Nudists and Postmoderns

Leonard Ravenhill had something interesting to say in his sermon, "Hell Has No Exits" and it applies quite well to the Emergent.

As you know, if you've become familiar with the Emergent heresy, the BIG REASON the Emergents say it is okay to be postmodern in your thought life is that we have to "be like 'em to reach 'em," a heresy common in the Evangelical church. Well, Ravenhill took up the subject of immodest dress in the church. Naturally, he got the usual excuse, "We have to dress like them to reach them."

To which he said, "I suppose some of you boys are praying you'll get called to a nudist colony."

Just thinking,
Phil Perkins. PS--Hear Ravenhill's sermons at sermonaudio.com.

Proving Emergents Are Liars In Three Sentences III

Oh yeah? How do you prove Emergents are liars and hypocrits in three sentences?

1. Emergents claim to be loving and tolerant, but call you "Fundie," "pig," "hypocrit," "moronic," or worse if you simply ask them to obey the God of the Bible.

2. Okay, the challenge was for three sentences and this is only two.

3. So, here's the other one.

In Christ,
Phil Perkins.

A New Category, An Old Strategy

One of the things I decided to do at the very first of this blog was to draw Emergents out to show their real character. I can't recall right now who I first read who said one of the hallmarks of the Emergent is anger. A good book to read by an Emergent is The Barbarian Way by Erwin McManus. He seeks, seemingly, to attempt to channel the anger of young church going males and sanctify it. The theme of the book is a refusal to become self-controlled in the area of anger and rebellion. Of course, he doesn't say it in those words, that would be too obvious. Instead, he speaks of not allowing yourself to be "domesticated."

In spite of their constant drum beat of tolerance and love, the real Emergent face is one of severe anger toward God, the Bible, and those who love both. So, if you want a little taste of the true character of the Emergent, click on the "Emergent Anger" label in the category box. I just added that category--I don't know why I didn't do so earlier.

In Christ,
Phil Perkins. PS--Okay, I DO know why. I'm old and I can't remember...stuff.

The Wit And Wisdom Of Rob Auld, part III--Something He Wants To Say Pubicly

Rob insists that this be made public. I have footnoted answers. Here it is:

Phil
I think you're a coward for removing that comment and want to say so publically.

The comment stands as written and you're a coward for removing it.(1) I'm not interested in censorship of any kind.(2) This is so typical of you fundies. Make substantive arguments and they censor you. (3)

Good luck with your message and once again Congrats on your promotion to god. I'm sure you've got some great advice for him. (4)

Btw, I was wrong you are a welder. My question was what gives a welder the education necessary to teach at a bible college? (5) I don't claim to be a scholar. You do. Defend yourself.

Rob

1. Actually, I've let you get away with many more gratuitous insults than most would.

2. I find that hard to believe since your first communication to me was, "Phil, You sound like a pig. Rob." Isn't that insult lingo for "Shut up. I hate you?"

3. This is one reason you're censored, Rob. You know I offered to republish the comment if you edit out the gratuitous insults and fabrications. This is an example of just such a fabrication. And that offer still stands.

4. And that's the other reason. Gratuitous insults. If you have an opinion, say it and support it. That sort of talk is just an ejaculation of perturbation.

5. A masters degree from one of the better evangelical seminaries in the country at that particular time, Western Conservative Baptist Seminary, now called Western Seminary.

I will put up one more thing from Rob. The comment I deleted had substantive issues worth answering. If he resubmits his comment without the gratuitous insults I will publish it as an article. If not, I will glean the actual arguments, publish them, and answer them some time in the next few days. They're worth answering for the edification of others. Beyond that, I want to move on to other topics. And I'm sure most of my three readers would like that, too.

In Christ,
Phil Perkins.

Email To Rob Auld

Here is an email I just sent to Rob Auld:

Rob,
I published your last comment on The Wit And Wisdom Of Rob Auld. I did so because there are substantive issues worth dealing with. However, after giving it some thought, I deleted it because of the gratuitous insults. If you would like to edit it and be more polite, I will be glad to publish it. Here are two examples of what I mean:

1. You accused me of lying when I held you accountable for misrepresenting my requests for politeness as threats. You said I was hiding the fact I was going to censor you if you did not add real arguments to buttress your evaluations. This is a moderated site. And the only way you could have known that I expressed any intention of censoring you was if I said so publicly. And I did so in the comment threads publicly published here, not taken down since the beginning of our interaction.

