IS YOUR CHURCH A PART OF "THE TANGIBLE KINGDOM"?

"The Tangible Kingdom" is book written by Matt Smay and Hugh Halter and published by Jossey-Bass Leadership Network, and it's creation, like so many other books published by the Jossey-Bass Leadership Network, is intended to move the church into the 21st century via the emerging church movement. Sadly, however, its methods are anything but biblical (I will say more about that later in this post). The emerging church has received the backing of the Leadership Network managerially and the Eli Lilly Corporation (drug manufacturer of Prozac) financially, and it appears to be a success due to their help, rather than a true move of God. 1.

To discover the answer to the question, "What is The Tangible Kingdom movement?" please click HERE.

What most people are not told about The Leadership Network and its baby, the Emerging/Emergent church movement* (see notes at the bottom of this post) is that it is based on both human and occult philosophy, not on Scripture. It is what is not being said about it that is so dangerous to the spiritual health of the churches which are looking to these church growth/missions methods as part of their program for spiritual development. That being said, however, the emerging church is showing its true colors, for those who are truly willing to see them; and although the rumor last year was that the emerging church movement is dead, it is anything but. It may have morphed or matured or changed its name, but the underlying philosophy is alive and well and continues to penetrate churches around the globe.

The authors of "The Tangible Kingdom" use the method of deconstructionism** in order to introduce their version of the kingdom of God (which according to Scripture is spiritual, not physical, as in the sense that it is a material kingdom in the present age). Although Christ and His church will one day rule this earth in a both a physical and spiritual sense in the Millennial Age, that is not presently happening. In this sense, the emerging church movement of the tangible kingdom fits more closely with Kingdom Now/Dominion/Theonomy/Reconstruction theology, which is preterist in nature.

"The Tangible Kingdom" also uses terminology typical to the emerging church , words such as tranformational, missional, and incarnational community. Which brings me to my next thought - the communitarianism*** inherent within the movement. The emerging church promotes communitarianism as a replacement for biblical unity (which is always based on the truth), as compared to the man-made false unity created by a common goal to use the church as a humanitarian organization which will eventually, and finally, compromise the truth of God's Word to achieve it. The purpose of this goal is to make the church fit in with the globalist/socialist agenda, a "three-legged stool" comprised of government, the business sector, and the social sector (which includes the church). It is blatant social engineering. The plan for socialism to infiltrate the church has been known for quite some time now, and has been purposely hidden from the church in order to deceive it. Please read the evidence HERE. It is time for the church to get its head out of the sand now!

"...we have seen how Dr. Walter Rauschenbusch... and the leaders of the social-action movements in the churches decided to do away with Christian individualism and turn to outright collectivism, using the church as their instrument.... Religion was only a means toward achieving socialism. And, like all other false prophets who have infiltrated religion through he centuries, [Rauschenbusch] used a 'front' or disguise. This disguise, as we have seen, was 'The Kingdom of God.' The Kingdom was not pictured as a spiritual society into which men and women had to be born as individuals through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ as Savior, but as a collectivist society which would be brought about by... eradication of poverty, redistribution of wealth... and 'economic justice.'" 2. (Edgar Bundy, Collectivism in the Churches.)

The words of Jesus:
"My Kingdom is not of this world" (John 18:36)

Notes:

* (from "Emerging Towards Convergence" by Sarah Leslie at http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/009/discernment/7-emerging-5.htm)

"We know that the current Emergent Church is a marketing phenomenon, set up as an official movement by Bob Buford’s Leadership Network, a historical fact which we documented in a series of Herescope posts in 2005 and 2006.[2] From its very inception in the 1980s Leadership Network imported a number of leading New Age business “gurus” as “experts” – holding nebulous (if any!) Christian credentials. They trained an entire generation of evangelical “leaders” on the latest tactics of psycho-social change theory, substituting it for genuine Holy Spirit revival. These business “gurus,” some of whom had open New Age beliefs, included such notables as Margaret Wheatley, Peter Drucker, Jim Collins, and Ken Blanchard. Many spoke at a 2000 Leadership Network conference “Exploring Off the Map” which launched the Emergent Church movement.[3]

From our research we also know that the Emergent Church was set up to be a vanguard, a forerunner, to propel the postmodern evangelical church towards a paradigm shift in theology, structure, methodology, and purpose. As such, it has been rushing headlong towards an open convergence with the New Age movement. Emergent leader Phyllis Tickle has termed this “The Great Emergence,” which is the title of her 2008 book announcing the “birthing” of a “brand-new expression of… faith and praxis” (p. 17) which will ultimately “rewrite Christian theology” (p. 162). Important details about both the history and theology of the modern Emergent movement can be found in Pastor Bob DeWaay’s recently published book The Emergent Church: Undefining Christianity (2009). This book summarizes the basic doctrines and practices of the movement, and gives an account of a few key leaders."

