A unified world?

World Citizen symbol

Has God called the visible church to be unified? Or is He calling for unity among the Bride of Christ?

We are now seeing many converging roads to a unity that has nothing to do with either the Gospel of Jesus Christ or the only way He speaks of.  Instead, the world and the visible church is calling for the Globalization of our governments, our economies and even our faiths. Our guest today has been following this globalization that is being shaped by trends, leaders and movements. In fact Gary Kah not only follows these developments, he has been taking a stand and warning us about these things for several decades. Gary is a researcher who has written two best-selling books explaining the goals of the one-world/interfaith movement. His books, En Route to Global Occupation and The New World Religion, are fully documented and are critical in understanding today’s global developments – including the current financial crisis. Check out Gary’s website.


[powerpress]
Subscribe (RSS | iTunes)
We are 100% Listener supported. Donate now!


Advertisements
This entry was posted in 2010 - 2015 Archives, Hot Topics, Podcast and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to A unified world?

  1. IN ESSENTIALS UNITY, RIGHT?
    What Scripture is not essential? And who published the master list of essentials?
    The essentials unity quote is attributed to a Roman Catholic Priest…and that is reliable source?

    A great question: Who and By what authority and where is the Master List of Essentials? But I would point out one more fatal flaw in that axiom.
    It is effectively also say in Essentials in which two opposing factions are not in unity, though both stand on authority of Scripture, the advice and logic that must proceed out of this axiom, is that it is impossible for there to be charity in all things…without one party capitulating…one one certain can't compromise by cutting the baby in half (Solomon). Therefore there is a built in contradiction to this axiom. Furthermore, would one want to be charitable to wolves in sheep's clothing?….other than the charity you might extend to your enemy. But light can't have fellowship with darkness.

    Was the Apostle Paul following the axiom "In all things charity" in Galatians when he twice cursed (eternally damned) the Judaizers?
    Was Peter obeying "In all things charity" with Ananias and Sapphira? It seems to me in both instances they were not charitable, unless one wants to redefine the term.

    Subject: Essentials unity? from my second book on Warren

    TODD HUDNALL:
    Augustine said this: 'In essentials we have unity, in non-essentials we have liberty, and in all things we show charity."

    RESPONSE:
    "This famous motto of Christian Irenics, which I have slightly modified in the text, is often falsely attributed to St. Augustin (whose creed would not allow it, though his heart might have approved of it), but is of much later origin. It appears for the first time in Germany, A.D. 1627 and 1628, among peaceful divines of the Lutheran and German Reformed churches, and found a hearty welcome among moderate divines In England." SOURCE: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc7.ii.vii.viii….

    TODD HUDNALL:
    You see there are some essentials, you have to believe that salvation comes through faith alone in Christ alone…

    RESPONSE:
    Yes, the doctrine of salvation through faith alone is essential (as this is what the Reformation was about). Countless Christians could have saved themselves from being burned at the stake by simply denying this Sola Scripture doctrine. It is curious as to why Rick Warren is forming an unholy alliance with the Roman Catholic Church for his purpose-driven programs when the Roman Catholic Church put forth in the Council of Trent that those Protestants who hold such views are anathematized (cursed).

    TODD HUDNALL:
    Now if you will do some of these things as a leader and you treat people with love and acceptance, you'll have no problem in getting people to come to your church.

    ********
    The "In Non-Essentials Liberty" Error

    (This article is a continuation of the article: Dangerous Christians)

    There is a very popular saying in the church today that has been around in one form or another for a few centuries now. Its origins are a subject of some dispute and different groups disagree as to exactly who is the author. It is commonly thought that Augustine is the author but there is apparently some evidence to the contrary. Regardless, allow me to quote and comment on this very popular saying which I would like to remind you is not a verse in the Bible.
    "In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity.”

