Chalk Is Cheese

A new religion has been initiated, which is no more Christianity than chalk is cheese; and this religion, being destitute of moral honesty, palms itself off as the old faith with slight improvements, and on this plea usurps pulpits which were erected for gospel preaching.

Charles Haddon Spurgeon wrote these words in 1887, describing the declining state of ‘Christianity’ in England in his day.  They are very apt today, and more eloquent than I could ever come up with.   For example, a couple of U.S. polls since we are the most polled society in the history of the world and the easiest to find info on, 89% believe in heaven, and almost 75% think they are going there.  Simply contrast that with the well-known statements of Jesus …

Enter through the narrow gate.  For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.  But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to lie, and only a few find it.(Matthew 7:13-14)

75% of course, does not qualify as few.  Most of that number say they are Christians(77% of Americans identify themselves that way).  The level of ignorance of the true gospel among professing believers in Jesus Christ is staggering.  More than half of evangelical protestants do not believe Christianity is the only way to heaven among many other disastrous beliefs.

There are a number of false gospels out there.  There is the whole faith healing movement, which overtly speaks of the Bible as something which needs to be added to.  There is the self-help/prosperity gospel, which is involved in extreme twisting of the Bible and often describes itself not as preaching but as ‘life coaching’.  But what I’m going to focus on for the time being here is a couple of other areas that are I think the most dangerous and deceptive.  I think one of the best ways to explain the truth is to contrast it with what is being taught.  I’ll be starting a couple series of posts deconstructing one of the better examples of each of these groups, for the purpose of contrasting it with my understanding of what the Bible teaches.  I also have a bit of a connection with each of these writings, bordering on the tragic. 

The first group are what I call the ‘airbrushers’.  These are those who, while not trying to overtly deny biblical doctrine, simply decide not to talk about or at least not to emphasize those things they view as ‘negative’.   Because of this things like sin, repentance, and hell are rarely discussed, and if they are there is not nearly the emphasis or seriousness about them that you find in the Word of God.  This leads to a grossly defective and out-of-balance gospel, although there is often very strong teaching on the extremely important and valuable matters of God’s grace, mercy, love, patience, peace, etc., or what are falsely called the ‘positive’ character aspects of God(what would a God who was loving but not holy really be worth?  Or a loving God without power?). 

This path is well-typified by The Purpose-Driven Life.  Written in 2002, it is or at least was according to the numbers I checked the highest-selling non-fiction hardcover book in history.  22 million copies.  When God changed my life almost a year and a half ago, the particular assembly I started to worship with began a study on the ’40 Days of Purpose’.  I saw a few problems with it, but not that many.  As I have learned to think more and more biblically, that picture has gotten worse and worse.  Even among ‘fundamental’, ‘bible-believing’ churches, so much of it has been swallowed.  So many churches use the purpose-driven model of ministry.  Nothing wrong with using a good model.  But this one is sadly deficient. 

The second is gaining more and more influence.  This group is known commonly as the ‘Emergent’ or ‘Emerging’ church.  The opinion is generally presented that the church has classically misunderstood the Bible.  It’s not an overt rejection of the Bible, just a statement that it’s really hard to understand what it means on even the most basic matters, and we’ve all missed the boat, so here’s a better explanation.  A lot of symbolism, allegory, this is connected to that, everything represents something else … leaving the ‘literalist’ as a dinosaur who really has just badly misunderstood what the gospel is and what the Bible teaches in general.  There is also a good deal of discussion from this particular brand about making the Bible ‘relevant’ … as though ultimate truth isn’t relevant by it’s very nature inherently. 

By far the most responsible, articulate presentation of this particular thematic brand of teaching is in my opinion Velvet Elvis.  And this one hits even closer to home for me personally.  Last year our class played a tape by the man who wrote Velvet Elvis, and while I did dispute one of his key points I thought nothing more of it.  But lately I’ve been hearing more and more about him.  One of the reasons for that is geographic.  The group he pastors meets, as the crow flies, less than 16 miles from where I live and sit typing this.  Many of the youth in our church have been influenced by the teaching of this gifted, charismatic, insightful, and I truly believe genuine(in the sense of a real passionate belief in what he says) teacher. 

Before I get into any details on what these men teach, I want to make a couple things clear.  This is not personal.  I make no judgement at all on the private lives or character, and if I were in a position to do so I most certainly would not air it publicly.  I have no reason to think they are anything other than extremely decent leaders who most people would look up to and admire.  What I object to is only what they teach.  I expect that I will have more to commend them on than to criticize — this is actually part of the problem of course.  A counterfeit is more effective the more it resembles the truth.  I will also not be criticizing superfluous matters on a regular basis.  That’s not what this blog is about, and secondary issues should not divide us as Christians.  But when it comes to the gospel, we have to be vigilant.  As I strive to do in all things, I base this need on what we are taught in the Word of God.

even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! — Galatians 1:8

He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it. — Titus 1:9, referring to qualifications for elders

If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him.  Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work. — 2 John 10-11

Strong words.  But threats to the gospel require a strong response.  I am well aware that I am simply a layman, while by contrast both of these authors lead congregations in excess of 11,000.  That is an external judgement though, not a biblical one.  I ask this of all who read:  judge what I have said on the basis only of what the Holy Spirit enlightens you on the meaning of the Bible.  Don’t accept it, or reject it, because I have said it.  If I’m wrong, I would be excited and grateful to be shown the error of my thinking, so that I may retract it and correct how I present the gospel to those in the mission field God has granted me. 

The ‘hook’ on the back cover of Velvet Elvis is well worth considering here.  

We have to test everything.  I thank God for anybody anywhere who is pointing people to the mysteries of God.  But those people would all tell you to think long and hard about what they are saying and doing and creating.  Test it.  Probe it.  Do that to this book.  Don’t swallow it uncritically.  Think about it.  Wrestle with it.  Just because I’m a Christian and I’m trying to articulate a Christian worldview doesn’t mean I’ve got it nailed.  I’m contributing to the discussion.  God has spoken, and the rest is commentary, right?

Very well said, espescially the last sentence.  It is in that sense and spirit that I dive into the discussion here.