** (from "Envisioning Emergence"" by Sarah Leslie at http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/009/discernment/7-emerging-6.htm)

"Pastor DeWaay does an excellent job of scouring the Emergent chronicles for evidences of “deconstruction.” “Deconstruction” is a philosophy that de-emphasizes the Word of God, and claims that no one can really know the Truth. It fits hand-in-glove with mysticism.

An excellent analysis of “deconstruction” was written by Samuel Blumenfeld in 1995, as part of his scholarly refutation of the “whole language” style of teaching reading that resulted in illiteracy. Blumenfeld explained how “deconstruction” obliterates the fact that words have meaning, de-emphasizes written language by claiming that there is no “truth” in it, and declares “the impossibility of determining absolute meaning”[15] in a text. He wrote:

"But not only do the whole-language deconstructionists reject the concept of the absolute word—the logos—but they reject the very system of logical thinking that made Western civilization possible. They not only reject the Bible, they reject Aristotle’s A is A. Their new formula is A can be anything you want it to be, which can only be the basis of a pre-literate or non-literate culture in which subjectivism, emotion and superstition prevail as the means of knowing. That, of course, is simply a form of insanity—the inability not only to deal with objective reality but to recognize and admit that it exists. A mind so inclined is a mind that will lead its owner to destruction."[16]

The Emergent Church is at the vanguard of this type of deconstructionism. It discounts the Word of God, mocks exegetical preaching and teaching, and emphasizes dialogue (“conversation”), mysticism, symbology, community (“relationships”), and various “spiritual disciplines.” A recent, related fad in the evangelical mission world is “orality,” which is telling stories about the Bible instead of teaching Scripture itself. This cheats the listener out of the precious ability to hear or read God’s Word."

*** (From http://www.thirdgreatawakening.org/communitarianism.htm)

"Communitarians refer to the creation of a world government as the effort to create a “healthy society.” The goal of the church growth movement (CGM) is to manipulate Christians and churches into this healthy society. “Health-based” language is sometimes used in the CGM. Some church growth leaders desire “healthy churches” and “healthy congregations” made up of “healthy Christians.” A healthy church would be one in which all members are willing to compromise the Word of God for the common good. Communitarians believe that attaining a healthy society involves the successful merger of the 3 sectors of society. It requires a merger of the government sector, the private sector (business) and the social sector (which includes the churches). This merger is also known as “Drucker’s 3-legged stool,” named after its main proponent, Peter Drucker, who is considered to be the “father of modern management.” Peter Drucker, like Amitai Etzioni, was a Communitarian and was also a student of the Kabbalah. According to Roger Oakland’s “Bob Buford, Peter Drucker, and the Emerging Church,” Peter Drucker, like Amitai Etzioni, shared a bond with the Kabbalist, Martin Buber. Roger Oakland stated, “Drucker felt a strong bond…with a panentheist/ mystic named Martin Buber (1878-1965), who embraced the teachings of Hasidism (Jewish mysticism).” In his book, “Between Man and Man” (New York, NY: Routledge Classics, 2002, first published in 1947), p. 219, Buber states, ‘Since 1900 I had first been under the influence of German mysticism from Meister Eckhart [a mystic] ... then I had been under the influence of the later Kabalah [Jewish mysticism] and of Hasidism.’” 32.

Peter Drucker was very interested in getting churches involved in the implementation of the world government. Drucker, who once lamented that there were “still many unhealthy churches,” 35. was not only an occultist, but an organizational guru. It was his involvement in the Jewish Kabbalah that inspired him to create an organizational model that would transform churches into agents of Satan. This organizational model today is called Total Quality Management (TQM). “Total” stands for “totalitarian.” It was Drucker’s vision that all organizations, including church organizations, within the 3-legged stool (Communitarian system) be run on TQM. He considered churches not conformed to this TQM model to be “still unhealthy.”

