# Brian McLaren shows true colors



## TimV (Feb 16, 2010)

I understand in his new book he comes right out and says things like the God pictured in parts of the OT is "hardly worthy of belief, much less worship". Has anyone read A New Kind Of Christianity?


----------



## toddpedlar (Feb 16, 2010)

I don't think I'd bother reading, much less pay for something that I wouldn't deem worth using to wipe clean my cat's litter box.


----------



## BobVigneault (Feb 16, 2010)

Thanks for being delicate Todd, when you got to the word 'wipe' I expected you to go in another direction. Whew!


----------



## LawrenceU (Feb 16, 2010)

BobVigneault said:


> Thanks for being delicate Todd, when you got to the word 'wipe' I expected you to go in another direction. Whew!



I was beginning to wonder as well. Perhaps that says more about us than it does Todd.


----------



## BobVigneault (Feb 16, 2010)

No doubt about that Lawrence. I don't have a cat so I was definitely thinking in another direction.


----------



## Andres (Feb 16, 2010)

The blog Dont' Stop Believing is doing a review of the questions that McLaren asks in the new book. 
Pretty shocking stuff.


----------



## toddpedlar (Feb 16, 2010)

TimV said:


> I understand in his new book he comes right out and says things like the God pictured in parts of the OT is "hardly worthy of belief, much less worship". Has anyone read A New Kind Of Christianity?


 
It's hard to come up with a comment that fits McLaren's point of view, except that his perspective is sheer blasphemy. How in the world he thinks he is qualified to judge the God of Scripture in this way is beyond me. His remakrs reflect raw hubris of the ugliest and most wicked kind, and I fear for his eternal sould if this truly reflects how he views God.


----------



## TimV (Feb 16, 2010)

When I heard about this Sunday I was actually glad, since even the densest, most ignorant Christians should be able to see him for what he is now. I've heard of one emergent church already here on the Central Coast that has distanced themselves from McLaren over the new book.


----------



## bouletheou (Feb 16, 2010)

_*I was actually glad, since even the densest, most ignorant Christians should be able to see him for what he is now.*_

Tim,
You are far too optimistic about what the average Christian will swallow. There's a good reason that the mainline became what it is today. People are less educated on epistemological and philosophical matters today than they were a hundred years ago. Logic has given way to gleeful irrationality. The Emergent Church is retracing 150 years of theological decline in less than a decade.

Alistair Begg was right. Unless God comes in revival, this nation's religious life will look like Europe's in less than a generation. Only the landscape will be littered with empty sheetmetal buildings with pleasing facades instead of great cathedrals of stone.


----------



## toddpedlar (Feb 16, 2010)

bouletheou said:


> _*I was actually glad, since even the densest, most ignorant Christians should be able to see him for what he is now.*_
> 
> Tim,
> You are far too optimistic about what the average Christian will swallow. There's a good reason that the mainline became what it is today. People are less educated on epistemological and philosophical matters today than they were a hundred years ago. Logic has given way to gleeful irrationality. The Emergent Church is retracing 150 years of theological decline in less than a decade.


 
Absolutely... the number of people who can simultaneously listen to teaching from a Reformed covenantal perspective and at the same time listen to and enjoy the likes of Tim Lahaye and Charles Stanley alongside the Reformed perspective, thinking all of them to be compatible and consistent with each other (or not caring a whit about that) is utterly shocking and dismaying. The fact that McLaren and his ilk have such a growing presence is indicative that many people just aren't thinking anymore at all, and are willing to scuttle Scripture in order to defer to ideas that are more 'comfortable' in terms of their lovey-dovey "Precious Moments" pictures of God.


----------



## CredoFidoSpero (Feb 16, 2010)

Tim Challies has a good post on it:
A New Kind of Christianity :: books, emergent, reviews :: A Reformed, Christian Blog


----------



## DMcFadden (Feb 16, 2010)

The good news? The emergent movement seems to be running out of steam, except in the "progressive" evangelical seminaries.
The bad news? Too many still consider McLaren an edgy "prophet" of sorts speaking "truth to power" about the silly old fashioned rationalistic eccentricities of orthodoxy.

After a good deal of probing analysis and self examination, I have attempted to look for something good in the man and concluded that there is something winsome and praiseworthy about Mr. McLaren . . . I really like his beard.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 16, 2010)

TimV said:


> When I heard about this Sunday I was actually glad, since even the densest, most ignorant Christians should be able to see him for what he is now. I've heard of one emergent church already here on the Central Coast that has distanced themselves from McLaren over the new book.


