KJV-er, anyway? Sounds evil.
As I have listened to what Bo has been saying, a sadness has been in my heart…and I have been praying about just what is the core reason for this sadness…I have no doubt that Bo has a genuine relationship with Jesus and that has put him in relationship with the Father, which is the whole point of Jesus’ sacrifice…However, even though Satan was ineffectual in keeping Bo from being saved… believing “lies” or false doctrine can in fact make Bo ineffectual in the great commission…This is very sad for those whose lives he comes in contact with, for they are not hearing a clear call…as well as for Bo himself…for he has a great love for Jesus truly desiring to reach others with the Gospel.
Bo this is for you…
You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit—fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. John 15:16 (NIV)
And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast.1 Peter 5:10 (NIV)
b/Bo
I do agree that the realm of reason alone is where Satan hangs out. I also understand the problems of the KJV only guys. I also understand that I will never convince anyone of anything by my own intellect (small as it may be!), but I do know the power of the Holy Spirit working in the lives of people who have been convinced of their violation of God’s law. The Bible has been attacked over the centuries and has withstood attacks from all directions and has remained virtually unchanged throughout history. Why do you think that the Bible has been the target of these attacks for so many centuries? Because, if it can be proved unreliable in one point, it can be disgraced in all points. This is what truly concerns be about the Emergents.
Please understand. I am a filthy no-good rotten sinner who God has redeemed by His power and through no good deeds of my own. I think that Dottie Rambo put it best when she said, “I boast not of works nor tell of good deeds, for naught have I done to merit His grace.” Tat Gd would even CONSIDER saving a total wretch like me is more wonderful that for which I have words. I have no desire just to pick a fight with those who disagree with me just for a fight’s sake, but there has to be a standard for which to fight. God has revealed His truth through the Scriptures, saved us “… by grace, through faith, and that (faith) not of yourselves it (faith) is a gift of God, not of works lest any man can boast,” by the sacrifice of Christ Himself on the cross and all for the ultimate Glory of the Almighty God who is the only one who is worthy of ANY praise.
What tears up my heart more than anything is that the man-centered “gospel” that Doug Padgitt, Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, Greg Boyd and so many of the other emergent church leaders preach is giving so many people a false sense of hope. Our only hope is in Christ. Isaiah tells us that all of our righteousness is as filthy rags. Imagine what our sin is to Him! If God is truly God, He MUST be just. In order to be just, He MUST punish law breakers.
To illustrate, consider the following analogy. If we lie to our dog, who really cares. He doesn’t understand us anyway. Every time I come home, my dog thinks it’s AMAZING! “How in the world does he accomplish that?!” If we lie to our spouse, we sleep on the couch (and rightfully so!) If we lie in court, it’s called perjury and end up in jail. If we lie to the government, it’s called treason and is punishable by death. Now what’s the difference? All of these actions are lies. The only difference is the level of authority of the one to which we have lied, therefore, the punishment is more severe the higher the authority.
Since God is more just than the most just human judge, he MUST punish the law breakers. Therefore, there has to be severe consequences for our law breaking. This is why Jesus preached on Hell more than Heaven. By denying a literal Hell, the Emergent denies the greatest attribute of God, His just holiness.
Finally (it’s about time!) if God is going to justify all of us in the end anyway, what is the point of going to church, or temple, or even porch for that matter. That God is not just, and any God who is not just, is not worthy of ANYTHING, much less any praise from my lips.
I am praying for Doug Padgitt, Brian McLaren, and the rest of the Emergent leaders as well as the many who are following their heretical teaching. And most of all, I am praying for all who read this thread that God will touch their heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh. Thank you b/Bo for reminding us of that marvelous transformation. Take care.
st,
Don’t forget 2 Timothy 3:14-15: context is everything, while proof-texting often ignores it. The scriptures Paul referred to was the OLD testament (“from a child…”). Timothy probably hadn’t even seen much of what we call the New Testament yet.
And sure “Thy word is truth”, but in John 14:6 Jesus says that HE is THE TRUTH; knowing Him personally is to know THE TRUTH. He is the LIVING WORD who makes us alive spiritually, gives us a new heart (and dumps the old stony one) so that we can receive His word in our HEARTS (not our heads/minds – that’s the enemy’s realm that must be transformed by renewal while our hearts are simply transplanted). If you need scripture references for those, I’ll be happy to provide them, but you certainly should be able to infer them. In the meantime, doesn’t it “ring true” in your heart? (1 John 3:19-22). There’s a deeper, more intimate “knowing” than head-based logic – to quote the prolific Bill Mallonee “Reason – she’s still the devil’s whore”.