For further reading: 1. " 'Undefining' God's Mission - The Emerging Church on a 'Mission from God' " by Bob DeWaay 2. "What's Wrong With the 21st Century Church? by Dr. Robert Klenck
3. "Treason in the Church: Trading Truth for a 'Social Gospel'" by Berit Kjos 4. "Transforming the World by Subverting the Church" by Berit Kjos

End Notes: 1. http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/?p=1585 2. Edgar C Bundy, Collectivism in the Churches: A documented account of the political activities of the Federal, National, and World Councils of Churches (Wheaton, Illinois: Church League of America, 1957), page 101

THE RUSH TO RELEVANCE IS THE ROAD TO RUIN by Paul Proctor

THE RUSH TO RELEVANCE IS THE ROAD TO RUIN

By Paul Proctor
July 22, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

I’d love to know who sold Christians and clergy the bogus notion that the church somehow needs to be more “relevant” to the culture in order to win it for Christ. You can hardly escape the word in Christian circles today. It’s absolutely everywhere believers are, and is used incessantly alongside other trendy terms like “connect,” “passion,” “purpose,” “awesome” and “tolerance” – flying out the mouths of church leaders as if it were some sacred biblical principle that should be worn like a phylactery on our foreheads and proclaimed from the rooftops lest we forget and, Heaven forbid, be a contrast to the culture in which we live.

The word “relevant” is not even in the Bible – except in one so-called bible version and verse – if you can bear to call The Message a Bible. But, the amazing irony of its brief appearance there, is that it points out perfectly why Christians should avoid being relevant:

"Don't be flip with the sacred. Banter and silliness give no honor to God. Don't reduce holy mysteries to slogans. In trying to be relevant, you're only being cute and inviting sacrilege.” – Matthew 7:6

Does that not accurately describe the relevant church today: cute, flippant, silly and full of slogans and sacrilege? Sounds just like the seeker-sensitive, purpose driven and emerging church to me!

Throughout scripture, in both the Old and New Testament, God’s own are repeatedly referred to as a “peculiar people.” (Exodus 19:5, Deuteronomy 14:2, 26:18, Titus 2:14 & 1st Peter 2:9) I’ve written about this many times over the years.

That means we ought to be viewed by the world around us as distinctive. But how can Christians be both distinctive and relevant? And just how does one “connect” with a culture and not be “unequally yoked” to it?

Being distinctive is what being sanctified and set apart for God is all about. We’re not suppose to look and act like the rest of the world. We’re not called to blend in.

We’re called to “come out from among them” and stand out as a testimony to God’s power and presence in a corrupt kingdom! You see, if we don’t look or act any different from the world around us, then we’re probably not any different.

But the church isn’t teaching sanctification anymore because it’s an unfashionable, unpopular and outdated word that scares sinners and separates Christians from the culture of cool. No, today’s church has, instead, set its heart on being more relevant to the culture than righteous before God in a prideful and egregious effort to help Jesus get the numbers up.

“Go ye into all the world and be relevant?”

I don’t think so.

In my estimation, the word “relevant” was simply another devilishly dialectic term marketed to the church as a clever way to help Christians appeal to the flesh of the lost and buddy-up to the Beelzebub Club without appearing to compromise one’s Christian faith. But, that’s exactly what it does. And the more relevant one becomes to the enemies of Christ, the more irrelevant they become to God.

A preacher at a local megachurch my wife and I recently visited proudly told me a few days ago that he’s known as the pastor of the “coolest church in town” – using the word “cool” in various forms repeatedly in his email message, as if that would somehow impress me and make membership there more attractive. Unfortunately, he didn’t realize that it would actually have the opposite effect. So, he was a little surprised and offended when I told him that “cool is not a fruit of the Spirit.”

If Christians have any relevance to this world, it is that we currently share it with unbelievers, who, like us, have a sinful nature. That’s all the relevance to this world Christians need in order to bear witness of the saving grace that came by Jesus Christ. It certainly isn’t necessary that we seek out more relevance than we already have.

Shall we now imitate more perfectly the hell-bound culture we were saved from as a means to win its favor, cooperation and participation? That’s not evangelism – that’s capitulation.

Being sanctified means we belong to Someone else now – Someone Who has forgiven our trespasses and sins and called us out of our old lives of depravity and rebellion to be “a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable unto God.”

Suffice it to say, our time as Christians would be better spent swimming upstream against the currents of compromise and corruption than finding some fashionable flotilla with which to comfortably fit in and ride the rapids of relevancy over the falls to our spiritual demise.

“And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word.” – 1st Kings 18:21 1.