 
This is a good point. Years ago McLaren was pretending to be a conservative who just wants us to love each other better. I read a couple of his books at that time, and even though I was a young, very ill-educated Christian, if he had ever written that he didn't believe in the resurrection or the penal substitution, I would have quit reading him much sooner.


----------



## Poimen (Feb 16, 2010)

CredoFidoSpero said:


> Tim Challies has a good post on it:
> A New Kind of Christianity :: books, emergent, reviews :: A Reformed, Christian Blog


 
From the review:



> It wasn’t too long ago that I wrote about Brian McLaren and got in trouble. Reflecting on seeing him speak at a nearby church, I suggested that *he appears to love Jesus but hate God*. Based on immediate and furious reaction, I quickly retracted that statement. I should not have done so. I believed it then and I believe it now. And if it was true then, how much more true is it upon the release of his latest tome A New Kind of Christianity. In this book we finally see where McLaren’s journey has taken him; it has taken him into outright, rank, unapologetic apostasy. *He hates God*. Period.



Love it. It takes courage to say these things.


----------



## calgal (Feb 16, 2010)

DH and I heard him speak a few years ago. The guy is a flat out marxist spewing Liberation Theology and it was nauseating.


----------



## DMcFadden (Feb 16, 2010)

Andres said:


> The blog Dont' Stop Believing is doing a review of the questions that McLaren asks in the new book.
> Pretty shocking stuff.


 
Calling the revelations brought to light by the reviewer as "pretty shocking" would be like describing a viral hemorrhagic fever such as Ebola as something that could make you sick!

Yikes! McLaren packages heresy in a user-friendly box so attractive to young seminarians. I'm with Todd in suggesting that for which it would be most useful.


----------



## kvanlaan (Feb 16, 2010)

> It's hard to come up with a comment that fits McLaren's point of view, except that his perspective is sheer blasphemy. *How in the world he thinks he is qualified to judge the God of Scripture in this way is beyond me.* His remakrs reflect raw hubris of the ugliest and most wicked kind, and I fear for his eternal soul if this truly reflects how he views God.



Whenever I've seen him mentioned places, it lists him as an "activist and author" and not a preacher.


----------



## Marrow Man (Feb 16, 2010)

He came and spoke at the "Festivals of Faith" here at Louisville a couple of years ago. 'Nuff said.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 16, 2010)

From the blog:



> Postscript: some have asked why my reviews of A New Kind of Christianity have been critical. Isn’t there something positive to say about it? That’s a bit like asking, “Otherwise, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?”





---------- Post added at 08:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:17 PM ----------




kvanlaan said:


> Whenever I've seen him mentioned places, it lists him as an "activist and author" and not a preacher.


 
My school's online student blackboard will occasionally have a C.S. Lewis quote about education, but inevitably they will mark the quote, "C.S. Lewis, Irish scholar and writer." Um...how about _theologian?_ Perhaps if you're seeing McLaren mentioned in non-Christian sources, they may have just omitted "preacher" for political correctness.


----------



## kvanlaan (Feb 16, 2010)

> they may have just omitted "preacher" for political correctness.



And here I was hoping they omitted it for outright correctness...


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 16, 2010)

kvanlaan said:


> > they may have just omitted "preacher" for political correctness.
> 
> 
> 
> And here I was hoping they omitted it for outright correctness...


----------



## SolaSaint (Feb 16, 2010)

TimV said:


> I understand in his new book he comes right out and says things like the God pictured in parts of the OT is "hardly worthy of belief, much less worship". Has anyone read A New Kind Of Christianity?


 
Sounds like he's been rubbing elbows with John Shelby Spong. I cannot believe there are ordained men who read his books and articles and come away influenced to disregard the bible. I guess they never regarded it highly in the first place.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 16, 2010)

TimV said:


> I understand in his new book he comes right out and says things like the God pictured in parts of the OT is "hardly worthy of belief, much less worship". Has anyone read A New Kind Of Christianity?


 
Can anyone answer Tim V's question? I would love to see where this quote (in context) comes from if it is true.


----------



## SolaSaint (Feb 16, 2010)

I found this article while surfing for comments on his book. 

