Chuck Smith-Beth Moore and "Where do you Stand"
Many years ago Martin Luthor took a stand for what he believed was right.
Now Chuck Smith takes a stand seemingly against the Emergent Church here-
http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/CCSpecialReport.htm
I think its a great first move but we need to be careful and see where this goes.
My prayers are that Chuck will stand firm on his statement.
But I cant help think about Beth Moore and her less than honest statement posted on Slice of Laodicea here-
My Dear Sisters and Brothers,
Recently I was interviewed for a program on prayer in which I was asked certain questions without any knowledge of what other participants would say or share. Since its release, I've been baffled by some inquiries into whether or not I am a proponent of approaches to prayer with overtones of Eastern meditation. Not only is my answer no, the thought never even occurred to me. I'm a Southern Baptist, for crying out loud! I'm afraid I have to convey the full extent of my ignorance when I tell you with stark honesty that I wasn't even aware of the controversy. I am not involved in any kind of emergent church movement or any kind of mystical prayer movement. Seeing people come to know Christ Jesus through the study of His Word is the only movement I'm part of. I thought I was simply one of a number of people who were being interviewed about approaches to prayer. I also thought that our different approaches would be part of what made the program interesting. In no way did it ever occur to me that each participant would be seen as part of the same movement.
I was told that I was asked to participate because I'd written Praying God's Word. I'm not sure you'd find anything further from a mystical, almost out-of-body prayer experience I'm being asked if I support. If I have participated in something unsound, it was hugely accidental and I ask your forgiveness. Nothing could be further from my desire. I have shared platforms with other speakers and teachers a number of times. My frustration is that any of us would be at a loss to take responsibility for every point of doctrine the others hold. I humble myself before you and ask that you would please hold me responsible for my words and answers only and, even then, please keep in mind that editors can use bits and pieces of interviews to convey something the interviewee might not have intended to say. Here's what I intended to say: pray, pray, and pray some more and learn how to listen for God's response.
Rest assured I have been greatly helped by this experience and will be more careful in the future. Thank you not only for your concern but for the accountability. I want very much to be a solid servant of God and His Word. I want to keep growing in Christ. In that process, I am more than willing to receive sound correction. I am honored to serve you.
In Christ's Name,
Beth Moore
Beths statement here never made it to her website.
Ive never seen any effort from Beth to withdraw from the Be Still Project.
And (wait let me pull the hook out of my mouth)-Umm better.
To this date I have never heard Beth speak out against Emergent or contemplative prayer.
Beth is pro-Catholic and hangs with the Word Faith crowd.
That to me says a lot.
So much around this Emergent Church movement seems to be weaved in lies, deceit and coverup.
If Emergent is so good why cover it up?
The church I went to before taught Emergent church rituals and when I confronted the leadership with the facts they merely denied involvement, covered it up and changed the names of the rituals around.
They are still promoting Emergent and contemplative its just packaged different.
So where do you stand?
I think we should take a wait and see stance with Chuck Smith.
We already know Beth Moore just wants to play to the crowd.
Lets be careful.
posted by Tim Wirth | 7:10 PM
4 Comments:
Chuck Jr. posted on it here:
http://tallskinnykiwi.typepad.com/tallskinnykiwi/2006/05/the_chuck_smith.html#c17664609
"Hey, Andrew, I lost your email address too and Craig forgot to forward it to me.
Anyway . . . No, my dad didn't write the CCOF letter. I think it was written by my uncle. Of course, my dad is still responsible for everything that comes out of Costa Mecca and claims to define Calvary Chapel, so we can assume that he holds to the views expressed in that document. Which is, of course, sad.
Yes, write my dad. He needs to hear from people who are in the emerging conversation. He needs to be informed that it is not what he's been told or what someone else read on someone else's blog site.
I do not believe my uncle has done any firsthand research (i.e., read McLaren, Sweet, yourself, Paggitt, Kimbal, etc.). I tried to correct his views a couple of weeks ago, but his ears were already attuned to other voices and they prevailed.
Something rather silly is behind all of this . . .