1. http://www.newswithviews.com/PaulProctor/proctor184.htm

MY RESPONSE TO THE USMB "Emerging Church Debate Casualties" ARTICLE

The USMB article, Emerging Church Debate Casualties, criticizes authors Roger Oakland and Ray Yungen on their books warning about the emergent church, and specifically regarding their warnings against popular authors and speakers such as Rick Warren, Max Lucado, Chuck Swindoll and Mother Teresa who have promoted or endorsed either the emergent/emerging church or contemplative spirituality. Click HERE to read the USMB article, Emerging Church Debate Casualties. My response to the article appears below it on their website. It is also found here:

You make this statement, "Many of the people mentioned by these writers are familiar to me as writers, speakers and ministers whose works I have read, messages I have listened to and ministries I thought were good. Youngen’s (sic) list includes Rick Warren, Max Lucado, Charles Swindoll and Mother Teresa, and Oakland adds Roman Catholicism. Am I so blind to the deception of these people that I could not recognize apostasy right in front of my eyes? There are too many enemies!"

My question is this: What if you have not taken the time to do the hours of research that authors like Oakland and Yungen have? I have been studying the "emerging/emergent" movement for almost three years and have come to many of the same conclusions they have. Oakland and Yungen understand that authors, speakers, etc. who endorse those in the emerging/emergent church movement and its proponents are unwittingly leading their readers and listeners into contemplative spirituality (CS), the Trojan Horse of Eastern spirituality. The introduction of CS into the evangelical church was PLANNED by the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue (MID) in the 1970's. If you are willing to do your homework you can find statements verifying this information online on MID's own website. The emerging church is the primary conduit of this mystical spirituality in the evangelical churches. This doesn't mean that everyone reading/listening to them will take the bait, but doesn't it behoove those who have studied the movement to warn believers about the dangers of this movement? We are to have no fellowship with darkness; witness to them, yes, but not fellowship. The associations and promotions of those you have mentioned (Warren, Lucado, etc.)result in spiritually dangerous, and I believe, illegitimate liaisons. This also doesn't mean that these men have erred in other areas of their teaching ministries (most of their teaching is fine, but it only takes a little leaven to leaven the whole lump!.

The emerging/emergent movement has many subgroups or roads, including the theologically conservative but culturally liberal groups. What many fail to recognize is that these roads, if they once were divided, are now once again converging into one. At the least, the thing they all end up having in common is contemplative spirituality or mysticism, since they all promote authors who are contemplative, even those who claim to be theologically conservative (Mark Driscoll, for example).

A return to plain Scripture and the simple way of the cross is a fine antidote to these obscure and nefarious movements. We are commanded in Scripture to test all things. Paul warned the churches over and over again in order to protect them from error. If the emerging/emergent movement is promoting practices that come from outside of Scripture, why are we not examining them more carefully? And why aren't people being warned about the errors in these groups. Have we become spiritual pacifists?

I put forth the challenge to you and all those in positions of spiritual leadership to take your responsibility to protect the flock from wolves and from doctrinal and practical errors (such as contemplative prayer) of the faith seriously. Much of the New Testament is written to warn and protect the flock in order to preserve "the faith once delivered". In our desire to be considered relevant and world-friendly we have failed to do so, putting the flock in grave spiritual danger.

September 22, 2009 @ 6:15 PM

*****************************

I felt it was important to expand on my response as above to give concrete evidence that the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue planned an inflitration of Contemplative Spirituality into the Roman Catholic monastic communities and the Christian church at large with the purpose of spreading its interfaith message. Please note that this organization comes straight out of the bowels of the Roman Catholic "church" at the behest of Vatican II. The emerging church is enamored with the Roman Catholic practices of all forms of contemplative prayer, their love of mysticism and the practice of sharing the Eucharist, and this has led them straight into the arms of the Roman Catholic "church" and its love for exalting experience over the Word of God.

Please also read The Mystic Plague - Catholicism Sets a Spiritualist Agenda by former Roman Catholic priest Richard Bennett, describing the links between Contemplative Spirituality, Roman Catholicism, false religions and the new age.

**********************************

Evidence regarding the agenda to spread mysticism and promote Eastern religions from the MID website- a report on the October 1977 Monastic Meeting at Petersham: Opening Session with Abbot Cornelius Tholens:

This conference has the very practical aim of helping monks and nuns, as representatives of the monastic world, make better known the Oriental renaissance, the discovery of mankind’s inexhaustible riches in Asian cultures and religions, of promoting a more universal humanism and establishing communion which will result in the using of each one’s characteristic heritage for the benefit of all.

