Shocking! Thanks for sharing, I know people who are buying into Brian Mclarens teachings and I'm seeing old Christian values being thrown away. In my opinion, Mclaren is teaching heresy and it needs to be challenged. YouTube search Brian Mclaren and most videos are about him rather than videos like this who teach to correct the herecies. Signs of the end times for sure!
Now I know why the Holy Spirit told me not to go to any bible college or seminary.
McClaren is not a christian. end of story.
But let us not congratulate ourselves for our orthodoxy. if it were genuine and bore real fruit would these people have any reason to reject what we say we stand for but which by our fuit we do not believe. Someone said the cults and isms were the unpaid bills of the church, ie we are responsible for them spawning. so also with this emergent nonsense. let us repent 1st
i cant believe that so many christians are so insecure and afraid they might not have everything figured out that they take people like rob bell, shane claiborne, donald miller, or mclaren completely out of context. any serious scholar of the bible and its culture would agree with brian mclaren on this idea of the kingdom of God. come on man, do your research.
Just so those of us who believe in a literal hell are thought to be all but genuine in our investigation, here is a quote from from his own website on the subject of Hell. In response to a question on his belief of hell - "On hell - You're right that I don't follow the conventional teaching on hell as eternal conscious torment for all nonChristians. But that doesn't mean that I don't believe the Bible: it means that I don't believe many of us have rightly interpreted the Bible on this subject."
@Wunji1 The quote from Mclaren makes a valid point, Is it not possible that we, as sinful human beings, can misinterpret the Bible? Wasn't the Bible used to defend the institution of slavery and the crusades? Additionally, there are wide ranging differences of interpretation in denominations today on significant theological issues. Who is right? More importantly, who determines who is right?
@Jpj1918 Hee is the problem with this. Egalatarian Ecclesiology.It is fairly funny to look at others who were probably wrong and that doctrine there is about communism-several hundred millions of people were enslaved and then slaughtered by communists. The ideal that someone mis uses the bible means we do not any longer use the bible? Or is it the Pantheism that says we are all God? Help me out with this.
@daveme7 Would be glad to help you out Dave! I didn't state or even imply that we should no longer use the bible. Instead, I posed a question that you did not answer. Is it possible that we can mis-interpret scripture (in the light of the atrocities that have been committed using Scripture as justification)? If it is possible, who determines who is "right" about different interpretations? We are human beings who get things wrong and screw up.
Sheeple like Jpl1918 ought to simply move next door to the likes of Brian M. It may benefit you in some way to allow such to comfort you now while you live on this earth. Maybe, just maybe, God will allow you both to rot next to each other in hell so that he may further comfort you. Oh wait! If you believe what Brian M. teaches, that the hell we have understood from scripture has been wrongly interpreted for thousands of years, you would then obviously have nothing to worry about...
@Wunji1 Very impressed that you are able to be the judge and jury as to who has a correct belief system and who doesn't! Even more impressed that you are able to to condemn me to hell over the internet. Exactly why the church is in the state that it is in today!
Brian McLaren is teaching theosophy in its basic new age form- its the central occultic view of man becoming the god vehicle for change- this is so dangerous as is Warren- if you love Jesus then do not touch this unclean thing and come out of any church that teaches this blasphemy
I find it interesting that no one writing in support of McLaren being allowed to speak on campus, denies that he was speaking in a mandatory Chapel service. Read from McLarens published books. His beliefs and quoted text are parallel to what Eric Barger says in this video. To say that McLaren did not promote what was eluded to in the video is saying that he spoke on a subject outside of his core beliefs.
I would encourage people to investigate what you are saying.
Much of what you say is taken out of context and misinterpreted. For example, your comment regarding p. 61 in Mclaren's book "A New Kind of Christian" about being good rather than being right..
Later on p. 61, "I'm not in any way saying truth isn't important. But I am saying that truth means more than factual accuracy. It means being in sync with God".
In turn, I would hope that people would investigate anyone who could read McLaren's book and then defend his ideas as orthodox!
Picking out the p.61 comment to dissect and ignoring the mountain of biblical and historical evidence standing against Emergent teaching and practice is akin to taking a drop of water from a lake and claiming you drained it.
@ebart32 I would be glad to address some of your other comments in this video and start draining the lake drop by drop.
You claim, " I heard Brian Mclaren claim that the term Kingdom of God was not a spiritual term but rather a political term"
My Reply: Jesus was a Jew. Jewish people were under Roman oppression. The head of the Roman empire or Kingdom was Caesar. How would the original hearers of Jesus' message interpret His statements about the Kingdom of God? In a political way?
