THE EMERGING CHURCH LEADERS

"Traditional Christian Families are "NOT" deceived of what is happening globally with this Dialectic Process - methods of being tossed to and fro."

,...believe they are coming against Religiosity in the Traditional Church ("Traditional" - it is meant these days: Those Churches who still preach and teach correctly God's Word in the Pulpit), but in truth the demons (mind you the demons) in these Emerging leaders are coming against The God of The Bible - The Christian Faith and presenting a forms of Buddhism and Socialism. A form of godliness. These men are not dealing with the demons in themselves - in their heart-land and so they are in control of them. Please pray for them and do not be silent when God tells you to speak warnings to them and love them in not only in word but in deed: If they are hungry give them food, naked - cloth them for in so doing you shall heap coils of fire upon their head. Until they repent, they are enemies of The Gospel of Christ and of The Cross of Christ. The Blood of Christ is not in their words. But they deem men like Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud as great men - I'll go over that a little later.

Like the CFR and the media it controls, Rick Warren has mastered the dialectic skill of speaking out of both sides of his mouth. He knows how to cloak worldly ambitions in words that resemble Biblical humility. He hides his emphasis on social collectivism behind Biblical words that promise oneness in Christ. And he promotes the Communitarian agenda while acknowledging the Kingdom of God.'

The more that I personally read over the books in hand of some of these Emerging church leaders the more they are bearing these forms (Buddhism and Socialism) out. And the more they try to say they are trying to find a language to speak to the youth (which they call "PostModern") the more they are only trying to justifying their cause in Not knowing or teaching The Holy Scriptures which from a child one can know. It doesn't take another new language to teach the youth but what they are teaching is another doctrine and another gospel being led by another spirit which neither Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior or The Apostle Paul taught.

2 Tim 3:12-17

12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. KJV

Note: when these Emerging Leaders use the word "Religion" in a negative way they mean "the belief in The God of The Bible" and so do the mortal men they uphold as great critiques. When these men use "Religion" in a positive way (to them) it's mental, so they try to work psychology on other church members who they deem as not growing in number. These only quote Jesus' words to move people into "theory and practice" - Transformational Marxism, it's the dialectic process. The will of man power, rather than believing that God has His Body where He wants it. This deception, of the will of man power, is against God on all fronts beginning with His Word and Authority. For they desire to be in Authority and that is what makes this Emerging church Movement demonic and full of doctrines of demons. For to them, a Religious Structure is those who Hold Fast to The Word of God and speak in His Authority. They speak The Truth. These Emerging leaders, if they loved God they would love their brother (Christian's who hold to God's Word) for who is under God's Authority not their power. Jesus Is Lord, not any other man on earth.

"I feel like you can never pin down the Emerging Church on what they actually believe. That kind of slippery theology seems dangerous, cowardly, and way too convenient in our politically correct culture."

Response:

There is a very good reason why it's difficult to pin the Emerging Church down on certain issues. Simply put, the Emerging Church is an evolving movement, a fluid conversation. ...

The EC's slippery nature, as some might put it, also hints at its postmodern beginnings.....Conversation is good. That's the way many in the EC see things. The EC crowd is not nervous when grey areas linger. Mystery is newly embraced in the EC. And this shift away from a blind emphasis on propositional truth seems, to me anyway, much more in line with early Christian faith and practice.

Faith is a process. The Christian experience is a journey. We would do well to remember that for the early followers of Christ, faith was commonly referred to as "the Way"- not the destination... (<-------that is Buddhism beloved,.....emphasis mine.)

This statement illustrates how someone with a rigid perspective (biblical perspective) is perceived by someone with an Emerging Church perspective (“fresh perspective”). From Darren King’s viewpoint, if someone is not willing to abandon their “faith infrastructure,” (the Bible) for the “fresh perspective,” (ideas that are unbiblical or anti-biblical) the person is considered a dangerous crackpot. http://crossroad.to/articles2/1-emerging-criticism.htm

THE EMERGING CHURCH LEADERS (Leonard Sweet, Brian D. McLaren and Jerry Haselmayer)

Notice that they say: --------> "History offers four great (these leaders say 'great' mind you) critiques of religion and religious ideology: Marx (as in Karl Marx), Freud (as in Sigmund Freud), Nietzsche, and Jesus. Postmoderns (as Emerging Christian's so called) will read and refer to all four again and again.

Notice they place Jesus in with that circle of (so called) "great" men. The reason the churches are like the movie The Perfect Storm is what the Servant of Jesus Christ - Jude (4) and The Apostle Paul (1 Tim 1:18-19) wrote. But these Emerging Leaders are teaching cowardly ways and not to be valiant for The Word of God on the earth:

4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. KJV

1 Tim 1:18-19

18 This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare;

19 Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck:
KJV

Let's take a look at who these Emerging Leaders are referring to as a "great" men for ~Emerging Christian's~ to refer to again and again.