In the quest for ultimate meaning in human existence, there is a monk in every man, and each one faces the task of integrating this dimension of himself. The monastic experience can be a bond of unity transcending dividing lines between religions. Merton pointed out that common contemplative experience must precede the dialogue and theology. The study of Hinduism, it has been said, is gaining popularity in the West partly in reaction against materialism. We are living at a moment in history when the Church is for the first time beginning a serious encounter with the Oriental tradition.1.

~~~and~~~

How can we help the West open out to the East? The East around us. How can we help others share in this task? How make Christian monasticism known in the East?

Some suggestions: we need a list of experts, East and West; of monasteries; of useful publications. We need exchange of persons between East and West; visits to ashrams. How can we instruct our Christian monks in techniques and methods of Asian meditation? Yoga, etc.

In answer to questions, Abbot Tholens pointed to some texts to be found in the New Testament which can serve as links to Yogic doctrines. Contact is most possible at the highest point of each religious tradition: this contact may be made in silence, but very really. In this way the East-West dialogue differs from ecumenical reflections among Christians. We need to start where we are one, in the Spirit of God. Even as Christians we must go beyond all thought. One is first a human being, then a Christian, then a monk. Christians are always “on the way” to God. The monk, as homo religiosis, is a point of reference for all men; each of us has a point of reference to the infinite.2.

~~~and~~~

The evening concluded, as did each subsequent evening, with a short prayer service led by Father Basil. The following day’s work began, as did that of each day of the meeting, with a meditation period of an hour guided by Abbot Tholens or by another Master making use of the Asian insights into the divine nature available also to Christians. “These prayer services, as well as the daily liturgies at 5 p.m., were held in a room adjoining the main meeting room. The prayer room was furnished with cushions for those who preferred to pray seated in the Eastern postures. The adornment of the altar (quite empty on a day of discussion of Zen; adorned with flowers situated at eight points of the compass when the emphasis was Hindu) and the style of the meditation carried out the Eastern themes. A short prayer service drawing from the Chinese tradition, prepared by Sister Helen Wang, concluded each morning session.3.

************************

A list of quotes from the mouths and pens of emergent church leaders themselves revealing their false gospel, false doctrine and unbiblical practices, many of them adopted from the Roman Catholic cult, from calvaryadvisor.org:

"The church has been preoccupied with the question, "What happens to your soul after you die?" As if the reason for Jesus coming can be summed up in, "Jesus is trying to help get more souls into heaven, as opposed to hell, after they die." I just think a fair reading of the Gospels blows that out of the water. I don't think that the entire message and life of Jesus can be boiled down to that bottom line." —Brian McLaren, (from the PBS special on the Emerging Church)

"Emergent doesn't have a position on absolute truth, or on anything for that matter. Do you show up at a dinner party with your neighbors and ask, 'What's this dinner party's position on absolute truth?' No, you don't, because it's a non-sensical question." - Tony Jones (at the 2005 National Youth Workers Convention)

"Meditative prayer like that we experienced in the labyrinth resonates with hearts of emerging generations."—Dan Kimball, (from the Vintage Faith)

"My goal is to destroy Christianity as a world religion and be a recatalyst for the movement of Jesus Christ," McManus, author of a new book called The Barbarian Way, said in a telephone interview.

"Some people are upset with me because it sounds like I'm anti-Christian. I think they might be right."—Erwin McManus (from The Barbarian Way)

"Many Christians use "Breath Prayers" throughout their day. You choose a brief sentence or a simple phrase that can be repeated to Jesus in one breath." —Rick Warren

"The fact is that contemplative spiritualitywill play a huge part in the Church of the future, and candles are just the beginning." - Duane Cottrell

"He [Brian McLaren] cites Dallas Willard and Richard Foster, with their emphasis on spiritual disciplines, as key mentors for the emerging church."—The Emergent Mystique, Christianity Today, 11/04

"We should stop to reflect and to treasure the words, to turn them over and over in our minds, repeating them ..."—Richard Foster, (Renovare)

"Some of the values of the emerging church are an emphasis on emotions, global outlook, a rise in the use of arts, and a rise in mysticism and spirituality."—Josh Reich (Creating Worship Gatherings for the Emerging Church )

"Church Should Be Like a Dance Club" —Josh Reich (Creating Worship Gatherings for the Emerging Church)"I stopped reading from the approved evangelical reading list and began to distance myself from the evangelical agenda. I discovered new authors and new voices at the bookstore." -Thomas Merton, Henri Nouwen