2 Timothy 3:16
John 17:17
I understand the desire to have a single, objective, authoritative document that you can refer to as the standard. I grew up with it. I was even a KJV-er for a long time. But I understand now that there are many ways God reveals himself to us, scripture being just one of them.
The early church only had the Hebrew scriptures, yet they were SUFFICIENT. As post-Christ writings were published and God’s people agreed together which ones seemed to be “authoritative”, there were more sources upon which to build. However, those new sources were decided by MEN and the tradition of which ones seemed to have “life” in them (i.e. inspired) was passed along to us. You can’t get the cart before the horse on this – what the early church had was SUFFICIENT for their lives.
Just as clarifying laws and applications were added to the 10 commandments, so Paul’s writings provide clarification for new situations that were a result of the church no longer just being comprised of Jews, but Gentiles also. The Holy Spirit did as promised, guiding Paul “into all truth” that he needed to convey, just as the Holy Spirit faithfully does that now.
Rejecting “difficult doctrines plainly stated in the Bible because we don’t…fully understand them” is an oxymoron. The “doctrines” are the interpreted applications made up by MEN over the years as a way of trying to articulate what they believe scripture to teach. A doctrinal statement is NOT scripture, it is merely a man-made device that may or may not accurately represent what God really meant. And these doctrines are always subjective based on presuppositions such as the appropriate metaphor to use in interpreting scripture.
Certainly one metaphor is the vicarious, penal, substitutionary atonement, and I don’t think Pagitt denies that. However, he would argue that there are a number of other metaphors that describe a larger (and perhaps better) picture of what the atonement has done for us. It’s like describing an elephant from different angles – your focus and mine may be different, but it doesn’t mean either of us is wrong; we just lack one or more perspectives.
I’m sure I’ll get the usual folks who slam me for saying such things – go for it guys. But hopefully SOMEONE will at least see the sensibility in this and take the initiative to pursue the truth with honesty and humility and a willingness to actually learn something other than what has been parroted to them by MEN.
b/Bo,
I was refering to Doug’s Way of The Master interview last fall. I wrote those comments before I had a chance to hear this interview on the podcast. Doug did answer the questions in this interview and I was sorry that he had to leave so quickly because there just wasn’t enough time to delve into what he believes.
You mentioned that it was a difference in metaphors which may be partially true. As you said, God’s reality is bigger than a single metaphor, however, it is not metaphors that define the faith. Metaphors can never fully explain theological principles, nor are they meant to do so. What needs to be done is to state plainly the doctrines already established in Scripture.
The most disturbing quote from this interview was when Doug said that he “…hopes that we would never say that our authority is a book because we a people of a living God.” The problem with this statement is that if there is no objective standard outside of ourselves by which to discern all things, who is to say whether anything a person says is of God or not. We cannot just pick and choose the doctrines we like and reject the difficult doctrines plainly stated in the Bible simply because we don’t like or fully understand them. At that point we put ourselves in the place of God, which is a clear violation of Exodus 20:3.
Finally, The Pharisees were not interested in doing anything with Jesus’ teaching because their hearts were evil and all they were attempting to do was trip Him up on His own words. What happened was Jesus purposely used those metaphors and that resulted in tripping THEM up on their own words. He certainly blew open their pigeon-holes!
Nancy, Ed, & Greg,
I totally beg to differ – I thought the Pagitt interview was great in that he answered every single question directly, honestly, and clearly. Whether or not you are able to understand and/or embrace what he was saying is a different question. It’s about understandable METAPHORS – if you don’t get that, then you totally miss the whole thing and misjudge him. God’s REALITY is far bigger than a single metaphor to describe what he has done for us and for the world.
Please, please, please read Scot McKnight’s “A Community Called Atonement” – it will help you understand that there are MANY valid metaphors, each which describes an aspect of our faith.
Just because it doesn’t fit into your existing pigeon-holes doesn’t mean it’s wrong; the Pharisees didn’t know what to do with Jesus’ teachings and ended up missing it because they didn’t understand his… METAPHORS.
Hey Paul,
I listened to the Doug Padgitt interview from Way Of THe Master last October. He would never answer any question directly and I believe that the next company he starts should be “Straw-Men ‘R Us!” Looking forward to the podcast to see if he ACTUALLY ANSWERS your questions. Talk to you soon, my friend!
Greg
Just liberalism repacked, no better than Hybels. Thank God for those sticking to God’s word only, Sola Scripture Paul!!!!!
I agree with your sentiments Paul, why does this guy even bother to pretend he is a christian! I really think he has a problem with his own philosophy…His interviews sound like he doesn’t even know what he actually believes or he is afraid he will be outed with the next question. Kind of like he just makes it up as he goes along.