Emergent Church Movement

[tragic_pizza]

Originally posted by DHK:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Gold Dragon:
Are you denying that ecumenism is also used to describe the cooperation of Christian groups within the same religion? That was also in the wikipedia link I referenced and I would not consider that to be unbibilical.

If it was Christian groups within the same religion then it wouldn't be ecumenical would it?
Two IFB churches cooperating together is not ecumenism. </font>[/QUOTE]No, but an IFB church and a PC(USA) church cooperating together is.

 

[tragic_pizza]

Originally posted by DHK:
Tragic,
Go back to the link provided by Gold Dragon. Do a search on ecumenism for yourself. Ecumenism has nothing to do with "helping" one another. We are all commanded to do that, and even the unsaved do that. People having been doing that ever since Adam and Eve, and are still doing so. That is nothing new.

Ecumenism is the unbiblical cooperation of different religions. It is cooperation, not simply giving help to. It is the uniting together of different relgions. Thus your red herring of "helping and loving one another," of "loving one's neighbor," etc. are totally irrelevant. These commands we all have had from the beginning of time, and no one disagrees with them.

I am a missionary, and have been to a number of Asian countries. As an example in Hindu and Muslim cultures, which you mention above, if the culture goes against the Word of God, then the culture must be abondoned (at least that aspect of it). A missionary doesn't go to westernize people, but to bring the gospel to them. The gospel in many cases brings civility to an otherwise barbarous nation. If you call that westernization, then so be it. I call it the fruit of Christianity. In most nations much of the culture is retained--that which does not go against the Bible (many marriage traditions for example).

In either case a missionary does not join hands with a Hindu or a Muslim, or any other religion. The goal is to carry out the Great Commission. Those relgions are the enemies of God, the work of Satan. Love the sinner and hate the sin. We preach Christ and Him crucified and have nothing to do with the unfruitful works of darkness. We completely disassociate ourselves from them as far as any cooperation is concerned.

How can you cooperate with Islam, when the threat of Islam in many Islamic nations is death to the Islamic convert??
DHK

Define "cooperate."

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Gold Dragon:
It would. Because there are still many different groups within Christianity that don't get along. Paul and Jesus knew this would be the case even in the early church and more so now. Hence their prayers and teachings on unity.

If you wish to redefine Christianity to say that only those follow DHK's 35 (making up a number) fundamental doctrines is a Christian, I would say you are adding to Scripture.

Go back to your website and read the definition of ecumenism, and make sure you understand what it means. There is nothing ecumenical about two churches of like faith and order cooperating together. That is not within the definition of ecumenism. Words have meanings.

One of the basic Baptist distinctives is:
Separation, ecclesiastically and morally.
Ecclesiastical separation speaks to the ecumenical movement. We, as Baptists, do not cooperate with other churches that are not of like faith and order. That is what the ecumenical movement is all about. This is a basic fundamental baptist distinctive--one that identifies us as Baptists, and separates us from other religions. There are plenty of Scriptures to back this up:
Mark 16:17; 2Cor.6:14-17; 2John 9-11, to name a few.
"How can two walk together unless they be agreed?"
We cannot walk together unless we are agreed in doctrine. The ecumenical movement exists because they place unity over doctrine and join hands cooperating one with another in spite of doctrinal differences. This is something that the Bible condemns. See the above references.

Many times I have had a Mormon come to my door. After I witness to them, thy ask me to pray with them. I reply in the negative. I will not pray with them (ecumenism). I will only pray for them. See the difference. To pray with them is heresy. It is to join hands with unbelievers who worship a different Jesus than you do, and pray to their god, a demon-inspired god, and pray to that god with them. That is the essence of ecumenism--cooperation with others no matter what their beliefs may be.
DHK

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by tragic_pizza:
Define "cooperate."

Cooperating in prayer, in evangelism, in anything that is spiritual. They are fighting for the devil. The Christian is a soldier in the Lord's army. Are you the traitor that will cooperate with the devil's army??

