Matthew 12:33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by [his] fruit.
I come to you motivated as never before in my walk of 30 years with Jesus Christ my Lord and Saviour to warn fellow believers and anyone who will hear! I am witnessing dangerous precedents set with people close to me deceived by the teachings of the “Organic Church” that is a part of the growing Emergent Church Movement. Before I go further I wish to share a word of testimony from the past about a confrontation of some drunks with the Gospel years ago. Normally, any Christian has better sense than to confront a drunk but this young man did, urged on by fellow Christians to follow the prompting in his heart to confront the sins taking place near his home. As he was about to speak he was threatened by one of the drunks. Already fearful and trembling the young Christian man spoke out anyway and to his surprise the drunk did not strike him with his bottle but quietly listened. The point in spite of threats, in spite of whatever fear he felt at that moment, he put his foot one step forward to be counted as obedient to his Lord.
1 Cor 2:1-5 “And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.”
I feel like that young man today with what I am going to present in the hopes that it will steer some errant brothers and sisters into sound Bible believing churches. One article will be insufficient to show everything I am researching so the following article is the first in a series. To fellow-believers working as true Bereans, I welcome your insights into this as well.
Now one step forward I go!
Today we are hearing about new and old paradigms (simply put accepted practices of what the old church is according to scriptures to the new practices of the contemporary church often called “emergent or organic”). Here is a very quick overview of these practices:
The practices of the “old” church are of a Biblicist (of the Bible) position to the extent possible leaning 100% on scriptures for definition – often referred to as ‘Sola Scriptura.’ The old practices are based on what the Bible teaches for what a church should be today. Please note in what follows when those of the Organic Church say we are a part of the “Institutional Church” (IC) it is not meant as an endearing term but a negative connotation to replace the “organized local church” as taught in scriptures. The person(s) within the Organic Church who coined this is not known but is a negative label for churches across denominations.
The “new” practices for church rely on a variety of sources Biblical and extra-Biblical, crossing denominational lines and even to other religions or cults (Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses and others). The idea is that everyone has something to bring to the table in the way of truth. – I would call this the ultimate goal of pragmatism (the ends justify the means) claiming that if something is “true” it is God’s truth we have seen it before.
Frank Viola said in Rethinking The Wineskin
(1998) and later revised in Reimagining Church quoted here:
"To borrow a term from scientific philosopher
Thomas Kuhn, we need a
"paradigm shift" regarding the church before we can properly rebuild it.
That is, we need a new worldview regarding the meaning of the body of
Christ. A new model for understanding the
ekklesia. A new framework for
thinking about the church. Of course, the “new paradigm” that I’m speaking
of is not new at all. It’s the paradigm that undergirds the entire New
Testament.” (Reimagining Church
p272, 2008) Emphasis bold and underlined mine.
(Reimagining Church p272, 2008) Emphasis bold and underlined mine.
Let's see who has their paradigm right, I believe Viola said what he is doing accurately the first time and is presenting another way to bridge the chasm without a Biblical foundation. I will let the evidence speak for itself throughout the series to address this foundational issue. In the article, on Herescope, Shifting the Emergent Paradigm paints the picture I am seeing used of Frank Viola and those of the Leadership Network:
Shifting the Emergent Paradigm
Continuing from yesterday's post, this is part two of a critique of selected excerpts from a 2001 era report by Brad Smith, President of Leadership Network entitled "What's Next with Terra Nova Project: The Emergence of Terra Nova." The next section of the Smith report is subtitled, "Three Types of Innovators and Paradigm Changes." This section represents a classic example of psycho-social and marketing methodologies. Smith begins by describing a "whole scale change in paradigms" and the "three types of innovators" that will help to shift a paradigm (worldview). In the case of Leadership Network, as Herescope reported yesterday, the paradigm that had to be shifted was theological, moving evangelicalism into post-modernism. Smith lists 3 type of paradigm-shifters, or "innovators" --
ADAPTERS: "The Adapters…who innovate by adjusting and honing what exists while taking into account new realities."
REVOLUTIONARIES: "The Revolutionaries…who innovate by critiquing the flaws of the old ways. They dismantle complacency in the old and make people aware of foolish assumptions that have previously been taken for granted. Much of what Revolutionaries create is a polar opposite of what preceded them."
