Tuesday, February 26, 2008

TTP Reclaiming the Mind Offers More Poison

TTP has yet again offered poison to Christians. While seeming to offer the "question" of the Emergent Church Movement and what its about, clues show they hardly neutral, but rather one sided.

Clue #1: Bradley Nassif, Eastern Orthodox "theologian". There is no common ground between the sister of Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox, and biblical Christianity. They do not have a biblical ecclesiology as Patton seems to think. Patton says:"The greatest weakness of Evangelicalism is our ecclesiology and our “historical amnesia.” I agree."

Such an ecumenical view merely makes the point I've held to for a long time: true biblical Christianity does not share its history with Rome, her sisters, nor her daughters.

Patton goes on to encourage his readers: "Don’t forget to check out Dr. Nassif’s excellent podcast called Simply Orthodox."

Excellent? By what standard?

For a treatment of the Eastern Orthodox Church go here:

"The inclusion of pagan priests and the infiltration of Greek philosophers led the church to become seeker-friendly, or as Dr. Morey notes on pg. 20, “the first emerging church.”...With an extensive section on the Hellenization of Eastern Orthodoxy, Dr. Morey provides documented proof that is beyond refutation that from its beginning, Eastern Orthodox theology was molded and shaped by pagan doctrines and rituals. Dr. Morey describes how the worldview of Origen and those who followed him was thoroughly pagan. He illustrates how instead of Christianizing the dominant Hellenistic philosophies and religions around them, they succeeded in Hellenizing Christianity (pg. 41). "

I wonder if they will invite Dr. Robert Morey to discuss why the EOC isn't biblical--you know, to be fair and irenic?

Clue #2: Nassif pushes the Emergen Church Movement. On the same "Simply Orthodox" that Patton thinks is "excellent", Nassif teaches on the Desert Fathers of Rome. These Desert Fathers are making a comeback in ECM circles, fostering the use of Eastern Mysticism.

They were Roman Catholic monks living in the desert and were heavily into mysticism, using breath prayers, labyrinths, all of which we see in the ECM's "Contemplative prayers" and "Contemplative Spirituality" and all of which were borrowed from the pagans.

Clue #3: Nassif and McKnight are on the faculty of North Park University. This school calls itself "Christian" but it is proud to be called "ecumenical" and indeed it is: "We are a Christian university, committed to relating faith in Jesus Christ to the aims of higher education. Ours is not a conformist environment; acceptance of diversity and ecumenism is the spirit of our campus." Translation: tolerance is our middle name!

North Park University has women teaching and leading at the seminary level (this is anti-biblical and the very definitive example of feminism), as well as offering "Spiritual Formation" classes.

Clue #4 : Future Guests:

March 13 - Greg Koukl (this man denies the sufficiency of Scripture and says not all of Scripture is God-breathed) will be dialoguing with liberal C Michael Patton about the Emergent Church. Do they come from a neutral view point? No, as I already showed, their recent guest, Nassir, is part of the ECM thinking--he endorses Contemplative Prayer via his own push of the Mystic Catholic Desert Father.

But in case you still have doubts, TTP's line up cements their positive view of ECM:

March 10 Dan Kimbal - ECM leader - feminist, pro-RCC. He pushes the Easter Mystic practice of lectio divina as well as silent meditation (emptying your mind) and prayer labyrinths. More on Kimball here.

March 27 Mark Driscoll - ECM leader and one of the founders. Also known as the "Cussing Pastor". In January 2006 Driscoll distanced himself from the ECM he helped to create. It turns out he hosted the very emergent National Pastors Convention dubbed "emergence 2007" at his church.

This annual conference pushes the ECM agenda and is chock-full of ECM leaders. He's not distancing himself at all. He's still at it, joining hands with Doug Pagitt and other leaders of the ECM.Here's a list of speakers for the June conference in Seattle:Seattle: Mars Hill Church – June 1-2, 2007Host: Krista Tippett Krista's Journal Speakers: Mark Driscoll, Dan Kimball, Doug Pagitt, Karen Ward (woman "pastor")."