@Jpj1918 Hegelian Dialectics(incarnational) which basically teaches pantheism as everything is in God and God is in everything based not on the bible but the philosophy of man in teaching a pure immanence as opposed to Transcendance of Plato which the bible does not exclusively teach one or the other-but sounds like this so we will believe this.
@Jpj1918 In fract, hypocrisy is rampant as they will take every philosophy from modernism and call it postmodernism. Find out why postmodern emergents do not believe in a six day creation as this is the same ideal taiught in modern rationalsim. I think consistancy is the hall mark of truth and do not see it from any emergent authors-they have some good critiques at times but very bad anti-scriptural solutions
@daveme7 This could be one of the most confusing replies I have ever read. None of what you said comes close to addressing any of my points in previous posts. If one actually reads Mclaren instead of watching videos on you-tube about what his beliefs are, then you will see that much of what is being said by Mr. Barger is snippets of Mclaren's writing and speaking that portray him in a way that is not truthful.
@Jpj1918 I have read several nof his books and the best one was with Campolo-they both hit on really good observations of American Christianity-it is not the critiques but the solutions they propose.
First-why do they fairly-including McLaren make statements about fundamentalism and never give names of sermons, books, or actual fundamentalists who fit what they describe as a quality of Christian Fundamentalism?
@Jpj1918 Last I checked, for instance, John MacArthur-a professd Fundamentalist-does he have poofy hair, hocking his wares for people to send money so he could pray over a mustard seed and send this to you promising a tenfold return on your investment? As this is more about Pentacostalism which he not only preaches against but also wrote a book against it.
@Jpj1918 On the other hand, have recieved several books in the mail and preaching CD's for no cost to me-does this sound like what McLaren is describing? Or maybe Sproul? Paul Washer? How about AW Tozer and Pink as professed fundamentalists? John R Rice? John MacArthur's father-Jack MacArthur who was on ther radio many years til his passing? The point being-quite a few Fundamentalists would amen this point until ascribed to them as this most times do not happen.
@daveme7 Don't even know where to start. First, regarding "fundamentalists", Mclaren includes extensive footnotes in all his books if you are looking for resources for further investigation of what he is saying. Additionally, you are missing the point of much of what Mclaren says by focusing on such an insignificant issue.
@Jpj1918 Like lying and saying fundamentalists are this or that and never share any names so we can actually verify what he is speaking about? He never referances anyone by name unless it is someone he agrees with. It is called lying about those you cannot stand and for all the stuff he criticizes-seems he never names names. Telling lies is a bad thing-oh wait-McLaren does not believe the bible teac hes truth either so i guess it is okay to violate the cpommands in the bible on lying.
@Jpj1918 How about J Vernon McGhee? One of the first fundamentalists has gon on the radio airwaves as a Presybeterian who also by the way also wrote a book on the Transcendance of God-i think Meachem was his name and is more known for his text on Koine Greek still used today. This goes to the Heart of Hegelian dialectics which ends up pushing for the immanence of God as God is in all and all is in God where Transcendance saw a seperation between the holy and profane
@Jpj1918@Jpj1918 Of course as modernism taught this thus why meachem wrote this book(or someone transcribed his audio messages on this and printed it in a book)-the whole point is modernism taught a very similar ideal known as the spark of divinity in man and basically must rescue them from evil capitalists-sound a bit familiar yet? The point being modenism taught the brotherhood of man and the fatherhood of God
@Jpj1918 So when Rob Bell teaches everything is sacred and McLaren teaching that when John 3:16 and the great commission was uttered by Christ-For God so loved the world and preach the gospel to every creature-this is not hiumanity but the earth and animals needing saving from evil Capitalists. I apologize, sometimes not even those who agree with me will ee incarnational as immanence or understand who Hegel was.
@Jpj1918 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
@Jpj1918 Context rules-he is not speaking about earth but rather people
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reprovedc. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Of course in these verses-it is so obvious it is speaking of hiumanity-how does dirt believe? How does water believe? These are the two elements besides air that takes more space in this world
@Jpj1918 13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
@daveme7 It may be helpful to study the term "salvation" as you understand it versus how I understand it. At the heart of our disagreement is our different understanding of the word. The term salvation, as used in Scripture would not have been interpreted as "save from Hell or one's sins" as the concept of Hell didn't exist in the Jewish faith. I would take a much broader view of the term, whereas you (I would guess) would interpret it only as "personal salvation"
@Jpj1918 Somehow, I never find anywhere else it speaks of water believing when the plain understanding is humanity. John 5, 6, and 10 deals with similar themes-where is the dirt, water, and air in these chapters. Romans 1 speaks of worshipping the creature and not the creator-somehow I think this also figures in. Context, context, context! I am glad someone taught me that and how to study the bible or perhaps I would be just like you! Context rules!
