Brian McLaren Calls Hell and the Cross "False Advertising for God"

[MrJim]

"[T]his is one of the huge problems with the traditional understanding of hell, because if the Cross is in line with Jesus' teaching, then I won't say the only and I certainly won't say ... or even the primary or a primary meaning of the Cross ... is that the Kingdom of God doesn't come like the kingdoms of this world by inflicting violence and coercing people. But that the kingdom of God comes thru suffering and willing voluntary sacrifice right? But in an ironic way the doctrine of hell basically says no, that's not really true. At the end God gets his way thru coercion and violence and intimidation and uh domination just like every other kingdom does. The Cross isn't the center then, the Cross is almost a distraction and false advertising for God." Brian McLaren speaking...


Just something else to chat about;) saw this over at baptist boards...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SOUfsX2fbk

[ChristianCenturion]

"[T]his is one of the huge problems with the traditional understanding of hell, because if the Cross is in line with Jesus' teaching, then I won't say the only and I certainly won't say ... or even the primary or a primary meaning of the Cross ... is that the Kingdom of God doesn't come like the kingdoms of this world by inflicting violence and coercing people. But that the kingdom of God comes thru suffering and willing voluntary sacrifice right? But in an ironic way the doctrine of hell basically says no, that's not really true. At the end God gets his way thru coercion and violence and intimidation and uh domination just like every other kingdom does. The Cross isn't the center then, the Cross is almost a distraction and false advertising for God." Brian McLaren speaking...


Just something else to chat about;) saw this over at baptist boards...

It might be me, but it doesn't read well as a snippet (IMHO). But I think I get the general idea.

Looking at it from a rather precarious perspective, I might tend to agree with the cross being false advertising in a certain sense... the "center' of focus (or more specifically, my Lord) isn't the cross. But to move away from that precarious ledge, I will clarify - my Lord is the man who kept himself on that cross, not the cross itself. Perhaps emphasizing a distinction between God and a created thing.

With such a distinction, my opinion on the assertion within the snippet reads as hypothetically lowering God down to the creation's level or elevating the creation up to His authority. I mean really... can the clay legitimately slander the potter by making claims merely using choice words such as violence, intimidation, etc. or is it rightfully seen for what it is - an attempt to equate God or God's will to that of lesser?

And I don't necessarily agree with the suffering and sacrifice bit when considered from a certain perspective. While I do agree that there is suffering in this fallen world and there are struggles between desires of the flesh and the spirit, I believe an assumption is present with it always being an infinite battle.

... but perhaps my inference there is a bit off.
As I tried to convey, I had some difficulty with it being a snippet and I might be filling in where I think there are gaps based on the surrounding material.

[ChristianCenturion]

I don't believe that I'm familiar with this Mr. McLaren.

I'm not particularly impressed from what I'm reading and there seems to be a few things that immediately jump out as objectionable when reading his statements.

Just so I don't accidently misdirect the thread, was the OP regarding the fellow or the intention of being limited to the theology/statements pasted?

[MrJim]

http://www.understandthetimes.org/mclarentrans.shtml

http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/brianmclaren.htm

[Izdaari]

I'm currently reading McLaren's A Generous Orthodoxy. I'm about half way through it, but one observation I can make based on what I've read so far: McLaren doesn't make much sense in snippets. He rambles and says apparently self-contradictory things, but if you bear with him (and I personally find his style charming rather than annoying), what he means becomes clear... though it sometimes takes most of a chapter before the clarity emerges. And btw, he claims to be 100% Nicene and I think he means it, so he's more orthodox than the impression you'd get taking him out of full context.

[Nadiine]

I don't believe that I'm familiar with this Mr. McLaren.

I'm not particularly impressed from what I'm reading and there seems to be a few things that immediately jump out as objectionable when reading his statements.

Just so I don't accidently misdirect the thread, was the OP regarding the fellow or the intention of being limited to the theology/statements pasted?
Go do some studies on the Emergent Church & you'll see the horror stories of what it's really about underneath all the fluff that sound Christian.

It's a mixture of eastern philosophies, new agism & ecumenism.

