Don’t [think/read/watch] this!
by MW Cook
Okay, so I’m cruising around the net and I come across this video (I tried to embed it but it didn’t take…)
I thought to myself, ‘Ah! Mohler! I’ve heard of him. He’s a Southern Baptist and he did that Together For The Gospel thing I’ve heard good things about, so I’ll watch this video!’
Watch it if you want, but it’s a very painful hour long. I made it about 15 minutes before I had to turn it off.
It’s a panel discussion, which sounds cool. All eyes are up front. What deep issue are they talking about? What encouraging truth are they opening their minds and mouths to grant to us?
Brian McLaren is serpentine child of the devil and going to hell (35:49). He’s written a book that’s disgusting and laughably silly (13:42).
Now, I’ve heard of this McLaren guy before. I don’t really know anything about him (other than that he’s very, very baaaaad). So when I come across a video like this my first reaction is, ‘Wow. I need to read this book they’re ripping apart!’
I had heard of the book. I think Driscoll said bad things about it. So I bought it. Don’t tell anyone, but it seems like a decent book (go check it out). It’s a novel, and the worst criticism I could come up with (and I tried really hard to criticize it) was that the characters were two-dimensional and I was pretty sure the author wrote himself as the sly Jamaican (but who wouldn’t want to be a sly Jamaican, really?)
It was so decent, I thought, that I couldn’t understand why there was such a to-do about it. So I checked out the video again.
It turns out, the video is about ‘A New Kind Of Christianity.’ I, unfortunately, bought ‘A New Kind Of Christian.’ Tee hee. Oops. Wrong book. So I actually don’t know a thing about the book they are criticizing (yet).
So I guess I shouldn’t really be saying anything. I guess the book they are talking about could very well be just as evil as they say it is. And maybe it is worth filling an hour over.
Now, I understand that people feel the need to debate. Of course! Why not? If a famous guy writes a book and you disagree with it, you ought to talk about that. But why do we need to be such jerks about it? Why fill a church for a hour to talk about it? And, most importantly, why oh why can’t you actually deal with his claims instead of calling him liberal and post-modern and all the other buzzwords that we associate with ‘bad?’ When McLaren calls the Flood genocide (15:39), why can’t you explain that it wasn’t (if it wasn’t)? When you say that his book is against the Bible (33:25) can you tell me how it is against the Bible? Or maybe I should just take your word for it.
I like book reviews. I go by them all the time. But I can’t go by this one because I feel like they are spending most of their time mocking the book (and its writer/readers) instead of deconstructing it. It was as if they were hired to judge a new piece of technology and, instead of talking about the in and outs of it, they just called it stupid with different adjectives for an hour.
But, again, I haven’t read the thing (nor have I finished the video. An hour of criticism takes a lot out of you). So I shouldn’t be saying anything at all, should I?
Of course, most people (like me) who criticize the Emergent Conversation haven’t read any books written by people who are actually part of that conversation. Most people (like me) have just listened to Mohler and Driscoll and come to accept what they think about the movement. Does anyone else find this a little dishonest?
It reminds me about when I was in KLBC and I attacked The Prayer of Jabez without reading it. Sorry Bruce, I shouldn’t have done that. And McLaren, I’ll read your stuff before I say anything bad about you. And even after I read it, I’ll try to be nice.
Wow, Matt. You hit the nail on the head. Thanks for that. But, hey, I’m a big fan of A New Kind of Christian and a current reader of A New Kind of Christianity. So maybe I’m too biased. I just think God gave us a brain for a reason – to sort through the very tough issues and questions that McLaren raises with discernment and respect, not with fear and insult.
So you’re saying The Prayer of Jabez is a good thing?
And if someone is teaching heresy, should “being nice” be the top priority in dealing with it?
Just askin’!
I’m not really saying anything about Jabez. I’ve never read it. And I don’t think I’m saying that being nice is ever a TOP priority. I’m all for review and debate and discussion. But the Mohler crew in this video isn’t doing that. That’s the issue. They don’t deal with the book. They mock it.
Matt –
I know basically nothing about you so i’ll be careful of my comments. Everything needs to be put in it’s context to be better understood. T4G conference this year was about the “un-adjusted” gospel. Moler talked about tradjectories that lead to an adjusted gospel. McLaren has long been on the cusp of falling into heresy and many believe he has now done so. His views are so far from orthodox Christianity now it is almost impossible for him to even call himself a Christian. That being said, i don’t know what you know of the Emergent church or it’s views but they are very clearly a tradjectory that leads to an adjusted gosepl so it makes perfect sense that they would speak about McLaren’s new book at this conference. I don’t know what your level is a Biblical understanding but, if you rememeber, Jesus, Paul, etc. didn’t waste a lot of time pandering to false teachers; when there are wolves around your sheep you shoot them you don’t pet them.