Brian McLaren, A New Kind of Christianity, Question 3 Don’t Stop Believing

He truly does have a low view of scripture.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 17, 2010)

The problem with the accusations is that they do not refer to specifics. I hate this. I am not sorry for requiring such. I don't care about what other people say about other works if they have no references....... Give references. Solid Proof, is important. Come on you guys....... Give page references of written works or don't comment. It is just hearsay till then. Especially from blogs.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Feb 17, 2010)

P.S. I am going to start deleting this stuff if it can't be identified. The Puritanboard is not a place of defecation upon those who hold to different views without reference. JHMO. I am tired of the stupid dumping on people.


PuritanCovenanter said:


> TimV said:
> 
> 
> > I understand in his new book he comes right out and says things like the God pictured in parts of the OT is "hardly worthy of belief, much less worship". Has anyone read A New Kind Of Christianity?
> ...


----------



## Herald (Feb 17, 2010)

BobVigneault said:


> No doubt about that Lawrence. I don't have a cat so I was definitely thinking in another direction.



Bob, I agree. I was thinking Todd was going to say something like wipe his window. That's how my mind operates. Pure as the wind driven snow.


----------



## Ivan (Feb 17, 2010)

Herald said:


> BobVigneault said:
> 
> 
> > No doubt about that Lawrence. I don't have a cat so I was definitely thinking in another direction.
> ...


 
We have a lot of people with colds around here so naturally I thought Todd was going to mention wiping one's nose.


----------



## py3ak (Feb 17, 2010)

austinww said:


> My school's online student blackboard will occasionally have a C.S. Lewis quote about education, but inevitably they will mark the quote, "C.S. Lewis, Irish scholar and writer." Um...how about _theologian?_ Perhaps if you're seeing McLaren mentioned in non-Christian sources, they may have just omitted "preacher" for political correctness.


 
Lewis would have said that he was not a theologian.


----------



## lynnie (Feb 17, 2010)

_The fact that McLaren and his ilk have such a growing presence _

How influential is he actually? A handful of churches in cities? Hundreds of churches in agreement, or thousands? Or lots of quasi Christian colleges using his books? I'm curious about hard numbers.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 17, 2010)

lynnie said:


> _The fact that McLaren and his ilk have such a growing presence _
> 
> How influential is he actually? A handful of churches in cities? Hundreds of churches in agreement, or thousands? Or lots of quasi Christian colleges using his books? I'm curious about hard numbers.


 
His books are read even by regular evangelicals. Like I said, I used to read McLaren and loved his writing, and others I knew read him, and I was at a conservative, evangelical church (arminian baptist). His older books were very popular and they weren't as openly liberal (sort of) as his current books.

---------- Post added at 10:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:44 AM ----------




py3ak said:


> austinww said:
> 
> 
> > My school's online student blackboard will occasionally have a C.S. Lewis quote about education, but inevitably they will mark the quote, "C.S. Lewis, Irish scholar and writer." Um...how about _theologian?_ Perhaps if you're seeing McLaren mentioned in non-Christian sources, they may have just omitted "preacher" for political correctness.
> ...


 
Or he might say everyone is a theologian. I still felt it was bizarre to label him that way. I would have said, "Anglican Theologian and author of _The Chronicles of Narnia_" because those are the things he's actually famous for.


----------



## DMcFadden (Feb 17, 2010)

I don't know about "hard" numbers, but he is quite popular in broad evangelical colleges and seminaries. I have spoken to numerous grads of my alma mater who consider him their guru.

My thought is that he is faddish. Just as we are already seeing a move away from the emergent church as yesterday's news, we will eventually see a dropping of McLaren as yesterday's writer. When I was in seminary there were a few "hot" writers that EVERYbody read; today, you can hardly find their books in print.


----------



## py3ak (Feb 17, 2010)

austinww said:


> py3ak said:
> 
> 
> > Lewis would have said that he was not a theologian.
> ...


 
Except that he actually did say that he wasn't a theologian, and was quite consistent in referring to himself as a layman. Thus when he is invited to address theological students, he says he is a sheep about to do some bleating.


----------



## lynnie (Feb 17, 2010)

_I don't know about "hard" numbers, but he is quite popular in broad evangelical colleges and seminaries. I have spoken to numerous grads of my alma mater who consider him their guru._

Ugh.


----------



## SolaSaint (Feb 18, 2010)

PuritanCovenanter said:


> TimV said:
> 
> 
> > I understand in his new book he comes right out and says things like the God pictured in parts of the OT is "hardly worthy of belief, much less worship". Has anyone read A New Kind Of Christianity?
> ...