@Jpj1918 On the other hand, quite often there are many modernist philosophies approached by postmoderns-process philosophy/theology, existentialism, peaceful Marxism, and as few more I have forgotten by now. Of course, when I go to a new age website form the man credited with originating the term new age and word for word is the same exact descriptions-except in incarnation-it is the spirits incarnating into society and not God-excuse me for confusing the emergen church with new age philosophy
@Jpj1918 so did any of my responses as given look like a person who merely watches videos on youtube to be educated about emergent church or perhaps a person who has not only read but also researched a bit more. Me, sometimes I think those emergent individuals would have clued you into what they do and how they do it-perhaps you are a bit the one decieved? Ask God to teach you the truth and study only the bible-this is where truth originates-God and the bible.
and thank you Eric for not being judgemental and mean toward those teaching/preaching false doctrine.. thanks for humbly telling Truth and speaking up! we need more watchmen.
As a freedom loving Constitutionalist conservative Christian I am also very concerned that many "evangelical" churches (including Church of the Nazarene) are supporting AMENSTY for criminal illegal aliens. I say "criminal" because this nation is built upon the Rule of Law and our immigration laws have been broken so why would church leadership support illegals breaking our nation's laws by supporting amnesty for them? Are they void of spiritual discernment in those churches?
"I'm not JUST here to diss Nazarenes, it's not about the Nazarenes, they could be the Presbyterians, the Episcopalians or the Lutherans or the Baptists or the Pentecostals or whoever else it might be, because, it's just not them...."
you reviewed "Emergent Church" (part 1 & 2) above ...can you provide the original source videos (links) so that I may review the the very words of the EMERGENTS that I too may review, critique etc? ie so that I may make an informed decision?
What you say is offensive only because it is true. I attend First Church o/t Nazarene in Blackwell, Oklahoma. Our congregation was nearly destroyed by McLaren heresy. Our former pastor was awash in the Emergent movement. It took our Board a while realize the depth and breadth of the problem. How could this happen in our Nazarene denomination? But we now have a new pastor. We are on the rebound!
Thank YOU for having the courage to attend McLaren's meetings and report the truth.
Again, like every other Emergent, InTheMidst1 never weighs in with any substantive answers as to where I am wrong - just that he's sure I am.
If the "intellectuals" who are pushing Emergent heresy had a higher regard for the authority and inspiration of the canon of Scripture as did, say, John Wesley, then we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. If that were the case then perhaps some of them might be more concerned for lost souls than unorthodox teachings such as McLaren's.
if you interpret 'mafia' with reference to the satire blog the same way that you 'discern' the EC movement....no wonder people here are perplexed!!!! I
Emergent defenders are very good at trying to intellectually marginalize their opposition but I have yet to have any of my detractors answer my primary objections to Emergent thinking - simply that what they are saying does not jive with Scripture.
I have laid out my case again and again and Emergents simply tell me I have it wrong but never answer the central objections that so many on the side of orthodoxy have to the core teachings of McLaren, Bell, Jones, etc.
It is truly amazing how Emergents twist and pervert what we in the opposition say. The main issues that I raise about Emergent appears to be purposely ignored by Emergents. - Eric Barger
The Pharisees twisted words and looked for ways to trap Jesus. Barger's methodology is identical to theirs. When those who are trying to root out false teaching speak falsely they become the false teacher. I cannot understand why those who are so interested in defending the truth use so little of it.
This is very sad. It sounds as if this gentleman has an ax to grind with McLaren. I hope he's not trying to make a name for himself. I know many of the staff @ NNU he wrongfully criticizes. They are solid, Holiness Christians with a passion to win souls to the Lord.
Totally missing the point re: what McLaren is all about. Classic conservative reaction to new ideas...cast them as conspiracy and cloak accusations in "last days" rhetoric. Shouldn't we be focused on intro'ing folks to to JC?
Funny... I didn't hear one word of "last days rhetoric" in this. And his "axe to grind" is simply comparing Biblical Truth to what McLaren teaches.
I'm Nazarene. Our church (Blackwell, Oklahoma First Church o/t Nazarene) was just torn apart... "deconstructed" to use an Emergent term... by an Emergent preacher. I can't imagine how ANYONE who really understands the Bible could even consider such heresey.
How can we focus on introducing people to Jesus Christ if we are giving different versions of Him to people? God is the one who wins people to Him, we are just the vessels who are to proclaim His Word. He can't use us if we are preaching something contrary to Him and the Bible. He is what makes His Word come alive, without Him we will never be of any use to change anyone.
