Chuck Smith Jr Clearing Things Up

"Something rather silly is behind all of this."

Chuck Jr, at the center of the controversy, gives a long and insightful comment on whats going on behind the anti-emergent talk.

Technorati Tags: , ,


Andrew Jones launched his first internet space in 1997 and has been teaching on related issues for the past 20 years. He travels all the time but lives between Wellington, San Francisco and a hobbit home in Prague.


  • Ed Enochs says:

    The Dangers of the Emergent Church Movement
    By Ed Enochs
    Chairman of the Evangelical Debate Society
    “But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come.”
    (2 Timothy 3:1)
    Introduction: The Reality of False Teaching in the Last Days
    Near the end of his earthly life and ministry, the Apostle Paul told his protégé Timothy that in the last days, before Jesus Christ’s return, “perilous times” would come. The Apostle Paul subsequently imparted to young Timothy what the characteristics of the end times would be. Paul said that in the last days,
    “Men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power (2 Timothy 3:3-5).
    According to the New Testament, which is the inspired, inerrant, infallible, authoritative and self-authenticating Word of Almighty God (2 Timothy 3:16-17 and 2 Peter 1:18-21), another conclusive sign of the end times would be the increase and rampant proliferation of false doctrine in and outside of the Christian Church.
    The Apostle Paul told Timothy in 2 Timothy 4:3, “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine.”
    In 1 Timothy 3:1 Paul wrote, “Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons.”
    In Acts 20, the Apostle Paul warned the Church at Ephesus,
    “That I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves. Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears.”
    The Apostle Peter also warned of the rise of false teachers and false doctrine in the last days when he wrote,
    “But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed. By covetousness they will exploit you with deceptive words; for a long time their judgment has not been idle, and their destruction does not slumber” (2 Peter 2:1-3).
    Our Lord Jesus Christ also warned us and gave us definitive signs of the end times and said that in the last days,
    “Take heed that no one deceives you For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many.” (Matthew 24:34-5).
    The false teaching that is so characteristic of the end times is the Apostle John warned us in 1 John 4:1,
    “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.”
    Thus, we are commanded by God in the Holy Scriptures to be like the nobe Bereans of Acts 17:11, “to search the Scriptures daily to see if these things be so”
    We are again, exhorted by the Apostle Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, to “test all things and to hold fast to the good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21) and to “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15).
    The Rise of the Emergent Church Movement
    In our own day and age, at the advent of a New Millennium and the beginning of the 21st Century, false teaching and false teachers are abounding throughout the Christian Church. One such false teaching that is threatening to destroy the American Evangelical Church today, is what many are calling “The Emergent Church Movement” a pernicious and destructive heretical movement that is attempting to redefine historic New Testament Christianity.
    The Emergent Church Movement and its leaders are attempting to create a new version of Christianity that is free of doctrinal and moral absolutes and
    In our fast paced, technological and entertainment driven superficial Western culture where stylistic sound- bites and digitally enhanced imagery takes precedent over substance and clearly delineated thought, American Evangelicals often do not have time or conscience desire to soberly and critically analyze the secular and ecclesiastical framework in which we live and move and have our being (Acts 17:28).
    Yet, make no mistake about it, there are currently ominously powerful sociological and ideological forces at work throughout Western Civilization that are working overtime to shape both the secular culture and Christian Church along postmodern lines and disseminate a secularist worldview that is bent on eviscerating the validity of the Church and is diametrically opposed to the historic Evangelical Christian faith and societal mission of world evangelization.
    While most American Evangelicals are busy being lulled to sleep and unwittingly conformed into submission to secularist and Anti-Christian forces by ever improving technology and round the clock entertainment choices that communicate evil and abominable messages that are entirely antithetical to the teachings and Lordship of Jesus Christ, the devil is actively energizing the postmodern and secularist ideological forces to completely subjugate American civilization and suppress the mission of the Evangelical Church.
    Bible believing Christians across America are now indulging themselves with the creature comforts of the world and are being lulled asleep by the call of the abjectly materialistic “American Dream” in pursuit of perpetual comfort and domestic ease through the quest for bigger and better material possessions.