New possibilities

Nietzsche believed there could be positive possibilities for humans without God. Relinquishing the belief in God opens the way for human creative abilities to fully develop. The Christian God, he wrote, would no longer stand in the way, so human beings might stop turning their eyes toward a supernatural realm and begin to acknowledge the value of this world.

Nietzsche uses the metaphor of an open sea (like on an open sea's wave,....emphasis mine), which can be both exhilarating and terrifying. The people who eventually learn to create their lives anew will represent a new stage in human existence, the Übermensch — i.e. the personal archetype who, through the conquest of their own nihilism, themselves become a mythical hero. The 'death of God' is the motivation for Nietzsche's last (uncompleted) philosophical project, the 'revaluation of all values'.

Is this really what New believers (Christian's) should be referring to again and again, should Jesus Christ really be named among one of the "great" men as Nietzsche?

1. Religion as an illusion

Freud describes religion as an illusion, wishes that are the "fulfillments of the oldest, strongest, and most urgent wishes of mankind" (Ch. 6 pg.30). To differentiate between an illusion and an error, he lists scientific beliefs such as "Aristotle's belief that vermin are developed out of dung" (pg.39) as errors, but "the assertion made by certain nationalists that the Indo-Germanic race is the only one capable of civilization" is an illusion, simply because of the wishing involved. Put forth more explicitly, "what is characteristic of illusions is that they are derived from human wishes." (pg. 39) He adds, however, that, "Illusions need not necessarily be false." (pg.39) He gives the example of a middle-class girl having the illusion that a prince will marry her. While this is unlikely, it is not impossible. The fact that it is grounded in her wishes is what makes it an illusion.

2. Origins and development of religion

Freud begins by explaining religion in a similar term to that of totemism. The individual is essentially an enemy of society[1] and has instinctual urges that must be restrained to help society function. "Among these instinctual wishes are those of incest, cannibalism, and lust for killing." (pg. 10) His view of human nature is that it is anti-social, rebellious, and has high sexual and destructive tendencies. The destructive nature of humans sets a pre-inclination for disaster when humans must interact with others in society. "For masses are lazy and unintelligent; they have no love for instinctual renunciation, and they are not to be convinced by argument of its inevitability; and the individuals composing them support one another in giving free rein to their indiscipline." (pg. 7) So destructive is human nature, he claims, that "it is only through the influence of individuals who can set an example and whom masses recognize as their leaders that they can be induced to perform the work and undergo the renunciations on which the existence of civilization depends." (pg. 8) All this sets a terribly hostile society that could implode if it were not for civilizing forces and developing government.

He elaborates further on the development of religion, as the emphasis on acquisition of wealth and the satisfaction of instinctual drives (sex, wealth, glory, happiness, immortality) moves from "the material to the mental." As compensation for good behaviors, religion promises a reward.

The topic is resumed in the beginning of the subsequent work Civilization and Its Discontents:

“ One of these exceptional few calls himself my friend in his letters to me. I had sent him my small book that treats religion as an illusion, and he answered that he entirely agreed with my judgement upon religion , but that he was sorry I had not properly appreciated the true source of religious sentiments. This, he says, consists in a peculiar feeling, which he himself is never without, which he finds confirmed by many others, and which he may suppose is present in millions of people. It is a feeling which he would like to call a sensation of 'eternity', a feeling as of something limitless, unbounded--as it were, 'oceanic'. This feeling, he adds is a purely subjective fact, not an article of faith; it brings with it no assurance of personal immortality, but it is the source of the religious energy which is seized upon by the various Churches and religious systems, directed by them into particular channels, and doutbtless also exhausted by them. ....

The views expressed by the friend[2] whom I so much honour, and who himself once praised the magic of illusion in a poem [3] caused me no small difficulty. ... From my own experience I could not convince myself of the primary nature of such a feeling. But this gives me no right to deny that it does in fact occur in other people. The only question is whether it is being correctly interpreted and whether it ought to be regarded as the fons et origo of the whole need for religion.

Psychoanalysis of religion

Religion is an outshoot of the Oedipus complex, and represents man's helplessness in the world, having to face the ultimate fate of death, the struggle of civilization, and the forces of nature. He views God as a child-like "longing for [a] father." (pg. 18) In his words "The gods retain the threefold task: they must exorcize the terrors of nature, they must reconcile men to the cruelty of Fate, particularly as it is shown in death, and they must compensate them for the sufferings and privations which a civilized life in common has imposed on them."