The Bible warns believers "in the last days even the elect will be deceived" and the emergent church is a tool of Satan to deceive believers... but the question should be "are professed believers really saved"? Likely not!
Can you explain what you experienced over what this guy says about that weekend event. I am really concerned about what this guy says and I would love to hear more details saying what really did get taught that weekend.
How can anything said about John Wesley be "heresy?" NNU is the leading center of Wesleyan theology in the US. Again, you might want to speak to the professors there about your concerns. I can't imagine speaking publicly against people I haven't first confronted. Do you believe that is biblical?
Dude, I was at this same conference in Nampa. It's hard for me to believe we were at the same event, because I didn't come away with anything close to what you got out of it.
I know many of these theology professors you disparage personally, and they are some of the most Christ-like men and women I know. You should really talk to them directly, rather than some "ex-elder", whatever that means.
I think Barger comes from a strong Reformed background and therefore out of his tradition he cannot see that perhaps his view of this is in itself hampered. Of course we all come with a 'tradition' but we need to see beyond it.
My question tho is - is he being fair and balanced in his review?
What is fair and balanced about error that leads people to a godless eternity?
I come from a Methodist background. I am not a Calvinist (I know many critics think if you are, then you must be a dreaded "Fundamentalist"). I am simply a "Bible-believer"...something which I am finding most Emergent sympathizers could not be - and still be "Emergent."
@ebart32 I am a Calvinist and a fundamentalist as it has always ben my understanding, methodists, Baptists, Bretheren, Calvinists, congregationalists, and sipensationalists were all involved in Calvinism as one of my besty friends who is methodist has influanced me spiritually in the past. We disagree and love him to death. As those in my faith movement encourages us to read the Spurgeons, Edwards, Whitfields, and Westley's which I bought from Logos in his commentaries.
@InTheMidst1 The same could be said of you of your judgements on this channel-you are judging from your own paradigm. Eventually, and this the problem with worldly philosophies-we judge others of not seeing pas thtier own paradigms-but that is a judgement from your paradigm or as in postmodernism-there is no such thing as absolute truth which is an absolute truth statement. Philosophy which has no philosophy which makes yours a philosophy of nothing
If your political views run contrary to your faith, you either change your political views to suit your faith, or change your faith to suit your political. views. Emergent seem to be doing the latter.
Shocking! Thanks for sharing, I know people who are buying into Brian Mclarens teachings and I'm seeing old Christian values being thrown away. In my opinion, Mclaren is teaching heresy and it needs to be challenged. YouTube search Brian Mclaren and most videos are about him rather than videos like this who teach to correct the herecies. Signs of the end times for sure!
devonbiker 5 months ago
Thanks for sharing. I was unaware of this
mess going on.
hiddentalent123 5 months ago
Now I know why the Holy Spirit told me not to go to any bible college or seminary.
McClaren is not a christian. end of story.
But let us not congratulate ourselves for our orthodoxy. if it were genuine and bore real fruit would these people have any reason to reject what we say we stand for but which by our fuit we do not believe. Someone said the cults and isms were the unpaid bills of the church, ie we are responsible for them spawning. so also with this emergent nonsense. let us repent 1st
Strefanasha 9 months ago
Whoever speaking in this video knows not the truth.
RememberJohnGalt 1 year ago
i cant believe that so many christians are so insecure and afraid they might not have everything figured out that they take people like rob bell, shane claiborne, donald miller, or mclaren completely out of context. any serious scholar of the bible and its culture would agree with brian mclaren on this idea of the kingdom of God. come on man, do your research.
chancejackson 1 year ago
Just so those of us who believe in a literal hell are thought to be all but genuine in our investigation, here is a quote from from his own website on the subject of Hell. In response to a question on his belief of hell - "On hell - You're right that I don't follow the conventional teaching on hell as eternal conscious torment for all nonChristians. But that doesn't mean that I don't believe the Bible: it means that I don't believe many of us have rightly interpreted the Bible on this subject."
Wunji1 1 year ago
@Wunji1 The quote from Mclaren makes a valid point, Is it not possible that we, as sinful human beings, can misinterpret the Bible? Wasn't the Bible used to defend the institution of slavery and the crusades? Additionally, there are wide ranging differences of interpretation in denominations today on significant theological issues. Who is right? More importantly, who determines who is right?
Jpj1918 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 Hee is the problem with this. Egalatarian Ecclesiology.It is fairly funny to look at others who were probably wrong and that doctrine there is about communism-several hundred millions of people were enslaved and then slaughtered by communists. The ideal that someone mis uses the bible means we do not any longer use the bible? Or is it the Pantheism that says we are all God? Help me out with this.
daveme7 1 year ago
@daveme7 Would be glad to help you out Dave! I didn't state or even imply that we should no longer use the bible. Instead, I posed a question that you did not answer. Is it possible that we can mis-interpret scripture (in the light of the atrocities that have been committed using Scripture as justification)? If it is possible, who determines who is "right" about different interpretations? We are human beings who get things wrong and screw up.