Contemplative spirituality seemed to open up a whole new way for me to understand and experience God. I was deeply moved by works like The Cloud of Unknowing, The Dark Night of the Soul and the Early Writings of the Desert Fathers." —Spencer Burke, (The Ooze)

***********************

Serious-minded Christians have every reason to be alarmed by what is going on in the emerging/emergent church movement, its fuzzy theology and its mystical practices, and every reason to sound the warning loud and clear. Preachers, teachers and authors, who have widespread influence need to be warning the flock, not endorsing these false teachers who are spreading this error. On this website I have provided as much information as I can to help you understand why the church is in the process of apostasizing. The problem is that many people do not want to accept the facts even when the evidence is staring them in the face. This indicates that there is a spiritual blindness in place. Scripture warns of the falling away in the last days, that the love of many will grow cold. It is happening faster than you think.

Examine your hearts!

********************************

1.http://monasticdialog.com/a.php?id=648
2. ibid
3. ibid

MY RESPONSE TO "THE TROUBLE WITH BLOGS: HOW SHOULD MBBS RESPOND TO ANONYMOUS ATTACKS?"

USMB has posted an article addressing the topic of bloggers who anonymously "attack" the MB Conference and MBBS. Click HERE to read it. In case my response to this article is removed from their site, I have placed it here as well. It is as follows:

***********************

As a blogger, I would like to respond to this article. My blog may or may not be one of those referred to.

One of the reasons I created my blog, at www.fortheauthor.blogspot.com (just over a year ago) is that I wanted to have a record of the things I was seeing in “Christendom” in general, and the MB Conference in particular. (A broader statement of the purpose for my blog can be found on my website.) The other reason is that I wanted to have a voice in the Christian community. The MB Herald provides a space for this voice in its letters section, but only 200-300 words are allowed. This simply is not enough space to say what I want to say. I highly doubt if the Herald would welcome me as a contributing author as I am rather an unknown in the MB circles and in the literary world. I also believe that my voice would be considered unwelcome there because I am speaking out about things I see which are construed to be controversial in nature. My voice is one calling out for discernment in a day and age where false doctrine and false teachers abound. It seems there are many who are willing to sacrifice truth on the altar of unity.

Regarding anonymity, I originally chose to remain anonymous for several reasons. The primary one is that of personal privacy, because I am a woman online which makes me vulnerable to those who may wish to harm me. It is also for the protection of my husband and children. My message on my blog is evangelical in nature and one that espouses the exclusivity of the gospel message, a message which could be construed as hate in a world where truth is relative, and proselytizing an act of hatred. Those who claim to be tolerant will not tolerate those who claim the Jesus is God in the flesh and the only way to a restored relationship with God by His substitutionary and efficacious death on the cross. Some of the evangelistic blog postings and links that are found on my blog could be reason for those who espouse “political correctness” to have my blog removed from the blogosphere, which would also mean that my witness would also be lost to those who find my blog while searching for the truth. I could be legally charged for “inciting hatred” according to those who think this way. (There has already been once case where that has happened.) I have an email address on my blog by which people can contact me. This way it is at my discretion to decide whether this person is an honest enquirer or a malicious person wishing to cause me trouble. At one time, not long ago, I did reveal my last name, and it was in regard to an article for which I knew it was vitally important to be accountable. Since reading the above article, I have decided that I would take the risk and leave my full name permanently on my blog. It may lead to persecution, and I need to be willing to face it if I want to speak the truth. So be it. If anonymity is the problem to those in the MB Conference, I willingly place my full name on my blog.

I really have nothing to hide. On my blog, I state that I am capable of error and open to correction. That doesn’t mean I won’t defend the truth when I think it is being undermined. I am not going to roll over and play dead just because somebody doesn’t like what I have to say. I would hope that any person who may read and/or comment on my blog would also be open to correction; however, I will not engage in arguments with people who already have their mind made up, being convinced that I am wrong, and also that I am being malicious and hateful. Anybody who really knows me knows that I am not that kind of person.

I have spent a full two years researching two of the main topics of my blog, the spiritual formation movement and the emergent church. My blog is the fruit of that research. I really wish that what I know about these things were not true. It would sure make my life a lot less complicated. For a long time I tried to convince myself that I was wrong about these things, but I have come to the conclusion that I can no longer deny the conclusions I have come to. The purpose for my blogging is not to be malicious or slanderous. Some people think what I am saying is an “attack”, but if that is the case, what is being said in the above article is also an attack on bloggers. And now that you know my name you can even “attack” me personally. Anyone who is willing to take the time to carefully examine my blog will soon see that I have a deep love for both the Living Word and the written Word.