Last year I edited ten of my dad's sermons dealing with life's troubles. Since I was turning oral expository sermons into a book, I reformatted them, took out a lot of filler, filled in a lot of empty spaces, and modified statements that were unclear. I also reformatted the prayers, etc. In the process, I included quotes by Len Sweet and Anthony de Mello. When I emailed the manuscript and my edits to my dad, I included a cover email to warn him about the de Mello quote and to urge him (or his editor) to read the mss carefully and remove anything he did not like or that might be offensive to others (who, perhaps having no understanding of biblical or spiritual discernment, think that if you read an author you automatically embrace everything the author says, true or false, and therefore try to control the reading habits of all Christians, especially Christian leaders), etc.
A couple weeks later I asked my dad when I would see the mss again (having three published works I was looking forward to working with the editor at the publishing company). Well, he had sent the mss into the pipeline, which resulted in a small bit of weak editing (by someone who assumed I meant "program" when I wrote of a "pogrom" against the Jews--that type of thing). But the poor sentence structure and "offensive quotes" did not get edited out. The errors are astounding.
My dad explained that when the publisher saw "storms" in the title of the book they rushed it to pring in order to capitalize on the Katrina hurricane. And so there it is, errors and all. Quite embarrassing to say the least.
In fact, there was a note I had put in italics and bracketed for the editor, saying that I wished my dad would clarify a statement in the book that contradicted an earlier statement. That editor's note appears in the published book! Sort of like a scribal note getting inserted into the text.
But more than embarrassing for my dad. He became the target of the neo-Pharisees who believe it's their job to sniff out error and defame those men and women of God who are actually doing something for the kingdom of heaven. And so those websites that in all their history have had less than 2,000 hits began to publish their heresy reports. My dad has had to explain that the offensive parts of the book were my insertions and not original to his work.
So . . . [deleted]
Now to be perfectly honest, I haven't belonged in the Calvary Chapel community for a long time. I identify with early Calvary Chapel (the culturally relevant, rock-n-roll worship, hippie church), but not as much with the institutionalized version today. I've stayed only because of my relationship to my father, whom I love and respect.
Calvary Chapel, as I perceive it is:
Fundamentalist--I am not
Dispensationalist--I am not
Anti-intellectualist (like the warning about not anything written by emergent leaders)--I am not
Primitivist--I am not
Officially, we have withdrawn from the Calvary Chapel affiliation, and for the very amicable reason that I (we) seek a breadth of relationships that CC is not willing to accommodate. For example, my close friendship with a Roman Catholic monk who died a few weeks ago. He was a wonderful person and spiritual mentor to me.
I should add, some of the stuff written in the CCOF missive were assumptions someone made based on how they perceived our church in Capistrano Beach. For example, I don't know of any emergent church (if there is such a thing yet) that has incorporated icons into the devotional life of their spiritual community. But for a while we had beautiful icons (byzantine-style) hanging in our sanctuary. Someone assumed "That must be one of those dadgum emergent thingies!" If only they had asked. But those in my old hood have never given me credit for originality, and they're always guessing who it is that's influincing me now. I've tried to tell them, it's the Lord Jesus Christ whose teaching they taught me to trust and to follow, but for some people, that just doesn't make any sense."
To suggest that Beth Moore is anything other than honest lets me know that you have done no research to substantiate your claims. This wonderful teacher wants nothing more than to bring glory to God and she would never purposefully lead anyone in any other direction.
tk your comments here show that you did not do the research to see if what I was saying is true. Beth Moore did issue a statement contrary to her position on contemplative prayer on Ingrid Schulters site. The facts were presented here. Beth was not being honest but playing to her audience.
I like some of Beth Moores books but I refuse to follow anyone blindly.
As you seem to do.
Also you made no statement of fact to refute what was stated here.
Which again show you are following Beth Moore superficially and blindly.
But hey thanks for your comments it makes my point that to many leaders in Christianity are followed even though what they are teaching and promoting does not add up when put to the light of Gods Word.
How much aresnic does it take to kill someone?
Tim Wirth
i think what i find most disturbing is in the last comment of:
"many leaders in Christianity are followed even though what they are teaching and promoting does not add up when put to the light of Gods Word"
i take it as meaning you have ultimate clarity on what that word is, unfortunately that really should be rewritten as:
"many leaders in Christianity are followed even though what they are teaching and promoting does not add up when put to the light of My Opinion on the Bible"
There are so many sects of christianity today, all because they think they "know" what the light of god's word is.
if it was really that clear and simple i dont think there would be so much arguing, because well, it would be irrefutable.
the truth is that it is not.
Post a Comment
<< Home