Wednesday, September 1, 2010

#190-Not Emergents -Part 1-A Survey

Editor's Note: A few weeks ago I mentioned that some of the topics that would be discussed would be Apostolic Identity, Youth Congress 2009, etc....

Well after that announcement, I was immediately intruded upon by an e-mail from someone naming himself only as "Zorro." And then in a following e-mail as "Lloyd the Fighting Loyalist." He demanded that my blog, in the name of being fair and balanced (which I have never claimed), to allow him the honor of doing a few posts representing the "silent majority" as the "voice of their cause for righteousness." I demanded an article that he would be willing to post as to show that his writing would be anything above subpar. He said he had dozens of such articles, but he was particularly fond of this one. He also asked that I post his picture which he sent (the portrait above). After careful inspection, the picture ends up being a portrait of the philosopher, Hegel with a Groucho Marx nose/mustache mask. Without further adieu (the article is two parts), 

A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Emergents Amongst Apostolics but While utilizing the Emergents in Such a Way that they Are Beneficial to Our Movement.

Gentlemen and Leaders of the Apostolic Movement in these times of Urgency,


I call on you in this hour to fight for your beliefs. Fight with everything you have got, for the sake of your wives and your children, your mothers and your parents. Your arms are defending everything we have ever held dear, and all the generations that will come after us. Be proud and courageous! Be inventive and cunning! 

What are we fighting against you may ask? The Devil? CNN? Osama Bin Laden? Why if you have not a clue to what I am speaking of, it demonstrates the danger you are in for they/it is already blurring your perception, and destroying your spiritual discernment to not even notice the great state of emergency our movement is in. For our enemy is either of the devil, or is on nearly equal grounds. The enemy is the emergents. 

At this very moment my spirit is awakened to know some of them are kicking down the door to an unsuspecting Apostolic Family at dinner...and....Oh God help....Help Them! STOP IT YOU ferrets! CEASE AT ONCE!.....oh no....it's too late...the damage is done. I can discern in my spirit (thank goodness I was not actually there) that the emergents marched into the house of the unsuspecting family and one by one forced each member of the family to read one chapter of the bible from the Message! 

But comrades, it is not too late. We can stop this menace. While I do not know one emergent personally nor have met anyone who has talked to a confessed Emergent in our movement, this is just a testament to how good the emergents are at blending in and keeping their methods underground. Because we know they exist. And they exist all around us. If you hear the words, "journey," "authentic," "walk," "relationship," "cross," "faith," "Romans," "Galatians," "community," in a church or conversational setting, know there is an emergent very near by hiding underneath a rock, laughing and waiting to blow our whole movement up to pieces.

I suspect that while the writer of this here blog conveniently named Sal continually denies that He is a emergent, he does so knowing if he were to come out of the emergent closet which he hides in, he would be publicly shamed and possibly even, yes, he would be forced to walk a plank of some sorts that we would make for him! And at the bottom of the plank he would walk off of would be a thousand Jehovah Witnesses waiting to convert him to their beliefs.

Now for the matter at hand, I have turned my thoughts for many years upon this important subject, and how we may outlaw the emergents from our ranks in an efficient, precise, but politically permissible fashion. I have seen several schemes in recent months trying to do the same. And while I find the intentions pure, they are all horribly ineffective. Most of the failed projections revolve around a failure to calculate the Emergent spirit accurately. It is here I aim to survey these attempts and discuss their miscalculations, all done in an attempt to propose my own hypothesis of how we can rid them from our midst. As someone once said, "Getting rid of lice is not a question of ideology, it is a matter of cleanliness."

Method A

Firstly, as one of the suspected emergents ("Slapastolic" on Twitter), has pointed out, there is a rising trend to have a question and answer session at youth events and conferences. The idea, as I understand is that the emergent menace is seeping into our walls because it offers only questions and never claims "absolute truth." This menace is appealing to our youth because we as Apostolics have positioned ourselves as bearers of "The Full Truth." This is a lofty position to hold, but it is not impossible to accomplish such a claim. The mountains are steep, but that does not mean the peak in the heavens cannot be reached by the children of God we are vis-a-vis Acts 2:38 and tongues and the like. However, by claiming "the full truth" those rebellious children think we owe them answers. Well I would have it known to the whole world that the truth of God is not meant to be eaten by irresponsible swine. The kids are demanding the meat when they should be satisfied with the milk of God and not beg for anymore. Meat increases the risks of heart attacks if not handled properly and in modest proportions. Do we want our kids to have heart attacks by feeding them the meat of truth? NO! So they must learn to be satisfied with the Milk (David & Goliath, Lions, burning furnaces, Boat in a flood, etc...)....