Very rarely do I post anything without first giving it very serious thought and careful research into the matter, especially if it is something serious in nature. It seems many would like to forget the warnings in Scripture that we are to give attendance to doctrine, to watch out for false teachers and false teaching, even to the point of naming names and warning others to stay away from such. Jude especially wrote with a sense of urgency to warn believers about such things. Are we to neglect doing this? I fear that this is what is happening. By the tone of the above article, it seems that its author believes that the MB institutions are incapable of teaching error, and do not want to deal with the possibility that some of their leaders could be in error. We must be careful not to idolize people and institutions. We are to follow Christ and Christ alone. I’m happy that the Board of Faith and Life affirms their adherence to their statement of faith. I wonder, however, what action they would take if they found out someone is teaching error, whether they care to admit it or not. I think those in leadership are too quick to accept people just because they have a few initials behind their name. And I think they have forgotten just how devious Satan is.

Most people do not want to talk to me face to face about the issues I tackle. They are afraid that it might upset their applecart. Some are even completely ignorant about the issues I am tackling. My blog is a place where I am free to express my opinion to the full extent, and where people who are afraid to tackle certain topics in a face-to-face encounter can ask questions and find information. I think that Christian bloggers have an important place in this world. It is not difficult to discern what a blogger’s intent is with a careful examination of all of the contents of their site. Don’t be so quick to judge a blogger’s intent as malicious just because they don’t agree with everything you say and do. As always, I encourage people to examine what I have to say carefully, and to use Scripture as their guide and measuring stick. God’s Word is always to be our final authority in all matters of faith and life. I want people to check out what I have written, to judge for themselves whether it is true or not. I do not claim to be the last word on anything. I am not trying to mislead people, and I tell them not to take what I say as gospel truth, although I love the truth and want it to be known. I want people to diligently seek the truth, not just take my word for it, or anybody else’s for that matter, whether they be in leadership or not. People are not perfect, but those who have a sincere love the truth know when something rings true and will vigorously defend it, especially if they love God’s Word and are knowledgeable about it. We must examine our hearts, whether we love the truth more than we love the praise of man. The human heart is deceitful and desperately wicked, and our minds in need of transformation. We must allow the light of God’s Word to shine on our hearts and minds, to discern our thoughts and the intents of our hearts.

As both a blogger, a Mennonite, and a Christian, by sticking my neck out and challenging people by what I write, I actually stand to lose a lot. I was a fifth generation member of my local MB church (a member for 35 years). Two of my children are sixth generation members there. My family has very strong ties to the MB denomination and to the people in our local church in particular. However, I chose to withdraw my membership from this church this April because it is an MB church. It was one of the most difficult decisions I have ever made. I did not do this without a lot of very serious thought. It was a heart-wrenching experience; it did not give me any pleasure to do so. I still love this little church and still attend there. I refuse to run away from any who wish to question what I have done. I have been open and upfront in my handling of the matter. I have been under the scrutiny of our church ever since by those who still do not understand my reasons for doing so, partly because they don’t want to know the reasons for fear of the consequences. They risk the loss of family support and fellow-member’s understanding and the ensuing alienation, the same risk that I took by doing what I did. I would have preferred actually not to have withdrawn my membership, but was compelled to do so by some of the things being taught through some of the MB publications and educational institutes. Please understand this: it has given me no pleasure to do so, and it gives me no pleasure to write what I write about on my blog. I am compelled to speak out to defend the truth and to warn my fellow-believers about what I see happening because I love them and am concerned for their spiritual well-being. My blog is both my personal testimony and my voice, and I refuse to keep silent. The things that are happening with the Spiritual Formation movement and the emerging church are promoting a form of godliness that is without the power to transform lives in a positive and biblical way. I stand behind that statement 100%, and have the personal experience to prove it.

So, what to do about us “bloggers”? If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. If everything the seminary is teaching and the MB Conference is promoting is biblical, once again, you have nothing to fear. I, for one, only desire to have the truth be known. If you have the same goal, you have nothing to fear. I have basically put everything on the line by speaking out. I may suffer some dire consequences by being upfront with you in this comment I am writing. I may come under attack. I may even be charged with libel (although I don’t think I have said nothing libellous). A lot of people may not like me, they may even be told to stay away from me. Judge this matter for yourself. Do I speak the truth on my blog or not? If I do, once again, you have nothing to fear, unless of course you fear man rather than God. But then you seriously need to examine yourself, to see if you are in the faith.