Will you go into the mosque and bow down with the Muslim and pray to his god (Allah), along with him, just as the Israelites bowed down to Baal?

Billy Graham is thoroughly ecumenical. He puts his arm around the Roman Catholic bishop, and says that this man believes the same that I believe. If that is true, then Graham is a heretic. He welcomes on his stage, and invokes the help representatives of all different relgions in setting up his crusades whether they be saved or not. If a person comes down to the "altar" to be saved, and has a Catholic background, he will send them back to the Catholic Church, where they will never be again taught in the things of the Lord. His message has become a watered down message of making a commitment to Christ, something more edible to many religions than the true message of repentance through faith in the blood of Jesus Christ.
DHK

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by DHK:
Go back to your website and read the definition of ecumenism, and make sure you understand what it means.

I'm reading the definition again...

Wikipedia - Ecumenism

As a minimum, ecumenism is the promotion of unity, cooperation, or improved understanding between distinct religious groups or denominations within the same religion more or less broadly defined.

Originally posted by DHK:
There is nothing ecumenical about two churches of like faith and order cooperating together. That is not within the definition of ecumenism. Words have meanings.

The distinct religious groups or denominations are of like faith on some things and not others.

Originally posted by DHK:
One of the basic Baptist distinctives is:
Separation, ecclesiastically and morally. Ecclesiastical separation speaks to the ecumenical movement. We, as Baptists, do not cooperate with other churches that are not of like faith and order.
...
This is a basic fundamental baptist distinctive--one that identifies us as Baptists, and separates us from other religions.

That is a historically dishonest assertation. The separation that is traditionally a baptist distinctive is that between Church and State.

The Doctrine of Separation that you are refering to is a more recent development in the late 1800s as a fundamentalist response to the liberal movement.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by DHK:
Billy Graham is thoroughly ecumenical. He puts his arm around the Roman Catholic bishop, and says that this man believes the same that I believe. If that is true, then Graham is a heretic.

Call me a heretic too. Many Catholics are my brothers and sisters.

Originally posted by DHK:
He welcomes on his stage, and invokes the help representatives of all different relgions in setting up his crusades whether they be saved
or not.

Fortunately, it is God who decides who is saved and not DHK and his 35 fundamentals. BG invites representatives from the Christian religion who don't fall under the definition of Christian as defined by DHK's 35 fundamentals.

Originally posted by DHK:
If a person comes down to the "altar" to be saved, and has a Catholic background, he will send them back to the Catholic Church, where they will never be again taught in the things of the Lord.

Where they will be taught many things of the Lord. Many teachings that are also taught by baptists and some that are not, usually because of differences in biblical interpretation and differences between Catholic and Baptist tradition.

 

[tragic_pizza]

Originally posted by DHK:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by tragic_pizza:
Define "cooperate."

Cooperating in prayer, in evangelism, in anything that is spiritual. They are fighting for the devil. The Christian is a soldier in the Lord's army. Are you the traitor that will cooperate with the devil's army??

Will you go into the mosque and bow down with the Muslim and pray to his god (Allah), along with him, just as the Israelites bowed down to Baal? </font>[/QUOTE]Now you're just being silly. Of course not.

However, if a group of people need feeding, and a Mislim group is doing the most effective job of feeding them, I'll cooperate with them in feeding people. If a group of people need clean water, and a Buddhist group has the best plan forgetting them clean water, I'll cooperate with them in bringing clean water.

For example, the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews works to care for Russian Jews. I support their work. In none of these things am I taking part in their worship.

Billy Graham is thoroughly ecumenical. He puts his arm around the Roman Catholic bishop, and says that this man believes the same that I believe. If that is true, then Graham is a heretic.

OR, Billy Graham is a Christian. Last I recall, the Roman Catholic Church is a thoroughly Christian group, whether you like their ancillary theologies or not. They still focus on and serve Jesus Christ, whether they do it the way you want them to or not.