    The American Church has largely bought into the insidious lie that the essence of human existence is materialism and image and the most important goal in life is to acquire bigger and better things, be it, houses, cars, boats, vacation homes and a litany of other materialistic and entertainment driven venues.
    We are told by secular forces that what matters most in life is to look good, to feel good and to live in optimum comfort for the indulgence of the self. American Evangelicals do not know they have actually bought into the philosophy of narcissism, an excessive preoccupation with self indulgence and one’s own personal importance, or with achieving one’s own chosen goals rather than bonding with others, or with associating only with others whom one chooses.
    Like the fictious technological parasites known as the Borg, who incessantly and unquestionably assimilate all life-forms into their ominous robotic collective, made famous in the Star Trek: the Next Generation television series, American Evangelicals are being lulled asleep by postmodern relativism, narcissist and entertainment driven self- indulgence and are being unwittingly culturally assimilated and rendered absolutely irrelevant and ineffective agents of Gospel Change by the seductive sirens of secularism.
    Contemporarily, many American Evangelicals have currently rejected the traditional Reformation emphasis on the centrality of the Bible, forensic justification and the person and redemptive work of Jesus Christ and his Cross and in turn, have adopted grotesquely unbiblical patterns of belief and worship, as the mass Evangelical rush towards the Emergent and Liturgical Church movements conclusively demonstrate.
    The emerging church or emergent church is a diverse movement according to a great article on the free encyclopedia, Wikipedia: within the American Christian Church that arose in the late 20th century as a reaction to the influence of modernism in Western Christianity. The movement is usually called a “conversation” by its proponents to emphasize its diffuse nature with contributions from many people and no explicitly defined leadership or direction. The emerging church seeks to deconstruct and reconstruct Christianity as its mainly Western members live in a postmodern culture. While practices and even core doctrine vary, most emergents can be recognized by the following values:
    · Missional living – Christians go out into the world to serve God rather than isolate themselves within communities of like-minded individuals.
    · Narrative theology – Teaching focuses on narrative presentations of faith and the Bible rather than systematic theology or biblical reductionism
    · Christ-likeness – While not neglecting the study of scripture or the love of the church, Christians focus their lives on the worship and emulation of the person of Jesus Christ
    · Authenticity – People in the postmodern culture seek real and authentic experiences in preference over scripted or superficial experiences. Emerging churches strive to be relevant to today’s culture and daily life, whether it be through worship or service opportunities. The core Christian message is unchanged but emerging churches attempt, as the church has throughout the centuries, to find ways to reach God’s people where they are to hear God’s message of unconditional love.
    Emergent Christians are predominantly found in Western Europe, North America and the South Pacific. Some attend local independent churches that specifically identify themselves as being “emergent”, while many others contribute to the conversation from within existing mainline denominations.
    Another definition of the Emergent Church Movement is as follows,
    Emerging Church groups have typically contained some or all of the following elements:
    · Highly creative approaches to worship and spiritual reflection, as compared to many American churches in recent years. This can involve everything from the use of contemporary music and films to liturgy, as well as more ancient customs. The goal in this area is generally to make the church more attractive to the unchurched.
    · A minimalist and decentralized organizational structure.
    · A flexible approach to theology whereby individual differences in belief and morality are accepted within reason.
    · A holistic view of the role of the church in society. This can mean anything from greater emphasis on fellowship in the structure of the group to a higher degree of emphasis on social action, community building or Christian outreach.
    · A desire to reanalyze the Bible against the context with the goal of revealing a multiplicity of valid perspectives rather than a single valid interpretation
    · A continual re-examination of theology.
    · A high value placed on creating communities built out of the creativity of those who are a part of each local body.
    · A belief in the journey of faith, both as individual and community. Membership is often viewed as participation in the community of faith.
    The Emergent Church movement has unwisely and unbiblically adopted the existential and ideological cultural hermeneutic of Postmodernism, the relativistic world-view that postulates that there are no ethical and propositional absolutes and seeks to deconstruct and overthrow traditional Western Christian doctrines and morals.
    In the Emergent Church movement the doctrines of Historic Evangelical Christianity are unhealthy and unnecessary relics of a semi-modernist and medieval ethos that has been obliterated by postmodernist and postmodern influenced Biblical Scholarship such as the New Perspective and anti-traditional Evangelical theology proponents such as New Testament scholars as E.P. Sanders, James Dunn and NT Wright.
