More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
Read between
December 23 - December 29, 2023
progressive Christians view the Bible as primarily a human book and emphasize personal conscience and practices rather than certainty and beliefs. They are also very open to redefining, reinterpreting, or even rejecting essential doctrines of the faith like the Virgin Birth, the deity of Jesus, and his bodily resurrection.
When I have doubts about my faith, or deep nagging questions that keep me up at night, I don’t have the luxury of finding “my truth” because I am committed to the truth. I want to know what is real. I want my worldview (the lens through which I see the world) to line up with reality. God either exists, or he doesn’t. The Bible is his Word, or it’s not. Jesus was raised from the dead, or he wasn’t. Christianity is true, or it isn’t. There is no “my truth” when it comes to God.
We can’t allow truth to be sacrificed on the altar of our feelings. We can’t allow our fear of offending others to prevent us from warning them that they’re about to step in front of a bus. Truth matters for bacon eaters, and truth matters for Christians.
In the context of faith, deconstruction is the process of systematically dissecting and often rejecting the beliefs you grew up with. Sometimes the Christian will deconstruct all the way into atheism. Some remain there, but others experience a reconstruction. But the type of faith they end up embracing almost never resembles the Christianity they formerly knew.[4] Traditional understandings of the Cross, the Bible, and the gospel get taken out with the trash.
The earliest creed in the history of Christianity is probably the one found in 1 Corinthians 15:3-5. Most scholars, even liberal and skeptical ones, say that this creed first began circulating as early as two to seven years after Jesus’ resurrection.
In fact, Kruger and Köstenberger demonstrate that the core canon was established as Scripture among Christians by the end of the first century.[12] This is such a powerful point because these supposed “other” Gospels weren’t written until the second and third centuries.[13] How could the later books compete with the four Gospels if those other books didn’t even exist yet?
Peter refers to “all [of Paul’s] letters” as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16).[15] That’s
But if we look at church history as a whole, every reformation was an attempt to get back to the earliest, most biblical, and most authentic version of Christianity. I think it’s time for another reformation. Not a reformation that progresses beyond historic Christianity. Not one that looks down on these early believers as less enlightened and more primitive in their understanding of God, but one that rediscovers the very definition of Christianity.
the human race has a problem too . . . a sin problem. There is only one cure, and sadly, many Christians throw away the cure because of a bad church experience.
biblical faith is trust—and that trust is based on good evidence.
If more churches would welcome the honest questions of doubters and engage with the intellectual side of their faith, they would become safe places for those who experience doubt. If people don’t feel understood, they are likely to find sympathy from those in the progressive camp who thrive on reveling in doubt. In progressive Christianity, doubt has become a badge of honor to bask in, rather than an obstacle to face and overcome.
But “the truth” was true whether I felt it or not. God was there. God is sovereign. He is good and trustworthy. I’ve tasted and seen. My heart is resolute, echoing the sentiments of Peter, who answered Jesus after many had walked away from him, “To whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life” (John 6:68).
Historically, Christians have viewed good works and acts of justice to be a fruit of their convictions. Believing the right things about God produces right actions. However, the emergent church flipped this on its head. Things like community, friendship, justice, and unity became the foundation upon which one’s faith is built. In other words, what someone does became more important than what someone believes. (Even though you have to believe that statement is true to affirm it.) Take the quote above. The logical problem with this idea is that the words themselves are statements—or more
...more
Anyone with a careful eye on the history and progression of the emergent movement can see that it is not dead. It is no longer underground. It is no longer a grassroots movement on the fringes of Christian culture. It has come out from the margins, stronger than ever but with a new name: progressive Christianity. The beliefs may be similar to those of the more liberal mainline denominations that burned through the church in the early 1900s. But progressive Christianity is a movement not satisfied to sit in the margins. It is directly aimed at infiltrating the evangelical church from within.
...more
The progressive views on everything from sexuality to politics to Christian life and practice are built on this foundation. As I’ve learned, progressive Christianity is not simply a shift in the Christian view of social issues. It’s not simply permission to embrace messiness and authenticity in Christian life. It’s not simply a response to doubt, legalism, abuse, or hypocrisy. It’s an entirely different religion—with another Jesus—and another gospel.
As author Anne Kennedy writes, We are not sitting at opposite sides of one long table. We are not eating of the one bread and drinking out of the one cup. We are talking about two different faiths, two different kinds of love, two different lords.[3]
Clement knew the apostles personally.[5] Clement believed that Christians should obey the Scriptures because they are the words of God: “Let us act according to that which is written (for the Holy Spirit saith, ‘Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom’). . . . Look carefully into the Scriptures, which are the true utterances of the Holy Spirit.”[6]
The Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of God [Christ] and His Spirit; but we, inasmuch as we are inferior to, and later in existence than, the Word of God and His Spirit, are on that very account destitute of the knowledge of His mysteries.[9]
Augustine quipped, “You ought to say plainly that you do not believe the gospel of Christ. For to believe what you please, and not to believe what you please, is to believe yourselves, and not the gospel.”[12]
The progressive view of the Cross is that Jesus was killed by an angry mob for speaking truth to power. God didn’t need his sacrifice, but in some way submitted to it in order to set an example of forgiveness for us all to follow. God didn’t require blood—humans did. As progressive author Brian Zahnd wrote, “God did not kill Jesus; human culture and civilization did. God did not demand the death of Jesus; we did.”[21]
These two gospels couldn’t be more different. The rule of faith expresses a Creator God who became flesh and invites us to follow him in loving God and our neighbor. A God who was crucified, buried, and physically resurrected to save mankind from sin and death. A God who will return again to judge every single person who has ever lived and determine their eternal destiny. By denying original sin and God’s plan to redeem humans and reconcile them to himself, the progressive gospel gives us an impotent deity who can only stand in “solidarity” with humans in our suffering and evil but can’t cure
...more
Like wheat and tares, true ideas and false ideas have grown together throughout church history, and it’s up to faithful Christians to be watchful and diligent to compare every idea with the Word of God and see if it lines up. As my misgivings about the class at church grew, I realized that my differences with the progressives were much more substantial than I had realized at first—and that Christians have been fighting these battles for two thousand years.