    Sounds nice and it holds some truth but it also holds a dangerous misconception. It does not explain the essentials that it mentions. There are two categories of essentials. First and foremost there are the super essentials of salvation. These are the doctrines that the Bible teaches regarding salvation and eternal life. Secondly, there are the lesser essentials of Christian living, where the Bible teaches us specifically how we are supposed to (and not supposed to) behave as Christians. Both are essentials. The first category is essential for salvation and the second category is essential to live and function properly as a Christian.

    If a Christian does not live and function properly as a Christian, then it is impossible for that person to live and function as a healthy part of the church.

    Even though the word “salvation” is not mentioned in the “in essentials unity…” saying, salvation is strongly implied. The word “essentials”, as this saying is commonly interpreted, is commonly thought to refer exclusively to the doctrines of salvation. Because of this, this popular quote gives the distinct impression that everything in the Bible beyond salvation is OPTIONAL in the Christian life. If that were true, then the Apostle Paul would not tell us to avoid Christians who are disobedient to the Scriptures in other areas.
    14And if any man obeys not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. 15Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. 2Thess 3:14-15

    Since Paul says that these unruly people are to be counted as brothers, we know that they are in fact Christians. As Christians, we know that they at least believe in the super-essential doctrines of salvation otherwise they would not be saved and would not be considered brothers. For example, among other things, we know that these people who Paul says to stay away from must at least believe in Jesus Christ from their hearts and believe that He rose from the dead otherwise, as the Bible makes very clear, they could not be saved. Therefore this verse is referring to Christians who are disobedient to the written Word in other areas. This is the basis for why Paul says that they should be avoided and ashamed.
    These are the dangerous Christians that the popular “in essentials unity…” quote has whitewashed and covered with false liberty and a license to categorize anything in the Bible that they disagree with as “non-essential” or “secondary” doctrine, in others words optional doctrine.

    What this means is we basically have a bunch of Christians running around yelling that salvation is all that is needed to live lives that are pleasing to God and properly operate as the church. No, salvation is all this needed for eternal life. Obedience to other teachings in the Bible, specifically the doctrines of Christian living as found in the New Testament, is necessary for a healthy Christian life. These people constantly play the “secondary doctrine” card, proclaiming “as optional” anything the Bible teaches that they don’t like or don’t want to obey.
    By making the “lesser” essentials of Christian living optional the doors of the church have been throw open wide for apostasy to come flooding in.

    Furthermore, the book of 2nd Thessalonians is simply part of the overall Bible and there are many other verses in the Bible that command obedience to God and specifically to His written Word overall. So by common sense, we know that 2Thess 3:14-15 is not limiting the requirements of Christian obedience only to the book of 2nd Thessalonians. This verse is therefore applicable to any professing Christians who refuse to obey the clear teachings of the Bible.
    A Christian has to be doing something pretty bad for the Apostle Paul to say that they should be ashamed and that other Christians should stay away from them. And we see exactly what the Christians described in 2 Thess 3 are doing that is so bad that we must avoid them. They have departed from sound doctrine in areas other than salvation and instead are obviously following and promoting teachings other than the teachings of the Bible. This is the main attribute of a dangerous Christian.

    Of course ultra dangerous “Christians” are those who are not even saved yet claim to be Christians but 2Thess3 is not referring to these people. Many Christians rightly agree that staying away from such a person is mandatory. But this passage of Scripture shows us that Christians who refuse to obey the Scriptures, even in areas other than salvation, are worthy of disfellowship and therefore must be avoided. If salvation alone were enough for living a life that is pleasing to God on this earth, then this and other Scriptures like this would simply not exist.
    Let me say this in a slightly different way: If the doctrines of salvation alone were enough for Christians to know how to properly live the Christian life, then other doctrines and obedience to the Scriptures in other areas would not be needed. There would be no such thing as an unruly Christian and the Apostle Paul would not have told the faithful in the church to stay away from the unfaithful. Of course we know this is not the case. Other doctrines are in fact needed and there really is such a thing as a dangerous Christian.