For the record, I have never attended any Bible School or Seminary within the MB Conference. I do however have one year of Bible School at a non-denominational school and have taken several seminary courses at a non-denominational seminary, one of them being Spiritual Formation. I have never made any claims to the contrary. However, I have examined the MBBS syllabus on Spiritual Formation and found it to be very "contemplative" in the monastic sense of the word. The authors recommended on the syllabus are also pro-contemplative. Also for the record, regarding my "anonymity" nobody from MBBS has ever emailed me at the address listed on my blog to ask who I am. If they had done so, I would have had no problem telling them my name.

Jesus, if I have said anything here that brings you shame or is a blot on the garment of your Bride, the church, I pray that you will reveal it to me by your Spirit, and correct me as soon as possible. It is my desire to be an open book before you and my fellow-believers.

Purchased by His blood and kept by His grace,

~Bonnie

**************************

Added later:

Oh, and by the way, I am one of those who have been praying for those in positions of leadership within the MB Conference and at MBBS for several years already, and I will continue to do so, as you are asking for prayer.

So whether you consider me an enemy, a mischief-maker (as stated in the article) or just a plain nuisance, I AM a fellow-believer in Christ and a fellow-Mennonite, one who is willing to sound a voice of warning when it is unpopular to do so. Before you make a judgment about me and what I say, I will ask you to carefully check out everything I have to say for yourself. I do not believe it is my job to convince anybody about anything one way or another. That is the job of the Holy Spirit. It is only my job to speak out about what I see. What I ask is that you be willing to examine the issues carefully from both sides as I have, and then make your own decision, being led by the Holy Spirit and open to His correction where necessary.

I have never intentionally misrepresented any educational institute. I take what I do as a blogger very seriously and provide as much documentation as possible. If I have ever said anything that could be construed as libelous, I would appreciate you letting me know, as that is not my intent. I am not interested in getting involved in any legal suits with any Christian brethren. There have been times when I have even asked others to proof-read my work to make sure that I was not doing or saying anything out of a malicious spirit, or that was immoral or illegal. If there has ever been a doubt in my mind as to whether I should post an article or not, it remained as a draft only until I was sure about what I had written, and had prayed about the matter. These are safeguards I have put in place, and yet I know I am still fully capable of error. Although I am speaking out, I hope you will see that it is with discretion.

I am just one small voice in a vast sea of Mennonites. I have come to see things differently than most and I am not like most people you know. I am not the least bit concerned with other people's opinion about me, although I don't set out to deliberately offend others. I have a deep-seated reverential fear of God. I read and study all day long most days even though I am not in a formal educational institute. Although I have taken classes in a seminary, I have concluded that the best textbook is the Bible and the best teacher the Holy Spirit; that God's Word alone contains everything we need to know about life and godliness. I take offense to those who uphold the words of a "Bible scholar" above the words of the Bible itself. I am only 45 years old, and yet I am not interested in the latest and greatest craze regarding personal spiritual growth or church growth. I am interested in the knowledge God has provided in His Word about such things. I still think the proclamation of truth and the personal testimony of believers are the most powerful tools for growth that exist, and I believe these are the tools God gives us for church growth. You cannot improve on God's Word or His methods; and, we don't need to make God's Word relevant: It IS relevant, period! So many have come to the conclusion that we need to adopt the world's ways of doing things to win the world, but God calls us OUT of the world, to be separate, to make a difference between what is profane and holy.

Let it be known that I am a firm believer that those who are concerned for their character care not a whit for their reputation. Those who think they have anything to fear by me are more concerned about appearances than character, more concerned about money than about truth.

I challenge those in leadership to carefully examine their teachings before God and His Word, and continue to allow themselves to be conformed to His image. Christ's last message to the churches called for repentance. I urge you all, dear brothers and sisters, in light of His imminent return, to carefully examine yourselves in all things. May God bless you as you respond to Him with humility and obedience. I also ask for your prayers for me, that God will continue His work in and through me as I walk the narrow way. I am "looking unto Jesus the AUTHOR and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God the Father."

I am "For the Author",
~Bonnie

THE EMERGING CHURCH AND THE NEW WORLD ORDER

Could the emerging church have anything to do with with New World Order? They are using much of the same terminology. Carla at More Books and Things has posted an article entitled The Emerging Church and the New World Order, which I recommend. Click HERE to read it.