GROUNDBREAKERS: "The Groundbreakers…who emerge after the war is underway between the old and the new. Often, they naively accept the new assumptions without understanding the necessity or background of the previous war. Utilizing forms from both the old and the new, Groundbreakers have the freedom to create truly new things built on totally new assumptions."
How to Shift the Paradigm
The philosophy of the paradigm shift is quite significant. The concept originated with Thomas Kuhn in his 1962 book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (University of Chicago Press). Kuhn, a scientist in academia, broke ground by applying Hegelian dialectics and existential thought to the field of science. He proposed that science itself is evolving and has no absolutes. Kuhn described science as a series of rocky shifts throughout history, created by a crisis when the old scientific model encounters new information that doesn't fit. When enough new information is accumulated, a "revolution" would occur and a new scientific paradigm would emerge; e.g. Newtonian science gave way to Einstein's theories.
Kuhn paralleled scientific revolution to political revolution, and noted that in "both political and scientific development the sense of malfunction that can lead to crisis is a prerequisite to revolution" (p. 91). In other words, it is necessary to create a crisis first before the paradigm can be shifted. Kuhn then makes the remarkable statement that the use of force may be necessary to shift to the new paradigm: ". . . the parties to a revolutionary conflict must finally resort to the techniques of mass persuasion often including force" (p. 92) .
Kuhn speaks about this paradigm shift in terms of a religious conversion. First, he remarks that a "mental transformation" is insufficient. "Rather we must look for indirect and behavioral evidence that the scientist with a new paradigm sees differently from the way he had seen before" (p. 114) .This statement, emphasizing an actual behavioral shift, hearkens back to explanations given in yesterday's Herescope post concerning "authentic" behavioral change. Kuhn advised that before a group can communicate fully, they must "experience the conversion that we have been calling a paradigm" (p. 149). This conversion is seen as a "transfer of allegiance" from one paradigm to another (p. 150).
New Agers and socio-political transformers took Kuhn's ideas to heart and applied it to the planned emergence of a new global mystical and political structure. Marilyn Ferguson cited Kuhn's ideas as significant, for example, in her 1980 book The Aquarian Conspiracy, which launched the New Age movement into the popular culture. It is therefore, of relevance to note Brad Smith's choice of language to describe the purpose of creating this emergent youth culture -- to propel forward a paradigm shift in evangelicalism. ...
The 3 Innovators
Brad Smith of Leadership Network deviated from his discussion about the three types of paradigm-shifters for an historical interlude. His report expounds on the topic of "Understanding Tectonic Change from a Historical Example." "Tectonic Change" is, of course, another term for 'paradigm shift.' Smith explained the philosophy undergirding this change:
"The German philosopher, Hegel, described this adaptation-revolution-groundbreaking model as a process of thesis, anti-thesis, and eventual synthesis. Many historians, sociologists and other ‘world-view’ experts are declaring that the Western world is currently experiencing a 'postmodern' anti-thesis to a two-century reign of the thesis of modernism. . .
Smith then explained more about these three "Innovators in the Church" and "Why all three types are important." The following description is a peek into the inner world of Leadership Network and how it has positioned itself as a premier change agent organization. As you read the excerpts below, keep in mind that what was really being discussed was the abandonment of orthodox doctrine. We know this because it has been five years since Brad first issued this report. The Emergent Church has now risen and provocatively positioned itself as THE NEW PARADIGM. The "old paradigm" is traditional orthodoxy. The "new paradigm" is post-modern mysticism:
ADAPTERS: "In the church world, the strength of the
Adapters is that they continue to minister well to the
people whom God has given them. They adapt and bring people along. They
innovate well within the boundaries of old
assumptions and eventually allow the new realities
to bypass them. Adaptors do not abandon effective present ministry just
because a new paradigm has emerged, but they will move toward it as quickly
as they can without abandoning their people. A few may even know they are
trading long-term effectiveness for faithfulness to a present calling."