    We are told by proponents of the Emergent Church movement that traditional Evangelical doctrine divides and that the contemporary Evangelical Christian Church movement within Western Civilization must immediately discard and instantaneously jettison the undue perceived dogmas of the Protestant Reformation and embrace traditionally divergent and diametrically opposed ecclesiastical movements such as Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy under the banner of one big relativistic conglomerate/ synthesis and smorgasbord of “Christian spirituality.”
    We are told by the postmodern driven Emergent Church proponents that traditional Evangelical doctrine is divisive and dogmatic and hence must be avoided at all costs, to be replaced by a more tolerant and inclusive “Christian spirituality” that embraces all ecclesiastical traditions that have functioned historically under the umbrella of historic Christendom.
    Essentially, the Emergent Church movement leaders and ethos are arguing that the Reformation was unnecessary and the quintessential doctrines of the Protestant Reformation such as the doctrine of the authority of the Bible alone and justification by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone is wrong, irrelevant and unnecessarily obstructionist towards the Emerging Church goal of uniting all professing Christians into one united church irrespective of heresy and unbiblical teaching and practices.
    The Emergent Church movement is forcefully and openly proclaiming that the traditional doctrinal differences that have historically divided Evangelical Protestants, Roman Catholics and adherents of Eastern Orthodoxy are ill-founded and unnecessary. This is why many Evangelicals are now openly incorporating aspects of Roman Catholic spirituality and teaching into the spiritual disciplines and doctrinal instruction within their respective local churches. Since doctrine no longer matters to most contemporary Evangelicals and historic Reformation teaching is always anathema to many Evangelical Pastors, we are told we should openly embrace the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox teaching and practice into our fellowships.
    We are also informed by many Emergent Church leaders that the traditional Evangelical opposition towards female pastors, elders and leadership in the local church are equally archaic and fallacious and that we must openly embrace the overt femmization of Christianity and allow women to lead men in the local Church despite the fact the Bible teaches that women are never to lead men in the context of the local church (1 Timothy 2).
    Likewise, many within the Emergent Church movement are calling the Church to embrace homosexuality as viable lifestyle and similarly adopt pluralism, the acceptance of all religions and life-styles as being equally valid as being true.
    However, despite this Postmodern and Emergent Church call to discard traditional and conservative Evangelical Doctrine and Practice, I believe this call towards complete assimilation into the postmodern ethos and the embracing of all varieties of spirituality and lifestyle __expression is unwarranted and self-defeating since the Postmodern world-view is so easily demonstrated to be illogical and self-refuting.
    Just as relativism can be demonstrated to be false and self-defeating based on the fact that this view in denying there are concrete and real absolutes at once, borrows from the traditional Christian absolutist world-view and deems the traditional Evangelical view to be wrong, all the while proclaiming there are no propositional truths, thus operating in a vicious and self-defeating circle of nonsensical language.
    Despite the Postmodernist Emergent Church call to disregard and discard the traditional and conservative Evangelical-Protestant doctrinal positions that clearly divided Evangelicalism from divergent forms of Ecclesiastical spirituality, doctrine, practice and engagement with secular culture, Postmodernity and the Emerging Church is self-defeating and offers the Christian Church in Western Civilization absolutely no concrete reason why we should not abandon Christianity altogether.
    In counter distinction to this ill-advised and destructive pathway charted out by many Postmodern and Emerging Evangelicals, there is a better and wiser course of action: embracing the doctrines of the Historic Evangelical Church for these teachings are founded on the authority of infallible Scripture and will never fade away.
    American Evangelicals must stand for the authority of the Bible alone, and the essential teachings of the Christian faith that has made Conservative Evangelicalism what it is, the most powerful force of Biblical change on the face of the Earth.
    American Evangelicals should not abandon the traditions of our Biblical Christianity, to do so would be to go against the clear authority of Holy Scripture and to effect mutiny against Almighty God who sent His Son Jesus Christ to be both Savior and Lord of the earth.
    Every Evangelical believer and Pastor in America should be careful to avoid the teachings of the Emergent Church movement and stand fast to the Word of God and the essential teachings of the Evangelical Christian Faith
    “The grass withers, the flower fades away, but the Word of God endures forever” (Isaiah 43:10).