The 2007 NPC (of which there are women "pastors" who join) boasted: "Join us for a unique weekend conversation that will feature many of the key leaders in the emerging church movement. This event will provide you with a first-hand experience with people who are reimagining what the church can be for a post-Christian world. Come and interact with key leaders about the beliefs, practices and ways of engaging culture in the way of Jesus. "

John MacArthur also decries Driscoll's use of inappropriate language and felt. MacArthur states:"Some of the things Driscoll talks freely and frequently about involve words and subject matter I would prefer not even to mention in public, so I am not going to quote or describe the objectionable parts." Driscoll rebels against the commands in Eph. 5:3-7.

For the bridge between Driscoll and John Piper, go here.

April 3 Scot McKnight - Return guest. ECM friendly - feminist and also on faculty at North Park University with Nassif.

He’s “Friend of Emergent” – he’s got this graphic at the bottom of his homepage. This in itself should make all who read and listen to him to be cautious considering the heresy coming out of the Emergent Church Movement.

He’s got 12 links to sites on “Daily Prayers”, and most if not all, are Anglican (akin to Romanism), Eastern Orthodox (again, akin to Romanism), as well as a Celtic Prayer site (self-proclaimed “ecumenical” that is demonstrated in a “new monasticism'). One such link goes to a site about “Divine Hours": Divine hours book and suggestions. "The Divine Hours" by Phyllis Tickle. Marcus Borg (of the heretical and liberal "Jesus Seminar" group) is also on the ExploreFaith editorial board with Tickle.

Who is this author that McKnight suggests reading? “Tickle is a member of the Episcopal Church and served as a Lay Eucharistic Minister and Lay Reader as well as, from time to time, a vestry member and teacher...

There 37 links to Emergent websites on McKnight’s website.

McKnight is pro-women pastors/teachers. Of course this violates clear commands given in 1Cor. 14; Titus 2; 1Tim. 3.

McKnight perverts Mary into a feminist of his own imagination:

In a Christianity Today article, McKnight turns the Mary of Scripture into an activist for political and social justice. This is troublesome because this simply is not what Scripture declares of Mary or Jesus for that matter (Scripture commands believers to submit to their governments—Romans 13, Titus 3:1; 1Peter 2:11-18, except when they tell us to disobey God’s command).

What McKnight does is to take the Emergent Church Movement/RCC’s Liberation Theology , and twists Mary into it. Mary was neither “subversive” (Webster defines this as “a systematic attempt to overthrow or undermine a government or political system by persons working secretly from within”); rebellious, or concerned with Herod as McKnight tries to paint her. Quite the opposite: she submits to God, Joseph, and later to her son Jesus Christ at the wedding in Cana.

It is clear that TTP and Reclaiming the Mind is set out to offer deception for Truth, as if anything is optional. God demands purity in worship of HIM as well as in doctrine. This is precisly why Scripture ALONE is the sole authority for the biblical Christian, for His Word alone is pure, uncorrupted, infallible, sufficient, living and active, as well as life-giving.

Jas 3:17 But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.

2Co 6:14 Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? 2Co 6:15 What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? 2Co 6:16 What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, "I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.17 Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; then I will welcome you,

Mat 4:4 But he answered, "It is written, "'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'"

Heb 4:12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

Psa 138:2 I bow down toward Your holy temple and give thanks to Your name for Your steadfast love and your faithfulness, for You have exalted above all things Your name and Your word.

Is. 8: 20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, they have no light of dawn.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Joh 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth.


Stephen said...

"I wonder if they will invite Dr. Robert Morey to discuss why the EOC isn't biblical--you know, to be fair and irenic?"

This, I seriously doubt.

Pretty neat blog you have!

pulsaudio said...

I have to correct your misrepresentation of Greg Koukl's view of Scripture. Greg has never denied that "all of Scripture is God-breathed," and in fact affirms quite the opposite. As for denying the "sufficiency of Scripture," a fair reading of the article you link to demonstrates that he has a high view of Scripture consistent with 2000 years of Christian orthodoxy. It depends on what you mean by "sufficient". Greg believes the Bible is sufficient for all God intends it to suffice for. It is the absolute and ultimate authority for our knowledge of God and what He has revealed.

hmmm,,, said...

Seems like your trying to teach me something...wait a sec. doesn't this blog violate clear commands given in 1Cor. 14; Titus 2; 1Tim. 3.????

Denise said...


It looks like you didn’t both (if either)of the articles I linked to.

