I am glad you bought the book. I am under no illusions that it will change your mind about emergents, but it should provide a better context for discussing the issues.

I think that you missed my point…

Does a person have to be a Trinitarian in order to have a correct view of God (because you made it a qualifier)?

I am not talking about faith in Buddhist or Hindu gods nor am I talking about faith in new age energy and positive thinking.

Oh, good.So…would you state that these groups, because of their lack in faith in Jesus Christ as Savior, are not part of the Church/the Body of Christ/The Kingdom?

If the Word of God is living and active, can’t it speak differently to different people?

Umm..no.

Define “living and active” through biblical citation…What do you mean by this? What does the Bible say about this? (then we can agree or disagree)

Your comments have helped me understand you some, I think.

In what way?

Is this true?

If their profession of faith in Jesus Christ as Savior is genuine, then, according to Scripture, they have crossed over from death to life and posses eternal life. It doesn’t matter what I think…It only matters what Scripture states.

After salvation, however, we are exhorted to study to show ourselves approved and to adhere to sound doctrine. According to God’s Word…If someone really loves God, then they love His Word and keep His commands.

If the Word of God is living and active, can’t it speak differently to different people? If not, what is the value of the Word being living and active? The same scripture can speak differently to me each time I read it. If scripture only has one meaning and one interpretation, why would I bother reading it more than once?

On the point of calling me an emergent- I didn’t realize those were all emergent buzz words. I used generous orthodoxy because it was a part of the original conversation. Maybe I am an emergent.

I used the qualifiers “Trinitarian Christian” in order to avoid silly questions like the ones you asked me. I am not talking about faith in Buddhist or Hindu gods nor am I talking about faith in new age energy and positive thinking. I am talking about faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

Your comments have helped me understand you some, I think. So let me try to restate what you are saying so I am clear:
You believe that if someone believes in Jesus as savior and puts their faith in Him, but also happens to read scripture in a way that allows for certain behavior that you find to be sinful according to your reading of scripture, they can still receive salvation and eternal life with God. Is this true?

I bought the book (and will read it).

You posted: If someone earnestly loves God (Trinitarian Christian God)…

Why do you use the Trinitarian qualifier?

Why do you use the Christian qualifier?

What about Buddhists, Hindus, Mormons and New Agers…Do they not earnestly love God?

Additionally:

Also, you assumed I was talking directly to you in my first post and I was actually not talking about you at all. You were READING INTO my literal words.

Nope…but you commented on points made in an ongoing discussion and I addressed your comments from my perspective. Is this unusual in a “conversation”.

I actually used myself as an example and you still felt a need to defend yourself.

Nope…just having a “conversation”.

You also lumped me in with the emergents. I have never said I agreed with what they stand for.

When you use emergent buzz words and phrases (“humble generous orthodoxy”, “our theology is a mystery so none of us has the full answer”, “I have no right to exclude them from God’s Kingdom”, “When I begin to judge them and criticize them out of anger for hurt that I have experienced or self-righteousness that lives in me”, and so forth)…

You sound just like an emergent and seem to agree with what they stand for.

Do you not agree with the emergents and what they stand for?

Please correct me if I’m misunderstanding your stance here. You say that you can read and understand scripture without any bias…

No…I didn’t say that. But I did say that through a proper hermeneutic (historical-cultural, contextual, lexical-syntactical, and theological analyses) we can get through bias.

And…Biblical text says what the Author (God the Holy Spirit) wanted it to say…It does not have different meanings for different peoples.

…you say that understanding the scripture in a way other than exactly as you understand the scripture leads to hell.

I definitely never said that!

According to the Bible, there is only one thing that leads to eternity in hell – A lack of faith in Jesus Christ (His work on the cross (atonement for sin), and His resurrection).

And…we know from the Bible that:

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” (II Timothy 3:16)

Given this scriptural passage, and several others, it is obvious that there are clear biblical doctrines that we can stand firmly on and proclaim boldly.

Hypothetical question for you: If someone earnestly loves God (Trinitarian Christian God) and earnestly loves others (in a holy and selfless way), but believes women can speak in church and wear gold and men can get circumcised (just for a few examples. You can put whatever “sinful” “unbiblical” act or belief in here that you want), would you say that person doesn’t actually love God and/or will still go to Hell?

Uh…no.

But some clarification may be necessary:

If someone earnestly loves God…

The criteria, according to the Bible (Acts 10:43), is
that in order to be a Christian, a person has to believe in Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. I am not sure what your phrase really means.

If they truly have faith in Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, then they won’t go to hell.

But…Christ is the Judge of these things (Acts 10:42 – this was a part of the Gospel that was preached in the book of Acts).

…and earnestly loves others (in a holy and selfless way)…

This is not a requirement for salvation, according to Scripture, but it is a by-product of salvation.

Thank you…

You are welcome.

Promoting Catholic mystics like Henri Nouwen, Thomas Merton, and others (all clearly false teachers), as emergents do (and their eastern in origin “prayer” practices)…is beyond the pale of orthodoxy.