  • Jason says:

    Wow, thats quite a comment, I hope you cut and pasted that..!

  • Aaron says:

    I imagine Ed is going to paste this comment everytime EC is mentioned. Sad thing is Ed doesn’t describe the EC as someone who is too well informed, but rather perfectly demonstrates the exlusivity, the elitist mentality, the moral brigade sensibilities, prejudice tendencies and so forth that many of us wish to emerge from. How can we be blamed?

  • Ed Enochs says:

    Aaron, that’s all you’ve got? The discerning reader will attest to the fact that I HAVE carefully and intellectually explored the EC movement and it is you who have resorted to a prejudiced bought of name calling.
    Aaron, instead of name calling and ad hominem attacks can you provide, instead an intellectually coherent defense of the EC movement that demonstrates is Biblical viability and continuity with historic Evangelicalism?
    As the old legal axiom demands “He asserts must prove”
    By posting here my concerns on the EC movement I am attempting to as Neo-Orthodox theologian Karl Barth did in publishing his 1919 Commentary on Romans, debunking mainline liberalism, I am sending a conservative salvo into your doctrinally suspect and woefully bankrupt postmodern EC movement, asking for a biblical answer to my question, not ad hominem attacks…

  • Jon Harris says:

    Brother Ed
    I notice that you are Chair of a Society that promotes debate, and hope that in your research you have had time to read the many discussions on this website, conducted over a number of years, about precisely the kinds of important issues you raise.
    And they are SO important, aren’t they?
    Personally, I do not tend to call myself Emergent or Evangelical, so I am not sure whether or not I am even qualified to enter into this debate. (That was a small, and probably ill-timed, joke.)
    However, as a Christian who follows Jesus and believes that the Bible is good news, I hope you will be able to see that, almost without exception, those whose names you will find on this website are passionately committed to the ancient truths of the Gospel.
    Grace and peace be yours.

  • Ed Enochs says:

    Thanks Jon,
    This Friday, (May 26th at 7:00pm) I will be debating a Unitarian Scholar named Dan Mages on the Deity of Christ at Calvary Chapel Saving Grace in Yorba Linda California, so I too, am dedicated to the Evangelical Christian faith and proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
    My concerns about the Emergent Church’s Ecumentical fervor and softness on the distinctions between the Protestant, Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy are what caused me to contact Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa on this issue.
    In my twenty years as a Christian, I have seen far too many people in the Calvary Movement fall away into Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism, heretical groups that do not possess the true Gospel of grace, for me to remain silent.
    At stake is the very relevance and distinctiveness of the Protestant Evangelical Church in constast to Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, two communions that deny that justifcation is forensic in nature and deny the Reformational understanding of “sola fide”, that is that justifcation is by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone based on the infallible authority of the Bible alone for the glory of God alone.
    The EC movement just does not meet the criteria of authentic Biblical Evangelicalism as taught in the Bible.

  • steve says:

    Ed, you note that in your initial comment that the emerging church is known for missional living; narrative theology (teaching focuses on narrative presentations of faith and the Bible), Christ-likeness (focus their lives on the worship and emulation of the person of Jesus Christ) and authenticity (emerging churches attempt, as the church has throughout the centuries, to find ways to reach God’s people where they are to hear God’s message of unconditional love).
    I thought it was a wonderful description of emerging church and I would be fascinated to know what exactly in these 4 things you consider to be teaching and heresy to be avoided?

  • Ed Enochs says:

    Romans 10:17
    1. A toleration of Roman Catholicism which preaches a false Gospel of works based righteousness and does not believe in the authority of Scripture alone.
    2. A toleration of Eastern Orthodoxy which preaches a false Gospel of works based righteousness and does not believe in the authority of Scripture alone.
    3. A de-emphasis on the authority of the Bible.
    4. An undermining of justifcation by grace alone.

  • andrew says:

    right, i am back after a short break.
    Ed – it is RUDE to paste an article in the comments section. i should have deleted it but people are now commenting on it and so i will let it stay.
    dont you have a site or blog to post it on?
    putting a link to Wikipedia or just quoting a few thoughts would have been more appropriate. Wikipedia’s definition, btw, is not as accurate as it used to be. [work in progress]
    another idea, if you are making a point, is to have some kind of proof to point to. Your number 3. and 4. for example, i would strongly disagree with.however, your charge that the emerging church is more tolerant and theremore more ecumenical carries some weight.
    Ed – I am glad you are a fan of Karl Barth and are familiar with his works. You will no doubt know of the impact of his trinitarian thinking on the impact of German missiology – “missio dei” and later, the idea of “missional” church.
    Much of our trinitarian missiology looks back to Barth.
    please tell us about .3 and .4 where are emerging church practitioners de-emphasising the bible and undermining grace?