He welcomes on his stage, and invokes the help representatives of all different relgions in setting up his crusades whether they be saved or not. If a person comes down to the "altar" to be saved, and has a Catholic background, he will send them back to the Catholic Church, where they will never be again taught in the things of the Lord. His message has become a watered down message of making a commitment to Christ, something more edible to many religions than the true message of repentance through faith in the blood of Jesus Christ.
DHK

I think he does the right thing; and I am willing to wager that Billy Graham has been, as far as sheer numbers go, a far more effective evangelist than have you. I know he is leaps and bounds ahead of me in that field.

You know, DHK, this is getting tedious. Why not just admit that the only True Christian on earth is you and get it over with?

 

[tragic_pizza]

Originally posted by Gold Dragon:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by DHK:
Billy Graham is thoroughly ecumenical. He puts his arm around the Roman Catholic bishop, and says that this man believes the same that I believe. If that is true, then Graham is a heretic.

Call me a heretic too. Many Catholics are my brothers and sisters.

Originally posted by DHK:
He welcomes on his stage, and invokes the help representatives of all different relgions in setting up his crusades whether they be saved
or not.

Fortunately, it is God who decides who is saved and not DHK and his 35 fundamentals. BG invites representatives from the Christian religion who don't fall under the definition of Christian as defined by DHK's 35 fundamentals.

Originally posted by DHK:
If a person comes down to the "altar" to be saved, and has a Catholic background, he will send them back to the Catholic Church, where they will never be again taught in the things of the Lord.

Where they will be taught many things of the Lord. Many teachings that are also taught by baptists and some that are not, usually because of differences in biblical interpretation and differences between Catholic and Baptist tradition. </font>[/QUOTE]Well said, Gold.

Just wanted to let you knwo that someone is reading your posts.

 

[Monergist]

Postmodernism Is, As Derrida Might Say, Le Dead

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Gold Dragon:

As a minimum, ecumenism is the promotion of unity, cooperation, or improved understanding between distinct religious groups or denominations within the same religion more or less broadly defined.

Notice the emphasis on the "broadly defined." I gave you the example of 2 IFB churches cooperating together. That is not broadly defined. In fact it it very narrowly defined. It is not ecumenism by any stretch of the imagination. Broadly defined in this definition would be all Protestants working together, as opposed to all world religions working together--as it implied in the former part of its definition.

Originally posted by DHK:
There is nothing ecumenical about two churches of like faith and order cooperating together. That is not within the definition of ecumenism. Words have meanings.

The distinct religious groups or denominations are of like faith on some things and not others.

Like I mentioned before, one of the Baptist distinctives is ecclesiastical separation--separation from all those who are not of like faith and order. From an IFB standpoint we separate from those who don't agree with an IFB statement of faith. We cooperate with those of like faith and order. We will not compromise our doctrine.

Originally posted by DHK:
One of the basic Baptist distinctives is:
Separation, ecclesiastically and morally. Ecclesiastical separation speaks to the ecumenical movement. We, as Baptists, do not cooperate with other churches that are not of like faith and order.
...
This is a basic fundamental baptist distinctive--one that identifies us as Baptists, and separates us from other religions.

That is a historically dishonest assertation. The separation that is traditionally a baptist distinctive is that between Church and State.

The Doctrine of Separation that you are refering to is a more recent development in the late 1800s as a fundamentalist response to the liberal movement.