Also look up "contemplative prayer" and "contemplative spirituality" which they push too. Right in there with them is Rick Warren (author of Purpose Driven Life). This is a discussion that's been in the ND debate area -
here's one of my posts with 2 links in it on McLaren:
http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=45658982&postcount=3

another post w/ a vid:
http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=45679941&postcount=9

LINKS:
http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/

http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Emerging-Church/
(lots about Mclaren there)

http://www.sfpulpit.com/?s=Brian+McLaren+and+the+Clarity+of+Scripture


http://watcherslamp.blogspot.com/2008/04/emergent-church-spreading-spiritual.html
(more links there)

It's very subtle and packaged/hidden well, but if you're looking at it closely, you'll see the serious problems with this movement.

[MrJim]

Go do some studies on the Emergent Church & you'll see the horror stories of what it's really about underneath all the fluff that sound Christian.

It's a mixture of eastern philosophies, new agism & ecumenism.

Also look up "contemplative prayer" and "contemplative spirituality" which they push too. Right in there with them is Rick Warren (author of Purpose Driven Life). This is a discussion that's been in the ND debate area -
here's one of my posts with 2 links in it on McLaren:
http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=45658982&postcount=3

another post w/ a vid:
http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=45679941&postcount=9

LINKS:
http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/

http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Emerging-Church/
(lots about Mclaren there)

http://www.sfpulpit.com/?s=Brian+McLaren+and+the+Clarity+of+Scripture


http://watcherslamp.blogspot.com/2008/04/emergent-church-spreading-spiritual.html
(more links there)

It's very subtle and packaged/hidden well, but if you're looking at it closely, you'll see the serious problems with this movement.

I agree~at first I was enchanted with it but as time goes on I get a bit more suspicious with many aspects of it. Problem is there is some good stuff going on but there appears to be no real foundation.

[Nadiine]

I agree~at first I was enchanted with it but as time goes on I get a bit more suspicious with many aspects of it. Problem is there is some good stuff going on but there appears to be no real foundation.
I think they do good packaging of this new movement, but a Christian who's properly grounded in scripture doctrine should be seeing red flags if they pay attn to the concepts being proposed.

The minute I read about contemplative prayer, I knew this movement was something to stay away from. They're introducing chanting as prayer. :doh: They might want to read Matt. 6 about that one.

They also use relativistic means of studying scripture - as well as altering scripture meanings to suit the times you live in.
In other words, the times have changed to where women are becoming pastors, so, the bible can then change to suit an evolving society. etc. etc.

Lots of stuff is mixed in there which you don't see up front. But its heavily infiltrating evangelical churches and being taught. I wouldn't have known about this if my sister hadn't had it come to her church in Florida.
She did some digging and couldn't believe what this really was.

She's been trying to set up a meeting with her Pastor to alert him to this course by McLaren & to keep it from being taught. I think it's going to be huge and flourish I'm afraid to say.
I hope I'm wrong.

[synger]

I think the over-emphasis on hell in some circles is indeed false advertising. No one is going to be in hell by accident, nor on God's whim. To set it up as our choice -- "cake or death!" -- can skew the perception of what is really being taught here.

God has chosen us already. His work on the cross is central to his reconciliation to his people. Those who reject that gift would not fit in heaven in the first place.

I've read A Generous Orthodoxy, and I think he has an interesting way of mixing the best traits of many Christian traditions. But he goes too far in a syncretic direction, and loses the focus.

We must always be centered on Christ, and him crucified. When we veer away from that too far, and overemphasize things like hell or works or whatever, we can easily become lost.

[Nadiine]

I think the over-emphasis on hell in some circles is indeed false advertising. No one is going to be in hell by accident, nor on God's whim. To set it up as our choice -- "cake or death!" -- can skew the perception of what is really being taught here.

God has chosen us already. His work on the cross is central to his reconciliation to his people. Those who reject that gift would not fit in heaven in the first place.

I've read A Generous Orthodoxy, and I think he has an interesting way of mixing the best traits of many Christian traditions. But he goes too far in a syncretic direction, and loses the focus.

We must always be centered on Christ, and him crucified. When we veer away from that too far, and overemphasize things like hell or works or whatever, we can easily become lost.
True, but then focus on ANY DOCTRINE too far in any certain way can produce the same bad results.