  • joeturner says:

    Ed – I’m really curious why you think you are an arbiter of what is/isn’t sound doctrine.
    Could it not actually be you who are in error and the EC who are not?
    Either way, given your extensive (and entirely erroneous) knowledge of Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy and EC, I see no reason why we should have any kind of discussion with you when we have nothing much in common.
    You said “Conservative Evangelicalism what it is, the most powerful force of Biblical change on the face of the Earth.” I reject that premise.
    You said “Bible believing Christians across America are now indulging themselves with the creature comforts of the world and are being lulled asleep by the call of the abjectly materialistic “American Dream” in pursuit of perpetual comfort and domestic ease through the quest for bigger and better material possessions.” To suggest that EC is more materialistic than your self-defined Bible-beliving church is laughable.
    You said “we must openly embrace the overt femmization of Christianity and allow women to lead men in the local Church despite the fact the Bible teaches that women are never to lead men in the context of the local church (1 Timothy 2).”
    a) I don’t accept your interpretation of 1 Tim 2.
    b) even if I did, I am not forcing you to do anything.
    You said “EC movement that demonstrates is Biblical viability and continuity with historic Evangelicalism?”
    Why should I seek to justify myself before you when you have already done the equivalent of squatting in a friend’s house and demanding a 3-course meal?
    I reject your version historic Evangelism, I rebuke your behaviour and I insist that you apologise to TSK and desist.

  • Jon says:

    Ed, you can set up your own blog for free at I am not saying this to be dismissive; it’s just that there are social norms online as there are face-to-face. On blogs, comments tend to be fairly short, while entries can be much longer.
    Once you have your blog set up, leave a short comment here inviting people over.

  • Ed Enochs says:

    I find it interesting that EC people who are dedicated to freedom of expression seek to supress dissenting views here.
    It is important to note that liberalism when institutionalized become repressive totalitarianism that seeks to subjegate and supress all dissenting views, especially conservative Evangelicalism. I see this EC blog site is no different. You seek to supress me, not because, I do not adhere to your blogsphere “cultural norms” but because I adhere to a conservative Evangelicalism you dislike. Thus, like Marxism, Socialism and other liberal ideologies, your EC views, in the end are as repressive as the tradtionalists you write against.
    Postmodernism, the prevailing and predominate ideological worldview of most people residing with contemporary American and European civilization, espouses the abjectly relativistic view that traditional Western conceptions of reality, morality and propositional truth are only arbitrary sociological constructions of a bygone jingoistic ethos long since deemed passé.
    The militant secularist and anti-Christian purveyors of the contemporary postmodern worldview have been highly successful in indoctrinating collective American and European civilization that tolerance and acceptance of
    every conceivable idea and lifestyle, irrespective of how illogical and morally repugnant, must now be accepted by society at large.
    The secularist agenda and politically correct ‘thought police’, (an ideological Gestapo) are now attempting to force us how to think, believe and act and have carefully and successfully conditioned us through the deviant and bankrupt public education system and entertainment industry, to accept every worldview except, Bible based Evangelical Christianity. The resultant effect of this colossal secularist hijacking of contemporary culture is that now, the only heresy in America is the truth.
    Almost every conceivable deviant ual practice is now touted by secular society as being acceptable and the postmodern forces at be, are attempting to force all citizens within the North America Hemisphere and European continent to accept deviant lifestyles such as homosexuality or run the risk of being called a Fundamentalist Obstructionist, one who holds intolerant religious and political views that impede the progress and enlightenment of society. Already, in some Western countries such as very liberal contemporary Canada and Scandinavia, punitive legal measures or being exercised against Evangelicals Christians who speak the truth against this intolerant “tolerance” that attempts to force its citizens to accept ideas and lifestyle practices that the Bible calls sinful.
    Evangelicals and cultural conservatives that buck this trend of accepting societal and ual deviancy are being marginalized and castigated as Neanderthal-like in their outlook on life. If American and European Evangelicals are not careful and fail to act and speak out against this call for postmodern tolerance of unbiblical ideas and lifestyles, we run the risk of allowing the militant Anti-Christian secularist forces to take us down a path that most certainly lead to unbridled persecution and political tyranny reminiscent of Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia and modern day Communist China, where opposition to the ideology of the State is entirely suppressed.
    Evangelical Christians must call contemporary society back to the ethical standards of the Bible and with uncompromising Biblical conviction, preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the only hope for our world or run the risk of being forced into accepting the obviously self-refuting, contradictory and self-defeating ideology known as “tolerant” Postmodernism.
    This relativistic view postulates that nothing in Western Culture is wrong accept the teachings of Jesus Christ as found in the Bible. Make no mistakes about it folks, there is currently a massive cultural war taking place and many secularists are making the argument that there is no heresy in the world accept the truth.

  • John says:

    Ed, no one is “suppressing” you. Your comments haven’t been deleted, have they? They haven’t even been blocked. It just that comments on blogs are supposed to be…well comments about the blog post. Not articles in and of themselves.