I dunno – i find it odd that you even read McLaren’s first book and didn’t see anything wrong with it. I dunno where you are at Matt – be interested to dialogue more with you and be of any help i could. God speed brother.
I get that. I understand the need to talk about this sort of stuff. It would be pretty hypocritical of me to comment negatively on Mohler’s panel if I said that Mohler couldn’t do the same thing. I get that.
Here’s my questions: Everyone in the evangelical world has told me that McLaren is not a Christian and his views are so horribly heretical that he’s missed Jesus completely and doesn’t know him. But no one has told me which horrible opinion he holds that damns him. What is that horrible opinion?
You’re right about the wolf thing. You don’t want to be petting wolves, you ought to shoot them, just like Jesus shot down the Pharisees. But I can’t help but think that their doctrine was pretty much correct. Jesus wasn’t pissed about them holding faulty doctrine. He was pissed because they were being religious prigs and unjustly spitting on people who were different from them. Those are the people who need to be shot, right?
But, again, I don’t know much. I’m only half-way down the new book and I’ve been out of the country for most of the Emergent controversy, so I don’t even know what they stand for. But I do have to say, unless I’m even more illiterate than I though, I’m having a hard time finding something wrong with A New Kind Of Christian. The new book, of course, seems a lot more… out there. But I kinda liked the first one.
Matt –
check out this short article. It is not exhaustive but it will give you an idea of some of the major concerns around the Emerging church and McLaren who is, arguably, the figurehead of the movement.
As to why Jesus was pissed with the Pharisees, i dunno – i don’t think their doctrine was correct b/c a doctrine that a: goes beyond the commands of the Bible (meaning basically, ‘God needs our help here’) and b: misses Jesus is not correct but a human invention that will make you feel very pious but will not keep you out of the Kingdom in the end. the Pharisees were ‘converting’ people to an oppressive list of rules that they didn’t even keep themselves and thus, as Jesus said, making them twice the sons of hell as they were. What is the main word Jesus uses when going after the Pharisees: hypocrites! They didn’t have the Father themselves (b/c they rejected His Son) and they decieved those who might find Jesus and salvation into a false sense of security that they, in the end, could not offer.
Matt –
check out this short article: http://theresurgence.com/brett_kunkle_2006-11_essential_concerns_regarding_the_emerging_church
It is not exhaustive but it will give you an idea of some of the major concerns around the Emerging church and McLaren who is, arguably, the figurehead of the movement.
As to why Jesus was pissed with the Pharisees, i dunno – i don’t think their doctrine was correct b/c a doctrine that a: goes beyond the commands of the Bible (meaning basically, ‘God needs our help here’) and b: misses Jesus is not correct but a human invention that will make you feel very pious but will not keep you out of the Kingdom in the end. the Pharisees were ‘converting’ people to an oppressive list of rules that they didn’t even keep themselves and thus, as Jesus said, making them twice the sons of hell as they were. What is the main word Jesus uses when going after the Pharisees: hypocrites! They didn’t have the Father themselves (b/c they rejected His Son) and they decieved those who might find Jesus and salvation into a false sense of security that they, in the end, could not offer.
Thanks, I’ll read that!
But I still can’t shake the idea that Jesus was more pissed about the Pharisees ignoring justice and mercy than correct doctrine. After all, the Pharisees were right, according to the law, to stone the adulterous, yell at the disciples for picking grain and stopping work on the Sabbath. Heck, Moses once stoned a guy for picking up sticks on the Sabbath! Why would picking grain be any different? I think he was pissed because they neglected the more important parts of the law: mercy, love and justice.
Thanks for the article!
I guess my point is that justice and mercy should be an integral part of doctrine – remember, Jesus tells them they should have done the former (remember justice and mercy) without neglecting the latter. He(Jesus) says elsewhere, that He has not come to abolish the law but fulfill it. Do some more research and/or listening to historical background of the pharisees and scribes. MUCH of their teaching went WELL beyond what God required in the law. So they followed God’s laws and then added hundreds of their own on top and made salvation something you attain by white-knucking behaviour as oppsed to wholy trusting in God to save by faith (this WAS of course, pre-finnished work of Christ but Jesus was/is after all the lamb slain before the foundations of the world.) Even just read ALL of the “woes” Jesus pounds the Pahrisees with (i think in Matt. 23?) and you’ll see what specifically He took issue with – seems to me it was the hypocrisy of unregenerate hearts (He told them they were ‘sons of hell’) trying to tell people how to find God viz. why He would call them blind guides.