2. You again called me "mentally unbalanced." That sort of remark is not made with any sort of intent but to hurt.

So, if you think me wrong, stupid, a pig, or a plumber, say so with an argument that is logical and biblical. Then I will not censor you.

In Christ,
Phil Perkins. PS--Here is your comment in case you have not saved it in some form:

The Wit And Wisdom Of Rob Auld, part II

Rob Auld is not unusual. He is a typical Emergent. He goes into circles of believers. He pretends to believe the Scripture by saying so. When examined closely he denies the authority of the Scriptures. If you want to read all his comments on this site go back to EVANGELIZING EMERGENTS Part I and work your way forward in time. You will see that I am not stretching the truth here. At one point I shared the gospel of repentance with him and edited some of the articles and to make him feel welcome here. (He is still welcome to comment here. I just wanted to get him to open up more.) After being asked to repent and follow Jesus whole-heartedly in doctrine and behavior, he refused, so I undid most of the editing I did for his comfort because it is important for the church to know Emergents are not believers and it is even more important for Emergents to know that so they can set it right with God.

So here is more from Rob as an example of what Emergent doctrine does to the heart and mind. His words with a few explanatory parentheses are in italics. Mine are not:

closed mindedness...(and)...a mentally unbalanced state. (Things Rob accuses non-Emergents of having.)

I'm a liberal and believe that this is what God wants of me.

This is the most idiotic, condescending post I've ever read. Do some research, then come talk to me.

The Bible is our norming norm in the community of God. (as opposed to the non-norming norm?)

1. I'd like to sell my eldest daughter into slavery, what would be a fair price?
2. The Bible claims the plants were created before the sun. Plants use photosynthesis to survive, how exactly did this work?
3. The Bible says that my hands shouldn't come into contact with Pig Skin. What about the Superbowl today? (Questions to prove the Bible is bunk and not to be obeyed, even though he had already admitted that it had the right to tell him how to think--and getting really angry at me for asking if it did. It should be noted that these remarks were written immediately after the paragraph in which he said it was our "norming norm." Is there any logic in Emergent World?)

...do I think it's inerrant, infalliable (sic) etc. The answer there is no.

If your (sic) looking for literal answers... (No, Rob. Speak only in symbols. I prefer it that way. With actual answers we can't be as confused as we'd like. In fact, burn every book ever written that isn't at least 90% figurative. No one needs math, logic, history, medicine, physics, biology, mechanical engineering, architecture, electrical engineering, or the Bible anyway. Let's go back to hunting and gathering. Let's see now...where is that figurative deer to kill symbolically so that my family can be clothed allegorically and fed non-literally...I hope my arrow flies straight in a figurative sort of way...)

It (the Bible) is profitable for Doctrine, reproof etc. Okay, so the "norming norm," though having numerous errors and entire concepts that are bogus, according to Rob Auld, is good for "Doctirne." Which ones, Rob? Is there a key you have in mind to tell which ones are good and which ones are stupid? We'll need that key.

Don't threaten me. This was Rob Auld's response when I asked him to be polite enough to explain why believers are "moronic" or "pig(s)" or "plumbers" or some such insulting thing.

All you need is the scripture. This was in sarcasm, denying the authority of Scripture.

Frankly, your responses are typically Fundamentalist. This was meant as a smear. Notice, there is no supporting argument--only the insult.

You know more then anyone and you have the Absolute Truth because the Bible's on your side. This was in sarcasm, ridiculing those who rely on Scripture.

Don't worry about context and nuance (of Scripture) because you're right. Well, Rob, if you do not trust Scripture, what difference does its context or nuance make?

I'll thank you not to pronounce judgement over my final destination and whether I know Jesus or not. Actually, you have said you will not obey Scripture and given examples. Jesus said if we are ashamed of Him and His words, He will be ashamed of us. And He gave us two tests of whether or not we are His. One is whether or not we obey Him. Find that in John 10. The other is whether or not we obey the Father. Find that in I and II John. It is a theme of both books. Then decide for yourself.