Balderdash! I have been teaching Baptist Distinctives now for over 25 years. Are just going to tell me now that for the last quarter of a century that I have been wrong. I don't think so.
Baptist distinctives have, out of necessity, been more and more well defined as history progressed. If we "Baptists" were still in the first century, then the only disinctive we would have to be concerned with is "The Bible is our final authority in all matters of faith and practice." That in itself, at that time period, would differentiate us from all other groups. As time marches on, baptismal regeneration enters the scene, and consequently unregenerated members of the church. Thus a second distinctive of the Baptists becomes "A regenerated and baptized church membership." That wasn't a problem in the first three centuries.
Now jump to the 20th and 21st centuries. We have to deal with such issues as the KJVO movement, the Charismatic movement, New Evangelicalism, Neo-Orthodoxy, Liberalism, evolution, etc. These were things that the early church never had to deal with, nor the early Baptists never had to distinguish themselves from.

Baptist Distinctives.
#1. The Bible is our final authority in all matters of faith and practice.
#2. Regeneratied and Baptized (immersed) membership.
#3. Autonomy of the local church.
#4. Priesthood of the believer.
#5. Soul Liberty
#6. Baptism by immersion, and the Lord's Table are the only two ordinances of the local church
#7. Separation ecclesiastically and morally.
#8. Separation of church and state.

This is what we have always believed and what Baptists have always held to, to some degree or another throughout all ages.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Gold Dragon:
Where they will be taught many things of the Lord. Many teachings that are also taught by baptists and some that are not, usually because of differences in biblical interpretation and differences between Catholic and Baptist tradition.

You know little of the Catholic Church don't you? Ask many of the former Catholics on this board to give you their testimony. The Catholic Church is not, and never was a Christian Church. I was a Catholic for 20 years, and never heard the gospel message once in the Catholic Church. It is not taught in the Catholic Church. They don't believe in a message of justification by faith. They preach a salvation by works, by the Catholic Church alone. They pray to Mary and practice idolatry. It is not a difference in interpretation.

The Catholic Church has martyred more Bible-believing Christians than any other religious group in history. They have burned Bibles, and kept the Word of God out of the hands of the common person. Go back in history and find out the reason, the cause, for that period called "The Dark Ages."
DHK

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by tragic_pizza:
Now you're just being silly. Of course not.

However, if a group of people need feeding, and a Mislim group is doing the most effective job of feeding them, I'll cooperate with them in feeding people. If a group of people need clean water, and a Buddhist group has the best plan forgetting them clean water, I'll cooperate with them in bringing clean water.

For example, the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews works to care for Russian Jews. I support their work. In none of these things am I taking part in their worship.

I am not being silly. You are. Again, I assert that you don't understand what ecumenism. You are speaking of helping not cooperating. Many nations, and religions of all kinds helped out the recent tsunami victims. There is nothing wrong with that, and nobody opposes that. That has nothing to do with ecumenism. We are not speaking of helping each other in the secular world. That has nothing to do with ecumenism.

Ecumenism is taking part in spiritual things of other people's relgions--just as Billy Graham does. One Charismatic preacher on TBN, who also had a RC bishop on his program, prayed: "O God, deliver us from doctrine." And I say heresy! Unity is the watchword nowadays, and doctrine has become a bad word among the ecumenical crowd.

OR, Billy Graham is a Christian. Last I recall, the Roman Catholic Church is a thoroughly Christian group, whether you like their ancillary theologies or not. They still focus on and serve Jesus Christ, whether they do it the way you want them to or not.

What a judgement you have just made. You have set yourself up to be god, and just pronounced that not only do you know and see the heart of Billy Graham, but of all the RCC. Incredible!! Where did you get your omniscience?

"The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked, who can know it?"
--I don't know whether Billy Graham is saved or not; I will leave that decision up to God.
--As for the RCC, Jesus said in Mat.7:20 "By their fruits ye shall know them." I judge them by their fruit. Their fruit says that they are anti-Biblical, and know not the way of salvation. My measuring stick is neither you nor your emotional outbursts, but the Word of God.

I think he does the right thing; and I am willing to wager that Billy Graham has been, as far as sheer numbers go, a far more effective evangelist than have you. I know he is leaps and bounds ahead of me in that field.

You know, DHK, this is getting tedious. Why not just admit that the only True Christian on earth is you and get it over with?