  • Joe Kennedy says:

    Ed, if you’re going to continue to comment, the least you can do is offer examples (with citation) for what you accuse the EC of being and doing. Right now, all you’ve done is offer an ad hominem attack. (Look it up if you don’t know what it means.) And while you’re at it, why not answer Andrew’s questions? I suspect you have none.

  • Mike Morrell says:

    Hi Ed,
    A couple of preliminary thoughts and then I’ll jump right into the meat of it.
    1.) I am a lifelong Christian and I even consider myself theologically literate, but I have no idea what “forensic justification” is…and my guess is that Peter, James and John wouldn’t know either. It might even be the case that Paul wouldn’t have any idea, I dunno…
    2.) I like how in your comment on the other post you tell someone, regarding your sources, “My sources are the Word of God alone and the following…” Such honesty! Many of us who’d like to give credence to sola scriptura do in practice hold a “canon within the canon,” as well as remain open to influence by those doggone outside sources.
    Okay, to the meat. It seems, brother, that you have a heart for the “truth” and the spiritual well-being of others You are quite literate but my guess is its academia applied; you see yourself, perhaps, as a modern-day Francis Schaeffer–like Schaeffer before you you’re concerned about the supposed decline of Western culture, and you translate that concern into action. I’ll bet you help out a lot of younger people in your area, and are a voice of stability for many as you share the gospel as you’ve received it.
    Well what I want you to know, brother, is that the man whose ‘blog you’ve been sharing your emerging church fears on is a similarly kind man with a heart for the “lost” as well as young disciples on the way. Andrew probably doesn’t share his convictions with the same sort of…flare that you do, but his disarming hospitality invites people to inquire of him that Hope which is so evident in his heart, and he is more than willing to share.
    I can speak to this from experience…not as someone bereft of the gospel (though always in need of a good re-telling), but as a vagabond throughout Europe in 2003. In leg after leg of my journey, Andrew made my stay positively comfortable–he has a way of extending genuine hospitality even when we were nowhere near his own home! And this welcoming spirit translates to missionary concern for Andrew…the young leaders and churches around the world that he’s impacted can share a loud-and-clear testimony of this.
    I say all this to say: you may not agree with our inclinations or even our questions, but like Gamameil (sp?) in Paul’s day, perhaps you can agree to watch us for awhile, and if we bear godly fruit, well…could you find it in your heart to accept us?

  • ellie says:

    Ed does have a blog… he linked to it in the comments to another post. it’s at
    oddly, for someone committed to debate, comments are closed.

  • andrew jones says:

    thanks for coming over to chat. the other commenters were right – it is rude to leave such large impersonal off-the-topic eulogies.
    if we were all seated in my living room and you pulled out a document and started reading it, we would be looking at each other and wondering about your social skills.
    as for doctrine issues, i have had many of these discussions with fundamentalists . . . and dont really have time for another because it is Friday and i need to wrap up my week.
    So lets quicken it.
    This is where you ask for what i believe and i say check out what I told Aaron and in particular the various creeds i ascribe to including the World Evangelical Fellowship Statement of Faith and the Lausanne Convenent – a document that enables many of us around the world to move forward in our projects without suspicion of each other.
    And this is where you jump in and say that the Lausanne Covenant is a “parachurch” thang and not a real church thang, and that it is not sufficiently Reformed and besides that, you have problems with John Stott who was a key initiator of the document.
    And i ask you “Well, Ed, do you have some documents or creeds that would work for missionaries around the world involved in cross cultural ministry inside the emerging church, that are not post-colonial in nature and gives sufficient weight to the church in the global south and yet enough scope for Christs body to get on with doing the job He gave us without gettting bogged down in games of who is more righter than who?
    and you come back with capital letters and say
    “WORK???” What do you mean truth “works”? Truth is truth. You only have to believe it.
    And i say, “Yes, thanks Ed for coming and for your contribution.”
    And if you are podcasting your debate tonight then i would be happy to promote it so people can listen in. please come back and leave a link to where we can listen to your debate.

  • Ed Enochs says:

    Our last debate is hosted on the Calvary Chapel Saving Grace Website, but the quality of the video is very bad.
    We plan on having better video of tonight’s debate, but no internet hookup though.
    We are having a three on three debate on the Trinity on Friday June 16th at Calvary Chapel Saving Grace, I’ll see what I can do to have it on line live.
    Regarding my blog, I have closed it, only because of my lack of time in maintaining it. Unfortunately, some people were dropping “f-bombs” on my blog and and I did not have time to clean it up every day, sorry.
    Hopefully, someday, I’ll have a better blog site like this one that I can post on in the future.