REVOLUTIONARIES: "The strength of the Revolutionaries is that they clearly see the new reality and send out a clarion call for change. They point out the dangers of old wineskins and do not shy away from the pain of a tectonic shift. While they critique the old with crystal clarity, they express the vision of the new with obscure idealism. To use a biblical metaphor, Revolutionaries are the Davids, the career soldiers who carve out the new land and gather the resources, but may not be allowed to build the new temple. Sometimes, they are so focused on what is wrong with the old, they do not have the freedom to create the new. "
GROUNDBREAKERS: "Groundbreakers emerge on the scene and see a new, clean canvas unencumbered by old assumptions or even anti-assumptions. They have the freedom to create new expressions in a clean space carved out by the war between the old and the new. Groundbreakers are not necessarily better that the other two types of innovators, but perhaps, like Solomon, they show up on the earth at an opportune time. Having seen the shortcomings of traditionalism and idealism in their predecessors, Groundbreakers move toward practicality." [All emphases in above quotations are added]
Young pastors reading the material quoted above are supposed to feel ineffective, inept, incompetent and out of touch. They may feel like dismal failures. This use of language is very slick. In contrast, the three change agent roles were created for new pastors and young leaders who were willing to step outside the boundaries of Gospel Truth. They would be applauded and rewarded when they became facilitators for the emergent paradigm shift.
Young pastors, do not be discouraged nor dismayed! Flee back to the Word of God and cling to it with all of your might. For in these Scriptures you will find comfort in these last days of trouble, and you will receive strength to stand and stamina to endure the trials.(Online Source)
These practices I just mentioned sound clear enough you would think the average Christian could separate the truth from the lies (discerning as the Bereans Acts 17:11). However, using the cliché of “not being able to see the forest because of the trees” sums up how most Christians live and go on day to day whether in the old or new churches. The old and new paradigms are incompatible like day to night. To clarify further, Dr. Francis Schaeffer once said, “The snow lies along that watershed, unbroken, as a seeming unity. But when it melts, where it ends in its destinations is literally a thousand miles apart. That is a watershed. That is what a watershed is. A watershed divides.” – That divide is growing today but both sides argue they are on the right side of the growing chasm. Dr. Schaeffer continued, “Within evangelicalism there are a growing number who are modifying their views on the inerrancy of the Bible so that the full authority of Scripture is completely undercut. But it is happening in very subtle ways.”
Dr. Schaeffer’s words are just as applicable today!
The teachers of the Emergent and Organic Church would take you through twists and turns in an attempt to persuade as many as possible that the old practices and traditions of churches are mostly rooted in pagan teachings from centuries ago. One book that exploits weak Christians is the book by Frank Viola and George Barna called Pagan Christianity – relying heavily on secular history to prove many of its points. Furthermore, Pagan Christianity levels some valid criticisms against churches as it throws most denominations into one basket. I see it as a means to an end - Please hold this thought as you read on!
George Barna, Frank Viola and other reformers are teaching they are bringing the church back to its historic Biblical roots. So where did the “organic” in the Organic Church come from? Frank Viola is often credited with the term Organic Church (though he points to T. Austin Sparks as the one who first coined it) Viola stated he has used it since 1993.
“When T. Austin Sparks employed the word organic to refer to church, he was not speaking of a system, a method, a technique, or even a movement. Instead, he was speaking of the particular expression a church takes when she is living according to her God-given nature as a living organism” (Frank Viola in “Why Organic Church Is Not Exactly a Movement” Christianity Today 1/10)
Viola continues to give the history that compares the Organic Church to those of the ‘60s, early ‘70s, ‘80s and ‘90s (the cell/home based churches). While Viola defends the Organic Church is not a movement, the equation he presents shows it is a movement. He splits hairs referring to this as a living organism (per T. Austin Sparks.) After reading a fair amount of his material, he and others like him believe it to be a movement of God! How many books of Viola and friends is necessary to prove the point? For starters: Reimagining Church, Finding Organic Church, So You Want to Start a House Church?: First-Century Styled Church Planting For Today, Pagan Christianity and more recently the Jesus Manifesto, which I will discuss further in Part 2.
A good friend and sister in Christ covered much of the cell/home church movement in the past. Sarah Leslie said this in 1999,
“Before proceeding, it is important to point out that the cell church movement has always been extra-denominational, i.e. it has proliferated both within and without established denominations. Some have charged that it has been a chief vehicle for the cross-pollination of doctrinal ideas. Others have charged that it has wreaked havoc with established orthodoxies based upon traditional doctrines, and has served as a vehicle to dismantle denominations. Indeed, much of the cell church literature is very derogatory towards denominations and traditions. There is some evidence that suggests that this is purposeful, with the intention of bringing down denominational barriers in order to erect a new church structure, global in scope, yet local in oversight.” (Sarah Leslie, 1999 in Research Notes - Analyzing The "Cell Church" Model)
So is the Organic – Home – Cell Church Movement something new or just something repackaged?