    Today such departures from Scripture are so widespread and commonplace that these things have become socially acceptable in most professing Christian circles. Many have redefined the requirements of Christian living and they teach a whole new protocol for how we are and are not supposed to behave as Christians. They have replaced the teachings of the Bible in this area with man made teachings, just like the Pharisees of old did.
    In Mark 7, Jesus told the Pharisees:

    8For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things you do. 9And he said unto them, Full well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your own tradition… 13Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which you have delivered: and many such like things you do. Mark 7: 8-9, 13

    The Doctrine of Optional Doctrine

    The “in non-essentials liberty” error creates a doctrine that is not found in the Bible. We can call this error, “the doctrine of optional doctrine”. But nowhere in the Bible do we find such a doctrine or find any doctrines to be optional. The Bible teaches that all doctrines are mandatory. None are presented for us to decide whether or not we want to personally follow them.
    Also, the Bible makes no specific distinction between primary and secondary doctrine. However we know by common sense that the doctrines of salvation are more important than the doctrines of Christian living. Because, if one is not saved, then everything else is meaningless. In other words, even if someone is obedient to every doctrine of Christian living but they do not believe the doctrines of salvation, they cannot be saved. Of course it would be impossible for a non-Christian to properly obey the doctrines of Christian living. One needs to be a Christian just to understand them. However, even though the doctrines of Christians living can’t save you, that doesn’t mean that they are unimportant. That doesn’t mean that these doctrines are not specifically necessary to live a healthy Christian life.

    Disobedience to the doctrines of Christian living is a main area where there are big problems in the church today. We are plagued with unhealthy Christians who are walking around infecting all who they touch.

    Many Christians have stopped at salvation and have gone no farther. They are truly Christians but they are not walking the walk and therefore they are producing little if any fruit. These are likely among those who the Apostle Paul said would be saved as by fire:
    11For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; 13Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. 14If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. 1 Cor 3: 11-15

    Many Christians have a few of the ideas of “being” a Christian down pretty well but they don’t have the function down well at all. And, because they don’t have the function down, they only have the idea of “being” a Christian down in a very academic and rudimentary sense. Therefore they don’t have a deep sense of who they already are in Christ. These are very deceived Christians, self-deceived as a matter of fact. Many of them hear and learn all kinds of “Bible stories” as head knowledge but they do not do or obey what they hear and because of this very little trickles down into their heart as deep belief and “heart knowledge”.
    22Be doers of the Word and not hearers only thereby deceiving your own selves. James 1:22

    Lastly, churches exist and are formed every day where the leadership decides what is right and wrong behavior for that particular church as a body. In a power in numbers mentality, such churches act as if by virtue of overseeing a quantity of people, that they somehow have the rights to do as they please. So they play fast and loose with the Bible, claiming obedience to Scriptures while they disobey the Bible and teach others to do the same. Because some of these churches do understand the doctrines of salvation and some aspects of evangelism, they are able to lead some people to salvation (praise God), but if these churches hadn’t done so already, they then immediately lead these same souls to their leaders as masters of Christian living.

    Contrary to popular belief, leading someone to the Lord in faith unto salvation is not a license to then lead that person away from the Lord in their Christian walk, indoctrinating that soul into the traditions and teachings of men.

    Paul Howey http://www.truthguard.com/Articles/the-in-non-ess

    *****
    At the 1996 Promise Keepers Clergy Conference in Atlanta, Max Lucado was the keynote speaker. His message dealt with "Denominational Harmony: From Bondage to Freedom." Lucado spoke of PK's statement of faith and emphasized that they are committed to truth and unity, "which are equal." He said, "I submit myself to the Word and there are core beliefs. However, for too long we have allowed our differences to divide us instead of our agreements to unite us." He urged that they subscribe to the premise, "In essentials unity — in non-essentials charity."