  • Ed Enochs says:

    Dear folks,
    A lot of people are asking for my Bio, so here it is.
    My name is Lee Edward “Ed” Enochs, and I am the founder and Chairman of the Evangelical Debate Society, a Christian apologetics and collegiate ministry dedicated to the promotion and defense of Evangelical Christianity in our postmodern and post-Christian world. A native Michigander, Ed Enochs became a Christian on the University of Michigan Campus in 1986, after reading books on apologetics by C.S. Lewis and Josh McDowell.
    For the last twenty years I have been an active Evangelical Christian apologist throughout the Southern California area. I studied theology and apologetics at the Moody Bible Institute, Biola University and the Master’s Seminary and have been involved in campus Evangelism and apologetics on University Campuses here in Southern California.
    In recent years, Ed Enochs has organized and participated in several formal debates with Muslims, Mormons and Unitarians. The author of the soon to be released book entitled, The Almighty Three in One: A Biblical Defense of the Trinity, I am an advid fan of professional sports, and am a life long follower of the Michigan Wolverine Football team, I counts among my many vices, the memorization of useless sports statisics that stump my friends and I am the opponent of theological and political liberalism wherever I can find it. I count as my ideological mentors, the late great, John Owen, Francis Turretin, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Hodge, Louis Berkof, B.B. Warfield, Francis Shaeffer, Greg Bahnsen, Al Mohler Jr. RC Sproul, John Piper

  • joeturner says:

    Ed –
    This is Andrew’s blog, not yours.
    You come here to complain about a whole movement of which Andrew is just a part, using lies, half-truths and misquotes.
    Mostly you are just rude. I’m afraid you’ve lost all respect for your position by your heavy-handed manner.
    I hope you find somewhere to post where people care what you think. I fear you probably wont with an attitude like yours.

  • andrew says:

    I was praying for you this afternoon, as i was chopping the garlic for tonights pizza
    and thinking about your debate tonight
    and i want to share some impressions with you
    i think
    and i might be wrong
    that God loves your boldness
    and finds much delight in you
    and is leading you into a deeper relationship
    where you will not be ruled by the fear of man
    and where you will minister out of your character as well as your resume
    and your valient effort in debating will not be an end in itself but rather a doorway into the lives of others
    where you will connect with them, befriend them, and see ministry move to a more relational level like what Jesus did by eating with sinners and tax collectors
    if you follow Jesus into this kind of incarnational ministry, you will be identified with sinners and your reputation among men will suffer . . . but God will be impressed and will honor you in the long run.
    it will take integrity and risk, and you will discover than when you invest your life in loving sinners and leading them to truth through your life as well as your words,
    you will discover that God is interested in your whole life and not just your mind
    and you will have a gift worth offering back to him.
    blessings on your debate tonight.
    know that God is not so much concerned with whether you win or lose, but rather with how you play and how you love.
    let us know how you get on . .

  • Ed Enochs says:

    Wow, last night’s Trinity debate was powerful. I just finished participating in a three and a half hour debate on the Deity of Jesus Christ with Unitarian leader Dan Mages, the Director of Hunger Truth, a radical Emergent Church group that denies the Trinity.
    A video of the debate is being produced and those interested in obtaining the debate can e-mail me, and I will send it to them at the cost of making it and postage.
    Why I Believe in the Trinity
    “Fides quaerens intellectum (faith seeking understanding) and Credo ut intelligam (I believe that I might understand) are ancient Christian mottoes
    “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen” (2 Corinthians 13:14).
    “The Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit intimate a divine unity of one and the same substance in an indivisible equality; and therefore that they are not three Gods, but one God: although the Father hath begotten the Son, and so He who is the Father is not the Son; and the Son is begotten by the Father, and so He who is the Son is not the Father; and the Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son, but only the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, Himself also co-equal with the Father and the Son, and pertaining to the unity of the Trinity. ”
    Augustine of Hippo
    “On the Trinity”, Book I.
    Throughout my two- decade long sorjourn in this most precious Christian faith, I have always believed staunchly and unequivocably in the historic Christian doctrine of the Holy Trinity. I believe in the Doctrine of the Trinity simply and finally because the Holy Scriptures teach this and for no other reason.
    The Bible teaches that there in one true and living God (Deuteronomy 6:4, 1 Kings 8:60 and John 17:3)
    The Bible teaches that the Father is God (Matthew 28:19-20, John 6:27 and Romans 1:7).
    The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is God (Matthew 1:23, John 1:1-14, 8:58, Acts 20:28, Romans 9:5 and Col. 1:16-17).
    The Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit is God (Matthew 28:19-20, Acts 5:1-5 and 2 Corinthians 13:14)
    Thus, I come to the conclusion that the Historic Christian Faith is correct and that there in God exists the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, the true and living God, world without end amen.
    I believe in the historic Christian Faith. I believe in the doctrine of the Trinity. I belive in justification by grace alone through faith in Jesus Christ alone based on the authority of the Bible alone. Amen. This is my faith, the historic Christian faith, this is what I believe amen.