Is this really what New believers (Christian's) should be referring to again and again, should Jesus Christ really be named among one of the "great" men as Sigmund Freud?

Marxist Dialectic: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels believed Hegel was "standing on his head", and claimed to put him back on his feet, ridding Hegel's logic of its idealist orientation, and conceiving what is now known as materialist or Marxist dialectics.... Dialectical method came to be seen as the vital foundation for any Marxist politics, through the work of Karl Korsch, Georg Lukács and certain members of the Frankfurt School.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels viewed religion (as believing in God,....emphasis mine) as a symptom of capitalist ills that would be cured by socialism...." (7-14) See The Rising World Religion

Karl Marx (1818 – 1883) adapted Hegel's philosophy to his vision of a Communist/socialist world system. His poetry and writings suggest that he was captivated by the occult.

● Like Marx, Lenin and Stalin saw Hegelian dialectic process as an essential tool for managing the masses. Through their hierarchical system of soviets (groups led by trained facilitators who led the group dialogue toward a prescribed and evolving consensus). Everyone had to trade individual thinking for collective thinking and communal values. The vision of "common good" was simply the carrot that justified total and cruel control. (See When Iron Gates Yield).

● The United Nations (1995) has promoted the dialectic process around the world. Like the mythical Phoenix rising out of its ashes, the UN emerged from the fiery devastation of World War II as a beacon of light to utopian humanists and their hopeful followers. Within two years after Communist leader Alger Hiss presided over its birth, some of its most powerful agencies had been established.
● UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) would be led by Julian Huxley -- brother of Aldous and a Fabian Socialist. He made the dialectic process the heart of UNESCO's global education plan. In his 1947 book, UNESCO: Its purpose and Its Philosophy, he wrote:

"The task before UNESCO... is to help the emergence of a single world culture. ....at the moment, two opposing philosophies of life confront each other from the West and from the East.... You may categorize the two philosophies as two super-nationalisms, or as individualism versus collectivism.... or as capitalism versus communism, or as Christianity versus Marxism. Can these opposites be reconciled, this antithesis be resolved in a higher synthesis? ...through the inexorable dialectic of evolution, it must happen....

"In pursuing this aim, we must eschew [shun] dogma - whether it be theological dogma or Marxist dogma.... East and West will not agree on a basis of the future if they merely hurl at each other the fixed ideas of the past. For that is what dogma's are -- the crystallizations of some dominant system of thought .... If we are to achieve progress, we must learn to uncrystalize our dogmas."

Webster's dictionary defines the word dialectic as "(Hegelian philosophy) a logical subjective development in thought, from a THESIS through an ANTITHESIS to a SYNTHESIS, or ... a continuous unification of opposites."

In the dialectic process, there must be two or more sides to everything. Nothing is absolute; everything is changing in a preplanned direction. http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/brainwashing/dialectic.htm

Enter Karl Marx who was not shy in proclaiming that Christianity, because of its teaching that we are all individuals, should be stamped out in pursuit of “Oneness of Mind”—the Hegelian Dialectic of thesis, antithesis and synthesis with synthesis becoming the new thesis, ever evolving to a higher plane of reality. If you think that sounds like something right out of the New Age Movement, remember that the religions of New Age and humanism are close cousins, the difference between the two being nothing more than the spiritual dimension of the New Age world view.

Marx, it is said, was deeply humane. He was dominated by one idea: how to help the exploited masses. What impoverishes them, he maintained, is capitalism. Once this rotten system is overthrown, after a transitional period of dictatorship of the proletariat, a society will emerge in which everyone will work according to his abilities in factories and farms belonging to the collective, and will be rewarded according to his needs. There will be... no wars, no revolutions, only an everlasting, universal brotherhood.... [p. 5]

Marx wrote:

“The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of man is a requisite for their real happiness. The call to abandon their illusions about their conditions is a call to abandon a condition which requires illusion...."[p. 6]

Marx was anti-religious because religion obstructs the fulfillment of the Communist ideal which he considers the only answer to the world's problems.[p. 6]

Personal history: Apparently Karl Marx was introduced early to Christianity. In his youth, he even appeared to be a devout Christian. But Marx' views had radically changed soon after he finished the German high school. As Pastor Wurmbrand explains:

"...a new Marx began to emerge. He writes in a poem, “I wish to avenge myself against the One who rules above.”[7] So he was convinced that there is One above who rules. ... Marx belonged to a relatively well-to-do family. He had not hungered in his childhood. He was much better off than many fellow students. What produced this terrible hatred against God? No personal motive is known. ...why should he have written these lines in his poem Invocation of One in Despair? [9]

So a god has snatched from me my all
In the curse and rack of destiny.
All his worlds are gone beyond recall!
Nothing but revenge is left to me!