"You think." But you don't think according to Biblical principles. Therein lies the problem. One is not effective by sending people back to apostate churche. They do more harm than good.
DHK

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by DHK:
Notice the emphasis on the "broadly defined." I gave you the example of 2 IFB churches cooperating together. That is not broadly defined. In fact it it very narrowly defined. It is not ecumenism by any stretch of the imagination.

Notice that I never commented on the example you provided of 2 IFB churches.

Originally posted by DHK:
Broadly defined in this definition would be all Protestants working together

Yes. That is broader. But last I checked, I wasn't part of the Protestant religion but the Christian one.

Originally posted by DHK:
Balderdash! I have been teaching Baptist Distinctives now for over 25 years. Are just going to tell me now that for the last quarter of a century that I have been wrong. I don't think so.

Sorry bud, but yes, you have been wrong about that for 25 years. It may be a distinctive of your brand of Baptist teachings, but it isn't one for historical Baptists or other current Baptists.

Originally posted by DHK:
Now jump to the 20th and 21st centuries. We have to deal with such issues as the KJVO movement, the Charismatic movement, New Evangelicalism, Neo-Orthodoxy, Liberalism, evolution, etc. These were things that the early church never had to deal with, nor the early Baptists never had to distinguish themselves from. These were things that the early church never had to deal with, nor the early Baptists never had to distinguish themselves from.

Correct as you acknowledge above, the doctrine of Separation was a recent development as a response of some Baptists to differing theologies in the late 1800s and not a traditional Baptist distinctive that the early Baptist shared or that all Baptists today share.

The other distinctives you mention are representative of traditional Baptist teaching and shared by a much larger portion of modern Baptists.

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by DHK:
You know little of the Catholic Church don't you? Ask many of the former Catholics on this board to give you their testimony. The Catholic Church is not, and never was a Christian Church. I was a Catholic for 20 years, and never heard the gospel message once in the Catholic Church. It is not taught in the Catholic Church.

I could have echoed your message but not now. I do know of a Catholic Church that does give an altar call/invitation to receive Christ. I do know of other Catholics who have become believers through some priests in the RCC.

Things have changed some in some RC churches.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by DHK:
They don't believe in a message of justification by faith. They preach a salvation by works, by the Catholic Church alone. They pray to Mary and practice idolatry. It is not a difference in interpretation.

Catechism of the Catholic Church

1996 Our justification comes from the grace of God. Grace is favor, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life.46

Catholic Outlook - Common Objections

It is blasphemous to worship Mary. To worship anyone other than God is pure idolatry!

I could not agree more. That’s why Catholics do not worship Mary. Period. To do so would indeed be idolatrous, and no one would be more grieved by such wickedness than Mary herself, whose job is always to point people toward her Son. For the record, the Catholic Church condemns the worship of anything other than God. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, “Idolatry consists in divinizing what is not God. Man commits idolatry whenever he honors and reveres a creature in place of God, whether this be gods or demons (for example, satanism), power, pleasure, race, ancestors, the state, money, etc.”1 Mary is a creature, like us, and she should be honored for her great faith, but she must never be worshipped. Referring to Mary specifically, the Church says, “no creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer.”2

...

Originally posted by DHK:
The Catholic Church has martyred more Bible-believing Christians than any other religious group in history. They have burned Bibles, and kept the Word of God out of the hands of the common person. Go back in history and find out the reason, the cause, for that period called "The Dark Ages."
DHK

I and many Catholics would agree that the Catholic Church has a dark past.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by gb93433:
could have echoed your message but not now. I do know of a Catholic Church that does give an altar call/invitation to receive Christ. I do know of other Catholics who have become believers through some priests in the RCC.

Things have changed some in some RC churches.