In June 2010 a much publicized book in the Organic & Emergent circle was released, the Jesus Manifesto by Frank Viola and Leonard Sweet. Leonard Sweet is a well-known Emergent Church Leader also known by some as a New Ager (in spite of his denials but his own words contradict him. I saw a number of individuals endorsing the book without reading it, lauding it as a much needed tool for the church. Like “birds of the feather,” the endorsements of the Jesus Manifesto reads like a who’s who of the Emergent Movement with direct ties to the New Apostolic Reformation “…where apostles and prophets are rising up to take control of the Church and to build and usher in the Kingdom of God.” Of course you will not read about these backgrounds and affiliations unless you research the names endorsing it. Why? The short story, they want your focus on the new paradigm (practices) for the “new church” as they define them and to abandon the old IC “institutional church.” I must question these men who say and do these things drawing on a plethora of extra-Biblical and often non-Christian sources. The books of these men are full of them!
Who are these people favorably quoted in the Jesus Manifesto? Here are several:
John Henry Newman – An Anglican who converted to Roman Catholicism
Sören Kierkegaard – Mystic leading into Secular & Religious Existentialism
Meister Eckhart – Mystic whose writings looked to by both Emergent and Organic teachers
Timothy Radcliffe - a Roman Catholic priest who has an entire book devoted to Meister Eckhart just mentioned
(Gilbert Keith) G.K. Chesterton – Roman Catholic theologian and apologist - known as a "Common Sense Apostle & Cigar Smoking Mystic" by those who liked him
Reinhold Niebuhr (Wikipedia link) – Known for helping to shape liberal Protestant / Neo-orthodox theology in the 1940s and 50s and holding to the effect that “…secular idealism can speak the Word of God to us better than the Bible,” in answer Niebuhr’s views by Dr. Francis Schaeffer.
They treat these men as if they are bringing something new to the table that we have been missing in scriptures – but they are the liberal theologians of the past that have been creeping into the churches in a new garment of wool for more than a century!
These new “apostles” Viola, Sweet and others are attempting to redefine the leadership within local churches as we know it – according to these men we have had it wrong for some 1900 years and that it is time for reformation or more recently referred to as revolutionary thought. They would have you believe it is extra-biblical to give to any “institutional church” as if we worship the building or that it is wrong to support our pastors and missionaries. While they refer to their brethren in the local churches and encourage their disciples not to tear down the organized churches the teachings coming out of the organic churches is an attack of the foundation of the local church! The ‘real’ Apostle Paul knew their type all too well when he said, 2 Cor. 11:8 “I robbed other churches, taking wages [of them], to do you service.” – The Apostle Paul confronted these false apostles mocking them for their lies!
Who are these teachers? What is their background? What fruit do they bear to show they are sent by God to be our experts to reform the churches? Which side of the watershed are they on? Here are only a few links (of many) to reveal the fruit tying them with the Emergent Church Movement, a variety of heresies, liberal theology and ties to the New Age. Although these men may attempt to distance themselves and downplay accusations of heresy their continued use of aberrant teachings show them not to be trustworthy!
|The Other Side of Emergent: The New Apostolic Reformation||Emergence Christianity: Quantum Shift To Pantheism|
|Beware of Leonard Sweet: Master of Doublespeak||Frank Viola And The Merry Monk|
|Emergent Metaphysics - Part 6: From Cosmos, To Chaos, To Consciousness (Speaks to the Jesus Manifesto)||Frank Viola And Corrupt Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism|
|*Update* Frank Viola Practices Corrupt Contemplative/Centering Prayer?|
|Leonard Sweet On The Gospel||Giving Leonard Sweet A Nudge|
If this is not enough to persuade you of the dangers of listening to these teachers/apostles besides all of their other extra-biblical quotes, the open endorsement, praise and use of the book called The Shack may grab your attention. If you have read The Shack comparing it to most orthodox Christian teachings the author shows himself to be a person disenchanted with Christianity and the Bible. He lashes out at most fundamental truths held sacred by those holding the old paradigm (Biblicist view). Here are just a few examples:
The Shack’s version of the Trinity:
Pages 82-84 with a variety of ethnic descriptions as well as two of the three being female, “…a large African-American woman…” Papa God the Father. “…a small distinctively Asian woman…virtually transparent and hard to see…” Sarayu as the Holy Spirit. A man “…appeared Middle Eastern and dressed like a laborer complete with tool belt and gloves...”Jesus as a carpenter.