Did you notice the haughty attitude for "plumbers?" Why did he feel he had to say such a thing? If Rob is an electrical engineer or a brain surgeon, his anscestors were blue collar. One might remind Rob, that he claims to follow (but actually doesn't) a carpenter. He is simply smarter than pretty much everyone else, I guess.

Which brings up this question: Since Emergents claim to know (believe) so little why do they look down on the intelligence of others so much? They sit in judgment on the apostles and prophets, deciding if what they wrote can be believed. Peter walked, ate, and evangelized with Jesus for three years, but Rob and other Emergents will decide if what Peter wrote is true?! Paul was commandeered by Jesus after having become a biblical scholar with one of the highest ranks in Israel. Then he actually corrected Peter. And Emergents decide if we can believe Paul?! And men like Brian McLaren or John Armstrong call believers arrogant?!

So take this as an example of the typical Emergent. They are not believers and they hate those who are because they hate the God of Scripture.

In Christ,
Phil Perkins.

The Wit And Wisdom Of Rob Auld

Here are a few new comments receieved today from "Rob." He is an Emergent with some very pointed things to say.

Phil, You sound like a pig.
Rob

Phil, You are absolutely moronic in your analysis.
Rob

Phil,You are absolutely moronic in your analysis.
Rob

Phil, Don't threaten me. Censor away, I submit you've censored quite a bit in your life. How can I leave Emergent? What is there to leave? We don't have to define ourselves along your sad denominational lines. We look to include and focus on those issues. You look to exclude and divide. We'll see whose 'more right' in the end I suppose. In the meantime, how does a plumber qualify to teach in a Bible school?

Rob

Ah there. Can't you just feel the Emergent love?

In Christ,
Phil Perkins, non-plumber. PS--Wonder if he hates carpenters, too.

Proving Emergents Are Liars In Three Sentences II

Oh yeah? How do you prove Emergents are liars and hypocrits in three sentences?

1. Emergents call themselves believers.

2. Emergents follow folks like Brian McLaren who says you really can't be certain of anything, Donald Miller who says we don't have to believe the gospel and if you say we do you're a heretic, and John H. Armstrong who says certitude is an idol.

3. The challenge was for three sentences, so here's another one. :)

In Christ,
Phil Perkins.

Proving Emergents Are Liars In Three Sentences I

Oh yeah? How do you prove Emergents are liars and hypocrits in three sentences?

1. Emergents talk and talk and talk and talk and talk and whine and whine and whine and moan and moan and moan about how mean Christians are to sodomites for saying that sodomy is wrong.

2. Christians all over the western world, including America, are now going to jail for saying sodomy is a sin.

3. Emergents don't say anything in the defense of pastors and grandmothers jailed in this way for their faith.

Ta Da. That was easy. I'll have to do this more often.

In Christ,
Phil Perkins.

Big Silva Lining In Emergent Cloud!

THE CLOUD

Ken Silva at Apprising ministries made a rather depressing point the other day in this article about Emergents that are now denying they are Emergent. Obviously, Rob Bell, Erwin McManus, and Donald Miller are Emergent in doctrine, whether they admit it or not.

As soon as I read the article, I thought, "Oh great! Another pack of Emerfibs to deconstruct; it never ends." Mark Driscoll seemed to start that particular trend. After being Emergent for years he said he was Emergent no longer. In less than a year, he is the star of Evangelicalism appearing with good men like John Piper. (As good as Piper's preaching and doctrine are, I am shocked at his lack of discernment.) What has Driscoll done? Well, he still has the jazz of something new, without the stigma of the Emergent. Suddenly he's doubly famous.

I suppose other Emergents are seeing his success and want some of that pie for themselves. This is disingenuous. (That means they're lying, for those of you in Rio Linda.) It's an Emerfib for two reasons:

1. Bell, McManus, Miller, and the rest know that their doctrine is Emergent.

2. Bell, McManus, Miller, and the rest know that their fame has been built by catering to the Emergent.

As Pastor Silva, points out, if it walks like a.......well...you know the rest.

Even Brian McLaren has gotten into the act. While he hasn't decided to no longer be Emergent, he has obviously lost the absolute truth debate. Now he is redefining the debate in terms of certainty. The argument is like this: "Okay there is absolute truth, but if you say you know what any of it is, you're stupid." And like the absolute truth argument, it fails. All one has to do is ask if Brian is all that certain that we cannot be certain. Two good articles on this are found here and here.