Jpj1918 1 year ago
Sheeple like Jpl1918 ought to simply move next door to the likes of Brian M. It may benefit you in some way to allow such to comfort you now while you live on this earth. Maybe, just maybe, God will allow you both to rot next to each other in hell so that he may further comfort you. Oh wait! If you believe what Brian M. teaches, that the hell we have understood from scripture has been wrongly interpreted for thousands of years, you would then obviously have nothing to worry about...
Wunji1 1 year ago
@Wunji1 Very impressed that you are able to be the judge and jury as to who has a correct belief system and who doesn't! Even more impressed that you are able to to condemn me to hell over the internet. Exactly why the church is in the state that it is in today!
Jpj1918 1 year ago
Brian McLaren is teaching theosophy in its basic new age form- its the central occultic view of man becoming the god vehicle for change- this is so dangerous as is Warren- if you love Jesus then do not touch this unclean thing and come out of any church that teaches this blasphemy
pianohbc 1 year ago
I find it interesting that no one writing in support of McLaren being allowed to speak on campus, denies that he was speaking in a mandatory Chapel service. Read from McLarens published books. His beliefs and quoted text are parallel to what Eric Barger says in this video. To say that McLaren did not promote what was eluded to in the video is saying that he spoke on a subject outside of his core beliefs.
3rdgnaz 1 year ago
AMEN!!
SATAN HIMSELF is behind all this human love, man-centered ideology, and spooky spirituality stuff! There is no longer any doubt in my mind.
GraceofGod758 2 years ago
I would encourage people to investigate what you are saying.
Much of what you say is taken out of context and misinterpreted. For example, your comment regarding p. 61 in Mclaren's book "A New Kind of Christian" about being good rather than being right..
Later on p. 61, "I'm not in any way saying truth isn't important. But I am saying that truth means more than factual accuracy. It means being in sync with God".
Your comments are disingenuous at best.
Jpj1918 2 years ago
In turn, I would hope that people would investigate anyone who could read McLaren's book and then defend his ideas as orthodox!
Picking out the p.61 comment to dissect and ignoring the mountain of biblical and historical evidence standing against Emergent teaching and practice is akin to taking a drop of water from a lake and claiming you drained it.
ebart32 2 years ago 5
@ebart32 I would be glad to address some of your other comments in this video and start draining the lake drop by drop.
You claim, " I heard Brian Mclaren claim that the term Kingdom of God was not a spiritual term but rather a political term"
My Reply: Jesus was a Jew. Jewish people were under Roman oppression. The head of the Roman empire or Kingdom was Caesar. How would the original hearers of Jesus' message interpret His statements about the Kingdom of God? In a political way?
Jpj1918 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 Hegelian Dialectics(incarnational) which basically teaches pantheism as everything is in God and God is in everything based not on the bible but the philosophy of man in teaching a pure immanence as opposed to Transcendance of Plato which the bible does not exclusively teach one or the other-but sounds like this so we will believe this.
daveme7 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 In fract, hypocrisy is rampant as they will take every philosophy from modernism and call it postmodernism. Find out why postmodern emergents do not believe in a six day creation as this is the same ideal taiught in modern rationalsim. I think consistancy is the hall mark of truth and do not see it from any emergent authors-they have some good critiques at times but very bad anti-scriptural solutions
daveme7 1 year ago
@daveme7 This could be one of the most confusing replies I have ever read. None of what you said comes close to addressing any of my points in previous posts. If one actually reads Mclaren instead of watching videos on you-tube about what his beliefs are, then you will see that much of what is being said by Mr. Barger is snippets of Mclaren's writing and speaking that portray him in a way that is not truthful.
Jpj1918 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 I have read several nof his books and the best one was with Campolo-they both hit on really good observations of American Christianity-it is not the critiques but the solutions they propose.
