modernism, postmodernism, and fundamentalism

Sorry, this should have said "church and state" instead of "national and state"

 

IMHO the post-modernists place a higher value on "the search" or "the journey" or "quest" for knowledge more so than actually achieving a answer for life, the world, truth etc... It is really quite bizarre.

It is sad for those who are caught up in this way of thinking going though life not really being sure of anything.
Yet, on the other hand for those who propogate this philosophy in christian circles be it from a pulpit or through books , lectures etc...it is arrogant rebellion against God and His Word. I dare say those who promote such pap are apostates.

I sat in Barnes & Noble the other day and did a quick read of Erwin McManus's new book . I forget the name it is a one word kind of title, "Cravings" or somthing like that.
At any rate this cat was a keynote speaker at the SBC convention back in 2006. His church is a SBC church.
His book was nothing more than post modern rubbish. He spent an entire book laying out the need for the quest for truth in one's life.
I kept waiting and waiting for him to lead the reader to the Bible or Jesus or something. Finally at the very end of the book he casually ,rather oddly pointed the reader to look to Christ.
NEVER did he direct the reader to observe that he/she could find answers to the questions of truth in SCRIPTURE.
What makes guys like McManus so dangerous is he is not pegged or flagged as a theological liberal he is more or less deemed as a mainstream SB kind of guy. If not why was he invited to speak at the SBC national meeting? People are naive that is for sure. The devil is crafty no doubt.
The problem with those of a "emergent" persuasion is one of the hallmarks of their movement is to be "in flux" you can't pin them down. While this may be appealing to those "outside" who choose to deny the God of creation it is dangerous for those "inside" the church.
The Church growth movement with it's shallow, casual, entertaining type of style helped to lay the ground work for the apostates of this movement. Biblical illiteracy is a very efficient weapon for those who practice and spread apostasy. Also the politically correct view of tolerance that has crept into the church aids and abets the apostates. Unity is held in higher regard than doctrine. This type of thinking is condusive to the wolves who spread apostasy.
Emergents aren't new they are old liberals in new clothes.
theological liberals will always speak highly of Jesus yet they will always downgrade,slander, distort,destroy if they can the BIBLE.
How can the american church stand up and fight this uprising of apostasy, when for the last 20 years all the books,lectures, programs, seminars, conferences etc... have taught no one how to DEFEND their faith rather the ongoing FAD has been to somhow share Jesus without offending anyone and most certainly not mention doctrine. For 20 years pastors even good men have been jumping on board this CGM train not giving a rip where it would finally pull in as long as numbers were up in their churches.
Well, the ole train is finally pulling in and apostasy is the last stop.
IF you don't stand for something you'll fall for anything. The american church has been bent for the last 20 years on showing the "world" how accomodating and savy they are with their political power their influence.
Funny thing we have more mega churches now than we ever did 20 years ago yet our nation is on the fast track to hell..The proof is in the pudding "ain't it"? Oh the american church looks rich with all its religious amenitites etc... yet she is dirt poor. She is also ripe for the pickings when it comes to the spreading of apostasy.

 

I did not read all the replies back and forth in this thread, nor do I intend to. The OP was intriguing (sp) enough for me.
I think our (Fundamentalist's) response should still be that same old thing. Stand on Truth and never waver.

I do however think we could take a lesson or two from men like Ravi Zacharias. Though I don't think he is Baptist, he does address this issue of relative truth, etc. quite effectively. He has his failings to be sure, but I think we could still glean a lesson or two from him. Truth is Truth. It is unchanging and we should never back down nor repackage it in order to address the changing times.

We need notconcern ourselves too much with how we Fundamentalists are viewed by the worldaround us. Paul dealt with all sorts of false charges. Perhaps there is a lesson there as well?

Why must we make things more difficult than they really are? Let the world's views change with the wind. WE must stay the course and present unchanging Truth in the same package we always have.

 

Uh, yeah. I've thought the same thing many times .... NOT!

Quite apart from the turgid prose in this excerpt, what I notice is the facade of scholarship given by constant quoting of various writers. The reader cries out for, "What do YOU think?". Or, more familiar to readers of this BB, "Whom do YOU say that I am?"