THE SILVER LINING

About three minutes after I read the article, though, a smile came to my ugly, going-to-turn-50-years-old-tomorrow face. Here's why: THEY HAVE TO LIE ABOUT WHO THEY ARE! They're squirming! Lying about their doctrine, changing how they state their doctrine because they are tired of loosing the debate--all this points not to their success, but to their failure. Otherwise, why change? Why not stay with a successful formula? The enemy has blinked.

It means folks like Pastor Silva, the Christian Research Network, thinkerup.blogspot.com., and others are having an effect. To all the pastors out there who have been vigilant and told their folks about the Emergent heresy, and to all the folks out there that have spoken to their pastors about the Emergent heresy, keep on fighting the good fight. Readjust your gunsights for this new tactic, but for now...

...this is a thanksgiving moment.

In Christ,
Phil Perkins.

Come And Die!

COME AND DIE!
Come and join a Billings street preaching team. We will concentrate in Billings going to parks, bars, and all sorts of public spaces. You can sharpen your gospel preaching skills. Learn to preach the law and the gospel as God’s tools for saving souls. We will also be preaching repentance at church parking lots all over town to church-goers.

Requirements:
1. Prayer and fasting. You will be expected to do both the day before an event.
2. Holiness of life. You will be expected to confess all sin and get rid of it before an event.
3. Preach and witness at least once a week. Week days and Saturdays we will go to the skateboard park, other parks, bars, gathering places, etc. There we will preach repentance and grace to unbelievers with boldness. On Sundays we will preach repentance to church goers in the parking lots of Billings churches.

Opportunities:
1. Preach repentance and grace in Billings and surrounding towns.
2. Sing for the Lord.
3. See folks saved.
4. Be mocked as He was mocked.

Needed:
1. Musicians.
2. Preachers.
3. Witnessers.
4. Prayer warriors to pray during events.

Contact: Phil Perkins 406-672-7450.

A Living Example/Warning

Interestingly, the main feedback to my three part article on Evangelizing Emergents is from angry Emergents.

I predicated the articles on the fact that Emergents, if truly trusting in Emergent doctrines, are not Christian believers at all. Rather, they are self-deceived and need to be confronted with this fact. And that's the best-case scenario. The worst case is that they are knowingly attempting to deceive others. I started with two questions that Emergents can't answer. 1. Is there such a thing as a right answer? 2. Does the Bible have the right to tell you how to think?

This weekend a very angry Emergent ripped into me. His name is Rob. He answered both questions "yes." However, as the conversation went on it became obvious Rob does not obey Scripture at all. Was he lying? I think yes and no. If you read the comment threads on the first and second parts of "Evangelizing Emergents" and look for Rob, you will probably find that he is convinced of his position. He thought he was obeying Scripture. But read on. You will find he has no intention of giving the Bible full trust and obedience at all. Instead, he comes fully equipped with a list of reasons to impugn the Scripture and those that put too much stock in it.

So why is this important? Two reasons. First, it's a warning to Christians. If your church is looking for a youth leader and a fellow like Rob emerges from your congregation or moves in from outside, you can easily expose your kids to a very hideous false teaching. When questioned if he will obey Scriptures he might very well answer "yes." If not examined further, you can imagine the sort of havoc he could bring to your church and the split it could cause when it's discovered what you have on your hands. At worst some of your kids will be messed up and the church will split. At best, you will have to tell your kids, "Gee, sorry. Disregard what your youth leader has said for the last two years. And sorry for wasting your time coming here every Wednesday to listen to him. He's a heretic."

Second, it's a warning to Emergents or those considering the Emergent. Look at where you're really headed. It's a deceptive movement. They claim to be Christian. Rob even claimed to be mentally obedient to Scripture. Rob was not. And the Emergent is not. In fact, the whole point of the Emergent is to be postmodern--to not believe. This cannot be reconciled to a religion with a gospel that says "Repent and believe for the forgiveness of sins." "Repent" means to reshape your thinking. Stop thinking the old way and start thinking the new way--the biblical way. Postmodernism is an ideology that says, "Don't believe anything. Think any way you wish and that will be true for you."

Please take this warning if you are an Emergent or not.

In Christ,
Phil Perkins.