Why dear citizens, having the Full Truth is by no means a pleasure and joy to possess. Rather truth is burdensome and if I could I would unload this burden immediately because it is too heavy for me to grasp. But the Lord is good and he knows what we can and can't handle, and it seems he Has chosen us Apostolics to handle the heaviest weights of conviction: This is the full truth.


Anyways, I am ranting now. Back to the point at hand: These question and answer sessions. They seem to be executed in a manner to show the kids that we have answers. But of course the kids don't actually want answers. They want excuses to jump off bridges and sell crack. And if we don't satisfy their questions (we never will), they will use such dissatisfaction to become our church's emergent bullies. So I have seen the position taken that in the Q & A forums, the moderator decides what questions are asked and then does not allow a rebuttal from the crowd, so it only appears that we are answering the questions, which are pertinent to this time. But the reality is we answer nothing. Because we are too loving to give the children the burden of the full truth. Cue Jack...




With that in mind, we cannot afford to fight our battles with the emergent menace in Q and A sessions. We will lose every time. should we give them the truth, they will devour it without reverence. Further they will say the truth is not enough and find loop holes in scripture which we should never acknowledge when pointed out to us (they are children, remember?!?).

Method B
This one is directed more towards possible emergent licensed ministers.The idea goes that if we make the emergent ministers sign a statement annually affirming their beliefs as our beliefs (holiness, salvation, et...), this will ensure that those who do not believe as we will not sign the affirmation and then will forfeit their right as a minister. While it's very commendable, it's assumptions are flat out wrong. I know of no other way to address it. The emergents are slimy. They are devious. They are liars. And because of this making them sign a document saying their beliefs are as ours when the reality is they are not, is of no consequence to them. They have sold their integrity long ago. We must not assume such honesty lies within their black souls.

Is it no wonder that even plenty of righteous ministers across the country sign the affirmation yearly and agree not to own a television, but know very well they own such a device in their own home. They openly and knowingly violate the condition to be a UPC minister and do not have qualms about it. And these are GOOD MEN. PRAYING MEN. MEN WHO SEEK GOD. If they hesitate not, then do we really think the emergents are going to be any more honest than they in the signing of the document? Of course not. Thus the signing of a document will be of no use here.

Tomorrow we will go more into the dark underworld of the emergent movement and face their critiques of us, which I will bluntly rebuke and show how wrong they are. And then I will propose my modest solution as to rid the emergents once and for all from our movement.

Thanks be to God and God Alone,

Lloyd, the Loyalist.
Department of Scorn & Removal

Editor's note: Part 2 will conclude either tomorrow or Friday (depending on if I can find a computer to post from tomorrow). Also It's SAL's 1 year birthday today. Never thought we would make it this far, but here we are. Thanks for sticking with us.

26 comments:

  1. YES!!! An Anti Emergent Blog. I think you are going to get some backlash Lloyd, the Loyalist. After the last blog that was put up here all I could think of is that emergent spirit starting to rise on here. Well to God be the glory anyway. Thanks for posting this joel even though its against what seems to be the popular opinion amongst the blogs on this site,

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yawn. Didn't the masonic preacher forum that started WeDeclare try this already ???... I think they are still trying to break 500.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Apostolic Truthers can now rise up...

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Daniel,

    May the witches you invoke by denouncing Dr. Stoneking's teachings find their paths of attack (which you facilitate) deterred by the Strong arm of the Lord and his Protective Angels.

    Brandon,

    The full truth needs to be protected. Paul had it. I have it. the Apostolics have it. And I'm not letting you little rascals take it away with some kind of jargon about mousetraps and old ways. The road to salvation is narrow. And in your insistence about "better mousetraps" you may just as well be creating a mousetrap that will trap your soul into the pit of desapir.

    John Paul,

    God bless ye brother. hold on to the truth. It must be near to our hearts! Viva la Deuteronomy 22:5!

    To God and Country,

    Lloyd the Loyalist

    ReplyDelete
  7. HA - God and Country. That just made me laugh.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. @Nak

    hahahaha My only reply to that is from the great wise Jedi Master Yoda. Do or do not...There is no Try!

    ReplyDelete
  11. People often get on bandwagons without taking time to research things. First we should understand that there is a difference between "Emerging" and "Emergent". Emerging is a broader term which can have Emergents, however most of the Emerging church are NOT Emergent.