McLaren has outright Eastern philosophy mingled in some of his literature, my sister quoted some to me on the phone.
He promotes the contemplative prayer stuff too... I see red flags with all of the EC movement; sure mingle enough truth into any lie and it will become more palatable to Christians. That's how I view his theology.

[synger]

Contemplative prayer in and of itself is not necessarily dangerous. There is a fine, long tradition of contemplative prayer in Christian practice, from praying the Psalms on a prayer rope (the precursor to the rosary) to contemplating the Scriptures about Jesus' passion and death to mark the Hours of the day.

It's when prayer becomes mere navel-gazing and is no longer solidly based on contemplating Scripture and praying as Jesus taught us that we run into trouble.

[ghs1994]

if we have immersed ourself in the Word and not into other authors views of the Word, we should see this type of "christianity" coming a mile away.

stick to the Word and not an author. i think we read too much other stuff as it is as Christians and not enough in the pure Word.

commentaries have their place, but it is not the inspired Word of God.

[JacobHall86]

McLaren is a heretic.

[Nadiine]

if we have immersed ourself in the Word and not into other authors views of the Word, we should see this type of "christianity" coming a mile away.

stick to the Word and not an author. i think we read too much other stuff as it is as Christians and not enough in the pure Word.

commentaries have their place, but it is not the inspired Word of God.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: absolutely true. I don't read all those other books - I have some apologetics/study books and I do look up commentaries online if I don't understand some verses, but I'm not into reading all the side books from all these authors.
not that none can be a blessing or enrich our walks...
just we need to be careful & put more into God's word than other authors teaching us about it.

[JPPT1974]

Praying that he will find
The real Christ and that
He will become a child of God
This lost person that needs Him!

[JacobHall86]

His Book A Generous Orthodoxy is neither Generous, not Orthodoxy.

[MrJim]

Thread resurrection~let's hear it for Jacob ladies and gentlemenhttp://bestsmileys.com/clapping/1.gifhttp://bestsmileys.com/clapping/1.gifhttp://bestsmileys.com/clapping/1.gif

[GQ Chris]

McLaren is an Idiot, and a False teacher.

[Nadiine]

McLaren is an Idiot, and a False teacher.
tell us what you REALLY think!

;)

[Simon_Templar]

contemplative practices seem to get a lot of guilty by association treatment.

Contemplation has a long history in Christianity, its not something that was introduced by oriental influences, or new age. Though those groups do tend to adopt similar practices.

The truth is that contemplation was written out of Christianity by most of the protestant Churches because of their reactionary nature combined with their foundation largely upon the modern 'scientific' world view.

It has always been present in the older Christian traditions going back to the beginning.

Contemplation is in many ways very similar to "charismatic experience" and it has the same dangers that the charismatic experience has. Namely that it is primarily subjective experience and as such it is easy for people to get off track if they don't insist on holding themselves and their experiences accountable to objective doctrine.

however, that doesn't mean that either contemplation or charismata are all bad, or that they should be avoided. On the contrary, I believe that they are important, even necessary parts of the faith. They just need to be kept in balance by doctrine.

[GQ Chris]

if we have immersed ourself in the Word and not into other authors views of the Word, we should see this type of "christianity" coming a mile away.

stick to the Word and not an author. i think we read too much other stuff as it is as Christians and not enough in the pure Word.

commentaries have their place, but it is not the inspired Word of God.


and the moral relativist/liberal says, but the Bible has so many mistakes, we can't trust it, and there is no truth...

[intricatic]

You know why he says that, right? McLaren knows that good advertising typically appeals to people and thinks God should get better publicists. McLaren has good publicists - people love that guy.

[CADude12]

I'm looking for an uncompromising orthodoxy, not a generous one, that makes excuses for our sins, robs the cross of its power, and reduces Christianity to charity work with tolerance for unspeakable godlessness.

[intricatic]

I'm looking for an uncompromising orthodoxy, not a generous one, that makes excuses for our sins, robs the cross of its power, and reduces Christianity to charity work with tolerance for unspeakable godlessness.
That's unappealing. You'll never make it in advertising. The prophets were worse - people actually killed them because of how offensive their message was. There is something to say about negative publicity, though.