 
Browse Inside A New Kind of Christianity: Ten Questions That Are Transforming the Faith by Brian D. McLaren

check out chapter 11, the third paragraph. but I wouldn't stop there, he says much the same all through the parts I read. in my opinion he truly does have a hatred for God.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 18, 2010)

WOW, chapter 11 is WAY beyond anything he used to say when I read him years ago.


----------



## dudley (Feb 18, 2010)

McLaren's position I believe is blasphemous and abominable to all of our beliefs as Reformed Protestants and really all Christian Protestants who accept the scriptures of the Old and New Testament, the Bible, as the Word of God and our sole source of His authority.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 18, 2010)

The section with the text TimV asked about is in Chapter 11, paragraph 3:



> In this light, a god who mandates an intentional supernatural disaster leading to unparalleled genocide is hardly worthy of belief, much less worship. How can you ask your children - or nonchurch colleagues and neighbors - to honor a deity so uncreative, overreactive, and utterly capricious regarding life? To make matters worse, the global holocaust strategy didn't even work. Soon the "good guy" Noah gets drunk, and soon after that his sons are up to no good, and soon after that we're right back to antediluvian violence and crime levels. Genocide, it turns out, doesn't really solve anything in Genesis, even if a character named "God" does it. (Could that be a worthy moral lesson to draw from the text?)





It's painful to quote this blasphemy, but there's the reference sought. *shudder*


----------



## buggy (Feb 18, 2010)

Sounds Gnostic to me, since it portrays God in the OT as evil and in the NT as good.


----------



## Kim G (Feb 18, 2010)

You can listen to him speak on YouTube. This first video talks about the "secret message of Jesus." Evidently the new kingdom he brought means that we have special relationships with all people now, regardless of their religion (around the 4 minute mark).

[video=youtube;5udKP9Q4_jw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5udKP9Q4_jw[/video]

Here is a series he did on "A New Kind of Christian."

[video=youtube;fFxMruDq1L4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFxMruDq1L4[/video]
[video=youtube;UbGwAzthiIs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbGwAzthiIs[/video]
[video=youtube;gfVe1Oc6N8Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfVe1Oc6N8Q[/video]


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 18, 2010)

buggy said:


> Sounds Gnostic to me, since it portrays God in the OT as evil and in the NT as good.


 
I doubt he'd have good words to say about the God who struck down Ananias and Sapphira, or Herod for that matter. And then there's all those "mean" things Jesus said...


----------



## kvanlaan (Feb 18, 2010)

> I doubt he'd have good words to say about the God who struck down Ananias and Sapphira, or Herod for that matter. And then there's all those "mean" things Jesus said...



I remember something Beeke (I think it was him) said: of all the verses that Jesus spoke in the Bible, the largest percentage were those regarding judgment. So the most 'relevant' Jesus by sheer volume in the Bible is the 'mean' Jesus.

I agree that we should not bash the man for the sake of bashing him (and that we should not do so without solid evidence), but his heresy is so fully revealed, should we not be almost 'evangelical' in warning weaker brothers who may fall into this false teaching? How should we treat him?



> But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.



He preaches a false gospel, that is completely without doubt. But I honestly want to know, in view of Gal 1:8, 9 how should we treat him if we met him or if we were invited to his house? He comes in the name of Christ and then blasphemes it continually _and_ teaches a false gospel. How do we love this enemy who is so completely opposed to God?

I know, love your enemies. But Paul's instruction is pretty clear. It is hard to love those who you are supposed to find accursed.


----------



## itsreed (Feb 19, 2010)

Not gnosticism, but denial of inspration/inerrancy. He doesn't believe that this is historical, or that God inspred the writing. Hence his ""some guy named god" comment. He's not accusing God of genocidal behavior, just the human authors of this "story".

This does not let him off. It does make a critique of him more accurate.


----------



## puritanpilgrim (Feb 20, 2010)

> “when we ask why God appears so violent in some passages of the Bible, we can suggest this hypothesis: if the human beings who produced those passages were violent and genocidal in their own development, they would naturally see God through the lens of their experience. The fact that those disturbing descriptions are found in the Bible doesn’t mean that we are stuck with them….”



I didn't read the book, I ripped it out of the blog which quoted the book. I'm assuming it's a real quote.

This is almost like the irony of Derrida using words and books to convey how you can't be sure the true meaning of words and books. Or like David Hume saying, "There are no absolutes." Which of course is an absolute statement. 

He criticizes previous scripture because of it's bias due to the author, but neglects to discern how this negates any new insight or revelation he may have due to the same rational.


----------