    The Emerging Church often favors the use of simple story and narrative. If you have never gone through a Biblical narrative, think Sunday school for adults. It takes the Bible in story form and views things from God's point of view. Rather than great men, you see God who did great things through the men. It wasn't Abraham who did it was God who provided. It wasn't Joshua who brought the walls of Jericho down, it was God. Everything is geared towards showing a loving, caring and covering God who does things for us inspire of our faults and weakness and entered into covenant with us through the cross.

    Members of the movement often place a high value on good works or social activism, including missional living or new monasticism (faith with out works is dead - as discussed in James 2:14-18). Often you will find New Calvinists in this group as well.

    You will find that it is the Emergent Church within the emerging church that people are referring to who tend to get into false doctrine.

    @Lloyd, careful putting your hopes in the teachings of any man, no matter who it is. The Bible says that Jesus is the only mediator between us and God, for we need to seek after Jesus and not men, then we cannot be servants of Christ seeking to please men.

    The other thing is that to say that the path is narrow to salvation or that this means salvation is difficult and something we have to work for, takes what Jesus was saying out of context. Grace by its very definition is broad and open because of the power of the cross and God's love for us. Jesus wants us to succeed, He has already covered and made provision for us; this means He isn't out to get us or trip us up.

    When was talking about the paths we have (narrow), Jesus was saying there are 2 basic choices: religion and Christianity - this was often the heart of many of His messages as He was trying to get people to break free of legalism, religion and a world who's mind was on themselves and appearances rather than a heart for God.

    Religion, in brief, can be defined as man’s efforts to reach God, while Christianity is God reaching down to man. Religion rests upon man’s work for God; Christianity on God’s work on behalf of men.

    Jesus said "Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep; if anyone enters through Me, he shall be saved" He also said "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me" This means Jesus is our provision for salvation, and it is only through Him that we are saved and not by anything we can do, which is the whole point of the new covenant, grace and the cross.

    ReplyDelete
  12. john paul- a better SW quote from Palpatine (darth sidious) " in order to understand any great mystery one must examine all sides of it."
    lloyd- acquiring "truth" is a process that never ends because there is always new information to be incorporated with what we know to be true. Like a scientific experiment we must test beliefs against what we already know to be true. if our hypothesis is proven to be false (not accurate and not precise) then we must revise our hypothesis to have it be proven.(as paul said in 1 thessalonians 5:21 prove all things hold fast to that which is good.) the false doctrines we must be wary of is the are the interpretations of the bible that do not make sense with all of the principles of the bible. (Galatians 1:6-10) We must make sure not to be guilty of hypocrisy ourselves before we start judging other people. its easy to point out what other people are doing "wrong". As for people being hypocritical with their beliefs. they will have their reward. It's not anyones place to judge them but God. sometimes we forgot this.

    ReplyDelete
  13. NAK,

    Does it concern you that in your demands of what truth, you sound eerily like Pilate in John 18:38 when he asks Jesus "what is truth?"

    Paul had truth. He claims it many times over. And doesn't hesitate about the claims. He even condemns those who do not believe the truth (singular). Only a buffoon would say that the truth needs revision and not grab ahold of it when it's presented to him in the apostolic message. I am not saying you are a buffoon. I have hope for you yet. Pray I will for you.

    To His Honor and Glory Forever,
    Lloyd

    ReplyDelete
  14. Lloyd -i do not care if i echo the words of Pilate. im not washing my hands and extricating myself from the matter at hand. i want to know what our definition of truth is. any person that says they have truth means nothing. truth must be proven in order to be true correct? Paul was condemning those that were trying to interject their own beliefs into christian teaching. Namely the idea that one can get can obtain salvation by self-righteous works.
    Truth only needs revision if it proven to be false either in the word or in execution of the work.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Seriously? I liken my own thinking to that of the founder of the Clash and you reject Emerson?

    Lloyd:

    I think we agree that truth is truth. We likely disagree with who knows it in its fullness. You seem to feel that you do and that you defend it. If you do infact know it in its fullness, thank you for defending it. I'm pretty sure I don't know the fullness of all truth, so hold it down for me so I can progress.

    If there's any place that folks are compromising, it's within the leadership of the organizations about all the marginal interests that are attempted to be legislated leveraging licensure.


    My point is that part of this truth is the clear purpose of the church. In response to the debate between the legalists and the emergent over who is right, I say neither. I don't see the organizations as all bad. My point is that if we were to revisit the truth about the function (role) of the church and throw out anything that isn't required to do that, we would be more functional and effective. That's all.