  • Aaron says:

    Sorry to flood your comments with responses to ED. But Ed said:
    >>> Aaron, that’s all you’ve got?
    Anyone is more than welcome to go to my site and download my thesis on the EC in the United States. I have devoted countless years and research to the EC as expressed in the U.S. And found some of Ed’s claims unwarranted. Simply, I questioning what proof he had to make such claims.
    >>> Aaron, instead of name calling and ad hominem attacks can you provide, instead an intellectually coherent defense of the EC movement that demonstrates is Biblical viability and continuity with historic Evangelicalism?
    My expertise does not lie in apologetics, nor did I understand his article to be solely theological in nature. Additionally, the problem I have with contemporary apologetics is the argumentative, non affirming tone to it. The article was indeed, difficult to get through without identifying that the writer might be biased in their arguments and have concluded prejudices without proper investigation.
    My public apologies to ED for “name calling.” My intention was not a personal attack, but rather a defense of some of the claims frequently made against the EC.
    Aaron Flores

  • scott says:

    What is the EC? I thought there was one body, one church. That being Christ Jesus! Is there ‘another’ bible out there I need to look at? With all sincerety, A ‘washed’ filthy rag brother

  • andrew says:

    hi scott – sounds like we are all part of that one same body, and a few of us are on that part of it that is emerging in new areas of our world.
    same gospel, different culture.

  • Gina says:

    wow… what a mess…goes to show we really are in the end times… brings to mind the word “apostasy”. More and more it makes me just want to stick to the Word of God, can’t go wrong there…

  • teresa says:

    Can I tell you how grateful I am that I found this?
    I am a widow…my fatherless son was repeatedly told at an Evangelical school that he was not a Christian because we are Roman Catholic. (Uh…you remember…the first Christians…I’m not splitting hairs…I’ll share with the Greeks!)
    As a Christian for over 35 years here’s what I know.
    Jesus did fine with whores and tax collectors…the only folks he couldn’t stomach were the religious self righteous.
    It’s not just about your relationship with Jesus…it’s how that relationship teaches you to love those around you better.
    Jesus said the Law consists of this: Love the Lord your God and your neighbor as yourself. That’s it…nothing extra.
    The rich young ruler called Jesus…”Lord, Lord” and Jesus said I never knew you…because when he (Jesus in the poor, forgotten, excluded, despised…) were cold, hungry, lonely…the rich young ruler ignored them.
    I never knew that was called “emerging”….I thought it was called Christlike….as in a follower of Christ….
    Thank you for being a beautiful model of Christlike love towards our brother who lacks tenderheartedness and humility.
    Bless you, Bless you, Bless you…this conversation is a healing balm on my wounded heart.

  • lgnash says:

    The Lord Jesus in the Flesh did not authorize any scripture to be written after his Death.People in the Roman World became Christians with out the NT.It was not written yet! Jesus taught gender, nationality, social status did not matter in gaining a relationship with the God Of Abraham. Actions for good and everyone is a child of God. So simple… WIKI;social dominance orientation…

  • brian mcnamee says:

    if you look at the “progress” we have made in the last 60 see mens standards are very related to the philosophy of the day, which now is evolutionary and naturally based. We see the freedom of speach and expression as a liscence to promolgate filth in our media. The scriptures declare God not to be an evolutionary God whose standards change with the emerging vvalues of the culture. The emergent movement to the degree that the core message is presented in new and novel ways is not wrong. I hear of living room couch churches, where the word is preached over coffee and more intereaction, very cool. But when the message itself is altered you are starting a drift that history will show is one that you wont recover from. Look at the %0’s television programs and look where emerging standards lead to. Ed is right, defend every point with scripture .His opening salvo is the word of God measure your movement against this and perhaps the letters to the churches in rev 2,3..

Leave a Reply