I shall build my throne high overhead,
Cold, tremendous shall its summit be.
For its bulwark -- superstitious dread.
For its Marshall__blackest agony.[8]

The words “I shall build my throne high overhead” and the confession that from the one sitting on this throne will emanate only dread and agony, remind us of Lucifer’s proud boast: 'I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God.” (Isaiah 14:13)

But why does Marx wish such a throne? The answer is found in a little-known drama which he also composed during his student years. It is called Oulanein. To explain this title a digression is needed.[9]

There exists a Satanist church. One of its rituals is the black mass which Satanist priests recite at midnight. ... An orgy follows.... [pp.10-11]

We will be able to understand the drama Oulanem only in the light of a strange confession which Marx made in a poem called The
Player, later down-played by both himself and his followers:

The hellish vapors rise and fill the brain,
Till I go mad and my heart is utterly changed.
See this sword? The prince of darkness sold it to me. -
For me beats the time and gives the signs.
Ever more boldly I play the dance of death.[p.12]

Now I quote from [Marx's] drama Oulanem:

And they are also Oulanem, Oulanem.
The name rings forth like death, rings forth
Until it dies away in a wretched crawl.
Stop, I’ve got it now! It rises from my soul....

Yet I have power within my youthful arms
To clench and crush you [i.e., personified humanity] with tempestuous force,
While for us both the abyss yawns in darkness.
You will sink down and I shall follow laughing,
Whispering in your ears, “Descend, come with me, friend.” [p.12]

The Bible which Marx had studied in his high school years... says that the devil will be bound by an angel and cast into the bottomless pit (abyssos in Greek: see Revelation 20:3). Marx wishes to draw the whole of mankind into this pit reserved for the devil and his angels....[p.12-13]

Marx had loved the words of Mephistopheles in Faust, “Everything in existence is worth being destroyed.” Everything — including the proletariat and the comrades. Marx quoted these words.... Stalin acted on them and destroyed even his own family. [p.13]

The Satanist sect is not materialistic. It believes in eternal life. Oulanem, the person for whom Marx speaks, does not contest eternal life. He asserts it, but as a life of hate magnified to its extreme. It is worth noting that eternity for the devils means 'torment.” Thus Jesus was reproached by the demons: “Art you come hither to torment us before our time?” (Matthew 8:29)....

[Marx'] correspondence with his father testifies to his squandering great sums of money on pleasures and his constant quarreling with parental authority about this and other matters. Then he might have fallen in with the tenets of the highly secret Satanist church and received the rites of initiation. Satan, whom his worshippers see in their hallucinatory orgies, speaks through them. Thus Marx is only Satan’s mouthpiece when he utters in his poem Invocation of One in Despair the words, “I wish to avenge myself against the One who rules above.”

Listen to the end of Oulanem:

If there is a Something which devours,
I’ll leap within it, though I bring the world to ruins—
The world which bulks between me and the abyss
I will smash to pieces with my enduring curses....

In Oulanem Marx does what the devil does: he consigns the entire human race to damnation. Oulanem is probably the only drama in the world in which all the characters are aware of their own corruption, which they flaunt and celebrate with conviction. In this drama there is no black and white... All are satanic, corrupt, and doomed.

When he wrote these things, Marx... was eighteen. His life’s program had already been established. There was no word about serving mankind, the proletariat, or socialism. He wished to bring the world to ruin. He wished to build for himself a throne whose bulwark should be human shudder.

Wurmbrand found some "cryptic passages" as he read the letters between Marx and his father:

The son writes, 'My holy of holies was rent asunder and new gods had to be installed.'

On March 2, 1837, Marx’s father writes to his son: “Your advancement, the dear hope to see your name being once of great repute, and your earthly well-being are not the only desires of my heart.... Only if your heart remains pure and beats humanly and if no demon will be able to alienate your heart from better feelings, only then will I be happy.”

What made a father express suddenly the fear of demonic influence upon a young son who until then had been a confessed Christian? Was it the poems he received as a present from his son for his 55th birthday? The following quotation is taken from Marx’s poem On Hegel:

Words I teach all mixed up into a devilish muddle.
Thus, anyone may think just what he chooses to think.’
In his poem The Pale Maiden, he writes:

Thus heaven I’ve forfeited, I know it full well.
My soul, once true to God, is chosen for hell.

Is this really what New believers (Christian's) should be referring to again and again, should Jesus Christ really be named among one of the "great" men as Karl Marx? Or is Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh (1 John 4:2) who is the image of the Invisible God (Col. 1:15) and who is before (Gk: Prior, before, figuratively-Superior) all things and all Praises are to go to Him and Him alone?

Deut 13:1-4
13:1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,

2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;

3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

4 Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. KJV