First-why do they fairly-including McLaren make statements about fundamentalism and never give names of sermons, books, or actual fundamentalists who fit what they describe as a quality of Christian Fundamentalism?
daveme7 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 Last I checked, for instance, John MacArthur-a professd Fundamentalist-does he have poofy hair, hocking his wares for people to send money so he could pray over a mustard seed and send this to you promising a tenfold return on your investment? As this is more about Pentacostalism which he not only preaches against but also wrote a book against it.
daveme7 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 On the other hand, have recieved several books in the mail and preaching CD's for no cost to me-does this sound like what McLaren is describing? Or maybe Sproul? Paul Washer? How about AW Tozer and Pink as professed fundamentalists? John R Rice? John MacArthur's father-Jack MacArthur who was on ther radio many years til his passing? The point being-quite a few Fundamentalists would amen this point until ascribed to them as this most times do not happen.
daveme7 1 year ago
@daveme7 Don't even know where to start. First, regarding "fundamentalists", Mclaren includes extensive footnotes in all his books if you are looking for resources for further investigation of what he is saying. Additionally, you are missing the point of much of what Mclaren says by focusing on such an insignificant issue.
Jpj1918 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 Like lying and saying fundamentalists are this or that and never share any names so we can actually verify what he is speaking about? He never referances anyone by name unless it is someone he agrees with. It is called lying about those you cannot stand and for all the stuff he criticizes-seems he never names names. Telling lies is a bad thing-oh wait-McLaren does not believe the bible teac hes truth either so i guess it is okay to violate the cpommands in the bible on lying.
daveme7 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 How about J Vernon McGhee? One of the first fundamentalists has gon on the radio airwaves as a Presybeterian who also by the way also wrote a book on the Transcendance of God-i think Meachem was his name and is more known for his text on Koine Greek still used today. This goes to the Heart of Hegelian dialectics which ends up pushing for the immanence of God as God is in all and all is in God where Transcendance saw a seperation between the holy and profane
daveme7 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 @Jpj1918 Of course as modernism taught this thus why meachem wrote this book(or someone transcribed his audio messages on this and printed it in a book)-the whole point is modernism taught a very similar ideal known as the spark of divinity in man and basically must rescue them from evil capitalists-sound a bit familiar yet? The point being modenism taught the brotherhood of man and the fatherhood of God
daveme7 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 So when Rob Bell teaches everything is sacred and McLaren teaching that when John 3:16 and the great commission was uttered by Christ-For God so loved the world and preach the gospel to every creature-this is not hiumanity but the earth and animals needing saving from evil Capitalists. I apologize, sometimes not even those who agree with me will ee incarnational as immanence or understand who Hegel was.
daveme7 1 year ago
@daveme7 Regarding John 3:16...for God so loved the WORLD...not humanity. Nuff said
Jpj1918 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Jpj1918 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
daveme7 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 Context rules-he is not speaking about earth but rather people
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reprovedc. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
daveme7 1 year ago
Of course in these verses-it is so obvious it is speaking of hiumanity-how does dirt believe? How does water believe? These are the two elements besides air that takes more space in this world
@Jpj1918 13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
daveme7 1 year ago
@daveme7 It may be helpful to study the term "salvation" as you understand it versus how I understand it. At the heart of our disagreement is our different understanding of the word. The term salvation, as used in Scripture would not have been interpreted as "save from Hell or one's sins" as the concept of Hell didn't exist in the Jewish faith. I would take a much broader view of the term, whereas you (I would guess) would interpret it only as "personal salvation"
Jpj1918 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 Somehow, I never find anywhere else it speaks of water believing when the plain understanding is humanity. John 5, 6, and 10 deals with similar themes-where is the dirt, water, and air in these chapters. Romans 1 speaks of worshipping the creature and not the creator-somehow I think this also figures in. Context, context, context! I am glad someone taught me that and how to study the bible or perhaps I would be just like you! Context rules!
daveme7 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 On the other hand, quite often there are many modernist philosophies approached by postmoderns-process philosophy/theology, existentialism, peaceful Marxism, and as few more I have forgotten by now. Of course, when I go to a new age website form the man credited with originating the term new age and word for word is the same exact descriptions-except in incarnation-it is the spirits incarnating into society and not God-excuse me for confusing the emergen church with new age philosophy
daveme7 1 year ago
@Jpj1918 so did any of my responses as given look like a person who merely watches videos on youtube to be educated about emergent church or perhaps a person who has not only read but also researched a bit more. Me, sometimes I think those emergent individuals would have clued you into what they do and how they do it-perhaps you are a bit the one decieved? Ask God to teach you the truth and study only the bible-this is where truth originates-God and the bible.
daveme7 1 year ago 2
and thank you Eric for not being judgemental and mean toward those teaching/preaching false doctrine.. thanks for humbly telling Truth and speaking up! we need more watchmen.
formernewager 2 years ago
coming from the new age, I appreciate and pray for those willing to take a stand for Truth and expose false teachings as the Bible warns.
formernewager 2 years ago
As a freedom loving Constitutionalist conservative Christian I am also very concerned that many "evangelical" churches (including Church of the Nazarene) are supporting AMENSTY for criminal illegal aliens. I say "criminal" because this nation is built upon the Rule of Law and our immigration laws have been broken so why would church leadership support illegals breaking our nation's laws by supporting amnesty for them? Are they void of spiritual discernment in those churches?