    Think parable of the talents - Some utilized what they were given productively. Some protected what they were given. What is your purpose? your reasonable service? What will you invest your finite amount of time and resource into?

    Please pray that my trap and soul avoid said pit.

    ReplyDelete
  16. @nak

    So I call you on it then. I am assuming that you are UPC because why would you bother being on here if only to start trouble. What about our Doctrine (Truth) do you find incorrect or needs Expounding? Please do tell...

    I appreciate the Star Was quoate I really do but that would not apply to Bible doctrine. Maybe it's because you grew up in this like most of the people who contribute to this site which is why they can mock everything UPC including trash Bible Schools. But I was 20 when I was Born into this.

    You can't tell me Jesus sat in the synagogue with his Coffee and in a nice comfortable setting to expound. NO...Jesus wasn't emergent! There were times of teaching and times of preaching with fire!

    In no way am I trashing on you in anyway and I do apologize if it comes off that way. I am very passionate about Truth and Doctrine and it is why I have preached and Evangelized for over 12 years now. I don't doubt the word and I believe it to be true. If that makes me a fool so be it. I would rather be a fool living for Jesus and hearing well done my good and faithful servant than Depart from me ye worker of iniquity.

    Rom 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  19. It really vexes me when people say they have the truth. The only truth there is is God. And he revealed that to us through Jesus Christ when Jesus said I am the Truth. The truth is not a docterinal position, Its God. To say that we, or anyone else, has the truth puts God in our little Box. You don't have the truth, the truth has you.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "You can't tell me Jesus sat in the synagogue with his Coffee and in a nice comfortable setting to expound. NO...Jesus wasn't emergent! There were times of teaching and times of preaching with fire!"

    Jesus did sit in the synagogue, in a comfortable settings, and teach. As well as outside telling parables (read:stories).

    ReplyDelete
  21. @John Paul are you not causing division yourself. Should we avoid you?

    ReplyDelete
  22. People often get on bandwagons without taking time to research things. First we should understand that there is a difference between "Emerging" and "Emergent". Emerging is a broader term which can have Emergents, however most of the Emerging Church are NOT Emergent.

    The Emerging Church often favors the use of simple story and narrative. If you have never gone through a Biblical narrative, think Sunday school for adults. It takes the Bible in story form and views things from God's point of view. Rather than great men, you see God who did great things through the men. It wasn't Abraham who did it was God who provided. It wasn't Joshua who brought the walls of Jericho down, it was God. Everything is geared towards showing a loving, caring and covering God who does things for us inspire of our faults and weakness and entered into covenant with us through the cross.

    Members of the movement often place a high value on good works or social activism, including missional living or new monasticism (faith with out works is dead - as discussed in James 2:14-18). Often you will find New Calvinists in this group as well. The Emerging Church in general seeks to get away from norms and traditions of religion and instead seek out God.

    What I find interesting is those who would say Jesus wasn't Emerging, but in the broader sense Jesus was. He was trying to show people a radical way of serving God, He came to fulfill the law and show us to live by grace, He showed that religion didn't work because it wasn't in their hearts (Jeremiah 31: 31, 33-34 - Matthew 23:28). Jesus showed people how to love, care for the poor, and have a heart of a servant.

    If you read any books on early Christianity it was consider the anti-religion movement because they didn't have traditional temples, they met in homes, parks, etc. They also had this radical idea of 1 God rather than many as the Romans did. They didn't make sacrifices, they weren't trying to save themselves through works (Romans 3:20-21) because Christ was their sacrifice and the cross paid their debts. Remember Jesus was crucified because He was so different and they feared He was trying to take away their religious traditions.

    ReplyDelete
  23. @Aaron

    Grate point.

    Just to add to that (at lest to my understanding and all other standard qualifiers):
    The Emergent Church is consented to be thous with strong affiliation (official or unofficial) to the Emergent Village (a web site). The Emergent Church tends to be on the more extreme side of the Emerging Church and is used as a straw man argument against the Emerging Church.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Um, To Whom It May Concern:

    Please excuse my nerd/literary tendencies, but really. According to Merriam-Webster:

    satire n. \sa-ti-r\

    1: a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn.

    2: trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly.

    PS - The best (IMHO) example of satire is Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal." Ring any bells?

    ReplyDelete
  25. the joke's on me. hahahaha : )

    ReplyDelete
  26. While many are on their knees praying you emergent peeps can use your internet prayer lamp and let the bubbles do the pray for you!

    ReplyDelete