It is possible that that may be so, gb, even as there are Charismatic Catholics in this day and age. But I think that you would have to agree, that those churches are in the minority. They are the exception, not the norm. They do not represent the average Catholic Church.
DHK

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Gold Dragon:

Catechism of the Catholic Church

1996 Our justification comes from the grace of God. Grace is favor, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life.46

Catholic Outlook - Common Objections

The Catholic Church pracitices a form of neo-orthodoxy. That is they change the meanings of Biblical terminology to fit their own theology. It is quite deceiving. Grace isn't grace. According to the Catholic Church grace only comes through the seven sacraments. Thus, baptismal regeneration. What does it mean to be born again? According to the Catholic Church, being born again is being baptized--another heresy. It is the water that gives the grace to be saved, as if water had some magical power to transfer saving power to the individual power. This is all superstition and man-made religion. The same concept is shown in their man-made concept of transubstantiation. Grace is involved in some tangible element. That is not so. In fact it is heresy. It is a redefining of the terminology that God has given in his word, so that they can accomodate their doctrine "salvation by works;" not by faith, into their theological scheme of things.

It is blasphemous to worship Mary. To worship anyone other than God is pure idolatry!

I could not agree more. That’s why Catholics do not worship Mary. Period. To do so would indeed be idolatrous, and no one would be more grieved by such wickedness than Mary herself, whose job is always to point people toward her Son. For the record, the Catholic Church condemns the worship of anything other than God. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, “Idolatry consists in divinizing what is not God. Man commits idolatry whenever he honors and reveres a creature in place of God, whether this be gods or demons (for example, satanism), power, pleasure, race, ancestors, the state, money, etc.”1 Mary is a creature, like us, and she should be honored for her great faith, but she must never be worshipped. Referring to Mary specifically, the Church says, “no creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer.”2

Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only thou shalt worship!
Thou shalt not make any graven images or any likeness thereof...
Thou shalt not bow down unto them.

Has the RCC ever heard of the Ten Commandments? Do they know and understand what they mean?
Again, the flimsy attempt to redefine worship and put a dichotomy between dulia and hyperdulia, etc. That is a sham. Worship God alone. There is only one kind of worship. Notice that Jesus never refused worship, for He is God. Prayer is worship. Prayer to Mary is worship. As long as the Catholics pray to Mary they worship her, and they commit idolatry.
Just because you say you don't worship Mary, doesn't mean you don't. Our guide is the Word of God, not the word of the Catholic Church. It is the Word of God that we compare their actions to. By their fruits ye shall know them.
DHK

 

[D28guy]

Theres nothing wrong with "thinking for ourselves" as long as we are thinking in line with scriptural paramaters and the un-alterable truth claims found in them.

Its not "either/or" regarding loving people or proclaiming Gods truth in the midst of error.

Its both.

This "Emerging Church" stuff...from what I read and heard articulated here...is the latest of a long line of subtle...but devilish...compromises in order make christianity so "likeable" and "irresistible" that people will flock to it...for all the wrong reasons...but will miss heaven for all eternity.

God bless,

Mike

 

[D28guy]

DHK,

"The Catholic Church pracitices a form of neo-orthodoxy. That is they change the meanings of Biblical terminology to fit their own theology. It is quite deceiving. Grace isn't grace. According to the Catholic Church grace only comes through the seven sacraments. Thus, baptismal regeneration. What does it mean to be born again? According to the Catholic Church, being born again is being baptized--another heresy. It is the water that gives the grace to be saved, as if water had some magical power to transfer saving power to the individual power. This is all superstition and man-made religion. The same concept is shown in their man-made concept of transubstantiation. Grace is involved in some tangible element. That is not so. In fact it is heresy. It is a redefining of the terminology that God has given in his word, so that they can accomodate their doctrine "salvation by works;" not by faith, into their theological scheme of things."

Very well put. The subtlety with wich the Catholic Church twists and alters the meanings of words in order to make the indefensible somehow seem acceptable is very very dangerous. And very devilish, to be honest about it.

Sadly,

Mike