BobCat1943 2 years ago
"I'm not JUST here to diss Nazarenes, it's not about the Nazarenes, they could be the Presbyterians, the Episcopalians or the Lutherans or the Baptists or the Pentecostals or whoever else it might be, because, it's just not them...."
siskelebertroeper 2 years ago
I am amazed at those who defend the emergent teachings and rail against Bro.Eric never seem to have any facts or quotes to back their arguments.
Simply put, there are none so blind as they that will not see.
JerryNorm 2 years ago
Amen, brother!
BobCat1943 2 years ago 2
Thank you for taking on the challenge of refuting this heresy doctrine!
kytekutter 2 years ago 7
Eric
you reviewed "Emergent Church" (part 1 & 2) above ...can you provide the original source videos (links) so that I may review the the very words of the EMERGENTS that I too may review, critique etc? ie so that I may make an informed decision?
InTheMidst1 2 years ago
What you say is offensive only because it is true. I attend First Church o/t Nazarene in Blackwell, Oklahoma. Our congregation was nearly destroyed by McLaren heresy. Our former pastor was awash in the Emergent movement. It took our Board a while realize the depth and breadth of the problem. How could this happen in our Nazarene denomination? But we now have a new pastor. We are on the rebound!
Thank YOU for having the courage to attend McLaren's meetings and report the truth.
Stuart
voice4choiceless 2 years ago
Again, like every other Emergent, InTheMidst1 never weighs in with any substantive answers as to where I am wrong - just that he's sure I am.
If the "intellectuals" who are pushing Emergent heresy had a higher regard for the authority and inspiration of the canon of Scripture as did, say, John Wesley, then we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. If that were the case then perhaps some of them might be more concerned for lost souls than unorthodox teachings such as McLaren's.
ebart32 2 years ago
"Again, like every other Emergent, InTheMidst1 never weighs in with any substantive answers as to where I am wrong"
First, EVERY emergent? Thats quite an over-generalization.
Second, I never made a statement that I was an emergent.
Third, your 'take' on Emerg. via video may sound convincing - but to confirm that you are accurate it is worth checking out other facts.
Fourth, w/ ref. to point 3, 1 Nazarane Pastor has already noted some discrepancies & therefore will test all things! (-:
InTheMidst1 2 years ago
InTheMidst1 what is your take on Brian McLaren's invinitation to the audience to rebaptise themselves into the "new Christianity"?
spocklodhon 2 years ago
Eric
if you interpret 'mafia' with reference to the satire blog the same way that you 'discern' the EC movement....no wonder people here are perplexed!!!! I
InTheMidst1 2 years ago
- From Eric Barger -
To refer to the defenders of orthodox, bible-believing Christianity as "Mafia" shows just how low this debate is going.
ebart32 2 years ago
re: To refer to the defenders of orthodox, bible-believing Christianity as "Mafia" shows...
LOL- this more or less reflects my point that you assume first, and ask few questions later.
InTheMidst1 2 years ago
From Eric Barger -
Emergent defenders are very good at trying to intellectually marginalize their opposition but I have yet to have any of my detractors answer my primary objections to Emergent thinking - simply that what they are saying does not jive with Scripture.
I have laid out my case again and again and Emergents simply tell me I have it wrong but never answer the central objections that so many on the side of orthodoxy have to the core teachings of McLaren, Bell, Jones, etc.
ebart32 2 years ago
It is truly amazing how Emergents twist and pervert what we in the opposition say. The main issues that I raise about Emergent appears to be purposely ignored by Emergents. - Eric Barger
ebart32 2 years ago
Google Eric Barger+ODMafia for a parody satire on his views of the Emerging Church and 'discernment' at large. Funny, yet informative.
InTheMidst1 2 years ago
So NNU must be okay with welcoming someone who says that:
The cross is false advertising for God.
We need a 5 year moritorium about the issue of homosexuality because the Bible is unclear.
There is no hell.
There is a broad path to heaven.
That HE knows Jesus had a 'secret' message about the kingdom and we have never had it right....but McLaren does.
Interesting.
Those who shine the light on error have always been attacked by those who refuse to see clearly what is taking place.
lucus347 2 years ago
The Pharisees twisted words and looked for ways to trap Jesus. Barger's methodology is identical to theirs. When those who are trying to root out false teaching speak falsely they become the false teacher. I cannot understand why those who are so interested in defending the truth use so little of it.
drtscott 2 years ago
What is he saying that is false? Did he misquote someone?
kjnetwork 2 years ago
Your analogy using th ePharasees indeed applies to YOU my friend, as well as to Mr. McLaren.