The Shack’s version of the Holy Spirit:
Page 171 Sophia is named and defined as, “...a personification of Papa’s wisdom,” and “She’s part of the mystery surrounding of Sarayu.” The conversation between Mack and Jesus concerning Sophia is as follows with a few inconsequential details left out (such as Mack stopping to tie his shoes): Mack asks if she is God too, making four of them. Jesus says no, there are only three of us. “Sophia is a personification of God’s wisdom.” Mack says, “Oh, like in Proverbs, where wisdom is pictured as a woman calling out in the streets, trying to find anyone who’ll listen to her?” Jesus: “That’s her.” Mack: “But…she seemed so real.” Jesus: “Oh, she’s quite real.” “She’s part of the mystery surrounding of Sarayu.”
The Shack’s powerless God that cannot take away pain:
Page 92 Papa is telling Mack, “Honey, there’s no easy answer that will take your pain away. Believe me, if I had one, I’d use it now. I have no magic wand to wave over you and make it all better. Life takes a bit of time and a lot of relationship.”
The nature of The Shack’s God:
Page 112, teaching pantheism, "God, who is the ground of all being, dwells in, around, and through all things....”
These are not isolated quotes from The Shack! Please read the following on our site:
The Shack can be used as a sort of spiritual litmus (fruit) test, whether a person is not saved, ignorant or an apostate person claiming the name of our Lord Jesus. The Shack plainly teaches of another God, Holy Spirit and Jesus! Both Frank Viola and Leonard Sweet endorse, praise and/or use The Shack in their writings, speech, or blogs along with their partners in the Emergent Church movement:
Frank Viola said, “All told: I will shamelessly throw my hat in the ring with those who are giving unqualified praise for The Shack. I believe that this book will make history in more ways than one. And as I’ve told Paul myself, I can’t wait until it trumps “The Purpose Driven Life.” At the present rate the book is selling, it won’t be too long for that to happen. Thank you, Paul Young, for writing this monumental work. The Kingdom of God is better off for it. ” Source was now dead link: http://frankviola.wordpress.com/2008/07/28/short-book-review-of-the-shack-by-william-p-young/
In his 2009 book So Beautiful, Leonard Sweet underscores his quantum “relational worldview” by favorably quoting from William Young’s The Shack regarding relationship.
Leonard Sweet, So Beautiful (Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook, 2009), p. 279, #118. Source: http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/?tag=leonard-sweet
They promote a form of theosophy, meaning we can get God’s truth from any religion (everyone has something to bring to the table) – that would explain their use of Reinhold Niebuhr (referenced above) in the Jesus Manifesto. This is in addition to the overabundance of books being sold making merchandise of ignorant (unlearned) or apostate believers. The Bible warns us of men like this, 2 Peter 2:3 “And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.”
In my readings, I see them claiming the name of Christ as Savior and His Supremacy but in the other hand denying a Biblicist view in promoting the a new paradigm. Second, an eager willingness to use non-Biblical resources and at the same time condemn many in the local churches similar practices with their traditions.
Another perspective coming into focus is the exodus of many from churches both (church and members) weakened by a host of other false teachings and programs that have been brought in supplanting good preaching of the Word. These programs have left many confused, disenchanted and embittered ready to leave and join their new way (paradigm). Our site has been warning of the dangers of many programs for better than 13 years now and we believe we are starting to see the real fruit of them!
If you take Viola and Sweet at the words of their books they point you to House Church resources and even offering help to pastors abandoning or considering to abandon their God called positions! They allege to have found the right way to have church with little organization, little structure, and loose doctrine. In their “church” everyone is equal no matter your gifting.
The Organic Church is a part of the Emergent Church movement – they are in bed together co-authoring books, making appearances together and so on with those of the Emergent Church Movement. Part 2 and Part 3 will make the case. Their books act as an introduction into a variety of false teachings (linked in this article) again with direct ties to the New Apostolic Reformation. The open praise and endorsement of The Shack shows they stand together attacking what any Bible believing Christian holds to be true. Then use a few legitimate criticisms in their books about what is wrong with the churches today they use this to ingratiate (suck up) to those who see these problems in their churches. – For almost every church problem they appear to have an answer! Viola and Sweet both will quote big names from history (Christian and non-Christian alike) to support whatever “fix” they propose but in what I see as a strategy to undermine the authority of the local church. One example, Charles Haddon Spurgeon whom they quote at least once in a positive light in the Jesus Manifesto I believe would quickly repudiate the use of his name in any positive association with that book!