Koukl says, "Such sufficiency does not preclude other sources of learning that give further instruction in mental health and skill at living. "

This is a very low view of Scripture and also the Person and work of the Holy Spirit. Indeed he thinks that the religion of psychology which was founded and is permiated by occultic practices and God-hating humanism, has some answers that apparently God forgot to reveal in His perfect and living Word.

Psa 19:8 the precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes;

Psa 119:104 Through your precepts I get understanding; therefore I hate every false way.

Joh 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth.

Psa 1:1 Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; 2 but his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night.

2Pe 1:3 His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, 4 by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Heathen “wisdom” and pagan humanism will never do this, for they are man-centered and demonic in nature. Only God and HIS Word can pierce the heart and mind and reveal the sin and motives, correcting us and empowering us to live lives that increasingly reflect HIM. Freud, Maslow, and Jung will never do this because they were enemies of God and rejected HIS Word and God Himself. We can’t intergrate the truths of Scripture with the lies of the ungodly.

2Co 6:15 What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever?

What men claimed in the past as "orthodox" doesn't dictate what we are to do, because Scripture should be the Christian's first, foremost and ultimate authority. I wonder if you consider RCC to be the definer of "orthodoxy"?

Denise said...

Stephen, yup I doubt it too.

Denise said...


I find it interesting that you considering this to be a church. Clearly you do need teaching though.

Baptist Girl said...

Great stuff! Here is something worth reading by Spurgeon. I came across it today as I was searching for something...it is powerful as always. What a great amn of God he was...



Truth Unites... and Divides said...

It will take some time, but take a look at this thread and its comments:


Take particular note of CMP's comment to me in #49.

I wrote the following response, but it was subsequently deleted:

CMP: “If you are not comfortable with irenics, then I understand.”

I’m comfortable with irenics. However, I may define it differently than you do. Furthermore, it’s a subjective assessment. (As I have mentioned more than once). And I give credence to substance more than you do.

CMP: “But, you really sound like you would be happier in the Catholic Church where questions, real questions, cannot be asked.”

(1) Your assertion that real questions cannot be asked in the Catholic Church is an insult to Catholics and to the Catholic Church. That is such a false assertion.

In fact, Pope B16 is considering whether Luther should be considered a heretic. That is a real question and it’s being asked and considered by the Vatican.

(2) Strawman. I have noted earlier on this thread that you are prone to constructing strawmen, and then burning down your caricatured strawmen as part of your rhetoric.
Nobody said or asserted that questions can’t be asked. I know I haven’t. Yet your strawman that you’ve built for your rhetorical argument says that questions can’t be asked.

Here’s something for you to consider:

Your emoting is short-circuiting the depth of your reasoning.
Similar to an adolescent who keeps saying that he’s not permitted to ask questions. Of course, he can ask questions.

The real key is to extend the horizon of your thinking a bit further. I hope this is not revelatory for you, but the key understanding is to realize that more often than not, there are GREAT answers to honest real questions.

What’s apparently hidden from you is that despite these great answers (from historical orthodoxy), these liberal POMO emergers often keep falsely asserting that they’re oppressed from asking honest real questions. As a lawyer would say, “Asked and answered.”

The next thing that you hide from yourself is the realization that many liberal POMO emergers DON’T LIKE the great answers they receive, and they will continue to agitate and divide over the rubric and disguise that they are asking honest questions. And they continue agitating and dividing until they justify what THEY WANT. (which is frequently antinomianism).

In short, they either say that they’re being oppressed from asking real, honest questions or that the answers are insufficient and unsatisfactory.

IT IS NOT about saying that people cannot ask questions. If you want to cling to your false strawman, then go ahead.

CMP: “You don’t sound to me like an evangelical at all.”

This is an inappropriate judgmental statement.

For someone who proclaims the supreme value of being irenic, and that solid biblical reasoning must be pursued when reclaiming the mind, I know that you are capable of far more than what you wrote and showed in #49. Aren’t you disappointed in yourself?

Hope this does not come across wrong, but I think it is important for you to see.

I find it ironic that while I'm being falsely accused of being afraid of real questions, this blog is afraid of my real questions to CMP.

This is hypocritical behavior.

Jnorm888 said...

The fact, that you trust what Morey says about EOC shows that you know nothing at all about Orthodoxy.

Morey doesn't have a clue of what he was talking about. He is not better than Dan brown and Jack chick.


Jnorm888 said...

He is no better than Dan Brown & Jack chick.