YOUR truth and HIS are not truth at all by any stretch. He offer nothing, and you apparently believe nothing.
Let me know how that works out for you at the Great White Throne.
n42c3 2 years ago
This is very sad. It sounds as if this gentleman has an ax to grind with McLaren. I hope he's not trying to make a name for himself. I know many of the staff @ NNU he wrongfully criticizes. They are solid, Holiness Christians with a passion to win souls to the Lord.
Totally missing the point re: what McLaren is all about. Classic conservative reaction to new ideas...cast them as conspiracy and cloak accusations in "last days" rhetoric. Shouldn't we be focused on intro'ing folks to to JC?
obedientjdc 2 years ago
Funny... I didn't hear one word of "last days rhetoric" in this. And his "axe to grind" is simply comparing Biblical Truth to what McLaren teaches.
I'm Nazarene. Our church (Blackwell, Oklahoma First Church o/t Nazarene) was just torn apart... "deconstructed" to use an Emergent term... by an Emergent preacher. I can't imagine how ANYONE who really understands the Bible could even consider such heresey.
voice4choiceless 2 years ago
How can we focus on introducing people to Jesus Christ if we are giving different versions of Him to people? God is the one who wins people to Him, we are just the vessels who are to proclaim His Word. He can't use us if we are preaching something contrary to Him and the Bible. He is what makes His Word come alive, without Him we will never be of any use to change anyone.
kjnetwork 2 years ago
The Bible warns believers "in the last days even the elect will be deceived" and the emergent church is a tool of Satan to deceive believers... but the question should be "are professed believers really saved"? Likely not!
BobCat1943 2 years ago
This is hilarious....oh wait. You're serious?
jzzbassman 3 years ago
Yeah, I was there too, this video is full of misinformation and quotes taken out of context.
krector73 3 years ago
Can you explain what you experienced over what this guy says about that weekend event. I am really concerned about what this guy says and I would love to hear more details saying what really did get taught that weekend.
digitalplus46 3 years ago
This is an important issue so please give some examples.
ddtillman 2 years ago
How can anything said about John Wesley be "heresy?" NNU is the leading center of Wesleyan theology in the US. Again, you might want to speak to the professors there about your concerns. I can't imagine speaking publicly against people I haven't first confronted. Do you believe that is biblical?
pettigrewfam 3 years ago
Dude, I was at this same conference in Nampa. It's hard for me to believe we were at the same event, because I didn't come away with anything close to what you got out of it.
I know many of these theology professors you disparage personally, and they are some of the most Christ-like men and women I know. You should really talk to them directly, rather than some "ex-elder", whatever that means.
pettigrewfam 3 years ago 2
I think Barger comes from a strong Reformed background and therefore out of his tradition he cannot see that perhaps his view of this is in itself hampered. Of course we all come with a 'tradition' but we need to see beyond it.
My question tho is - is he being fair and balanced in his review?
InTheMidst1 2 years ago
What is fair and balanced about error that leads people to a godless eternity?
I come from a Methodist background. I am not a Calvinist (I know many critics think if you are, then you must be a dreaded "Fundamentalist"). I am simply a "Bible-believer"...something which I am finding most Emergent sympathizers could not be - and still be "Emergent."
ebart32 2 years ago 2
@ebart32 I am a Calvinist and a fundamentalist as it has always ben my understanding, methodists, Baptists, Bretheren, Calvinists, congregationalists, and sipensationalists were all involved in Calvinism as one of my besty friends who is methodist has influanced me spiritually in the past. We disagree and love him to death. As those in my faith movement encourages us to read the Spurgeons, Edwards, Whitfields, and Westley's which I bought from Logos in his commentaries.
daveme7 1 year ago
@InTheMidst1 The same could be said of you of your judgements on this channel-you are judging from your own paradigm. Eventually, and this the problem with worldly philosophies-we judge others of not seeing pas thtier own paradigms-but that is a judgement from your paradigm or as in postmodernism-there is no such thing as absolute truth which is an absolute truth statement. Philosophy which has no philosophy which makes yours a philosophy of nothing
daveme7 1 year ago
If your political views run contrary to your faith, you either change your political views to suit your faith, or change your faith to suit your political. views. Emergent seem to be doing the latter.
staciepaul 3 years ago
Exactly!
voice4choiceless 2 years ago
wow. if we couldn't take quotes out of context, where would we be?
solvealways 3 years ago
Some of those quotes were pretty out there. Why don't you gives us the context to demonstrate the fallacy here.
ddtillman 2 years ago