I sense an arrogant attitude in their writing and have experienced it firsthand from some of their disciples. Some friends, who have dealt with this movement, have compared this to a cult-like mentality and I concur!
As this TRULY relates to spiritual warfare for the Bible Believing Christian – Rom. 16:17-18
To any Christian wavering on this topic, do you consider yourself spirit filled? Or “…tossed to and fro…” Eph. 4:14, 1 Cor. 3:1-2. Do you study your Bible? Acts 17:11, 2 Tim. 3:15. Are you a soldier for Christ as the Bible defines one? 2 Cor. 10:4-5, Eph. 6:13, (not like those of the Dominionist thinking of forcibly taking the world or the church).
Consider these words from my father-in-law who was a missionary to the Lakota and Navajo Indians in days gone by, “It is not enough to remain on the defensive, for if we elect to do so, we will, by attrition fall behind. No successful military commander ever prevailed in the long run by merely maintaining defensive emplacements.” (Missionary Warren Williams in his unpublished booklet warning about the New Age Movement and others involved with the Latter Rain Movement and Manifest Sons of God) – Comparable to the New Apostolic Reformation mentioned earlier.
This Organic Church Movement has made more than a proverbial line in the sand. History provides a perspective during the World War Two French defense ‘Maginot Line.’ Without an offense, it allowed Germany to flank them (run around) their defense position. – However for the faithful praying saints who know the scripture, you know the enemy cannot flank the God of the Bible with fine sounding words and eloquent speech! While weaker brothers and sisters are falling into this apostasy with the Organic, Emergent Church Movements what we are witnessing are battle lines being redrawn with a Satanic stronghold being established as never seen before within some Church walls!
Dr. Schaeffer nailed it when showing these things as watershed events, you may not see that dividing line in the snow today but eventually they are thousands of miles apart!
The Bible told us how to recognize them and judge by the fruit. 2 Cor. 11:13 “For such [are] false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.” The ‘Jesus’ being preached by these apostles IS ANOTHER JESUS, who permits, tolerates and even embraces false teachings as God’s truth. Doctrine (Biblical teaching) is downplayed labeling us as Pharisee or being a jaded fundamentalist when we quote scriptures in opposition to expose their false teachings! This sort of circular reasoning is common in the cults to justify and rationalize their positions and marginalize us.
My warning to those of the old Biblicist paradigm (that I count myself a part) - beware of the organic and emergent teachings the same as you would the cults! The truth does not fear examination be as the Bereans Acts 17:11 and see who is presenting the truth and who is lying!
Christian, this is a battle cry! Ephesians 6:12-18 gives us our directions and although much of our armor is defensive there is an offensive weapon listed. The sword of the spirit, the Word of God, it was never meant to be kept in the sheath or to be used just to protect ourselves. Any defensive armor will eventually break down if the enemy is allowed to beat upon it without pause or opposition. We, as Christian warriors must grasp our swords and go on the offensive as in 2 Cor. 10:3-5 with the Sword of the Spirit. With the armor we have, the faithful Christian has nothing to fear, for the war was won at Calvary. Battles are coming to be fought but the Word of God tells us clearly that the final victory is His. One day we will share in the rejoicing when the enemy and his troops are confined to their POW compound for eternity. (Missionary Warren Williams in his unpublished booklet warning about the New Age Movement)
My father-in-law was a man ahead of his time not realizing fully what a threat he saw with these people when he, likened them [the New Agers] “to a large fishnet. It is a loose network of individual knots and strings, having no central point, headquarters, clearly defined leader, (in the human sense), or chain of command. As with a fishnet, each segment is self-sufficient. A knot within a fishnet can be cut, but the overall integrity of the net is not affected.” The same can be said of the Emergent Church and Organic Church types based on the evidence here and in their books showing they are nothing more than closet New Agers (false teachers) in their doctrine at best or the wolves in sheep’s clothing the real apostles warned us about!
End of Part 1
The Way of The Organic Church: Part Two March 2011