    [O TIMOTHY editor, David Cloud: We wonder if Lucado considers the gospel itself "essential"? If so, how can he yoke together with Roman Catholics who add sacraments to Christ's salvation? The phrase "in essentials unity — in non-essentials charity" is a smokescreen for disobedience to Biblical separation. While not every teaching of Scripture is of equal importance, the Bible does not divide doctrine into essential and non-essential. Timothy's job in Ephesus was to make certain that NO OTHER DOCTRINE be allowed (1 Tim. 1:3). There is no hint here that some portions of apostolic truth are "non-essential." Paul labored to preach the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27). The man who strives to be faithful to every detail of New Testament truth will find it impossible to be comfortable in an ecumenical Promise Keepers-type environment. As one wise man observed, "You will have a limited fellowship, or you will have a limited message."]

    His Master’s footsteps. Jesus commanded His disciples to teach converts “to observe ALL things whatsoever I have commanded you” (Mat. 28:20). Paul instructed Timothy to keep the truth “without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Tim. 6:14). A spot is a small, seemingly insignificant thing. Jude instructed every believer to “earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). As Jude didn’t delineate what part of the faith is to be defended, the obvious meaning is that whatever aspect of the faith is under attack, God’s people should rally to its defense rather than pretending that it is a “non-essential.”

    I challenge anyone to show me where the Scripture encourages the believer to “stand for the cardinal truths and downplay the peripherals.”

    IN ESSENTIALS UNITY

    The New Evangelical philosophy is often stated by the dictum, “In essentials unity; in non-essentials liberty; in all things charity,” (commonly attributed to Augustine, but actually first spoken by a 17th-century Lutheran named Rupertus Meldenius). This became the rallying cry of the Moravians, who did many good things but refused to reject the heresy of infant baptism, among other things, and promoted unity above the absolute truth of God’s Word. The same dictum has been heartily adopted by modern New Evangelicals.

    The rejection of biblical separation by these New Evangelical ministries is also evident in their refusal to take a stand against the worldliness and compromise that characterizes the contemporary church growth philosophy, with its love for rock music, sensual fashions, Hollywood entertainment, and pretty much everything the pop culture produces. Some of them might say privately they are opposed to the growing worldliness in the churches, but they do not preach plainly against it. Rather, they accept invitations from contemporary churches and are willing to teach on creationism in such churches while avoiding “controversial side” issues.

    The failure to preach and practice separation has very real consequences. For example, Ken Ham admits that the churches he is associated with lose most of their young people. There is a reason for that, and the reason is not just because they are weak on defending literal creation. It is far deeper. It has to do with an overall weak approach to the Word of God and Christian living and discipleship. The preachers in these churches don’t boldly proclaim the WHOLE counsel of God and reprove the pop culture and other forms of worldliness and preach sold-out discipleship, and as a consequence the people tend to live much like the world. This is a foundational error that is not addressed clearly in any of the books I have ready by Ham, because he has determined just to focus on creation-science and basic apologetics. He doesn’t even deal clearly with the salvation issue. His book “Already Gone,” which describes the departure of youth from evangelical churches, though excellent in some ways, doesn’t deal sufficiently with this most important and foundational issue, which is the fact that a vast number of the young people in these churches aren’t born again.

    If someone argues that these ministries (e.g., Answers in Genesis, Creation Research Institute) aren’t New Evangelical and that they do not actually reject separatism, I would like for them to send me the documented answers to the following questions:

    First, when has that ministry issued a statement delineating and supporting the doctrine of biblical separation as applies both to ecclesiology and to the world?

    Second, when has that ministry renounced the popular but unscriptural philosophy “In essential unity; in non-essentials liberty; in all things charity”?

    Third, when has that ministry supported and promoted a fundamentalist, separatist ministry?

    Fourth, when has that ministry taken a stand against Billy Graham and all of the evil he has done through his New Evangelical philosophy?
    **
    IN ESSENTIALS UNITY, IN NON-ESSENTIALS LIBERTY, IN ALL THINGS CHARITY

    Exactly what is non-essential?
    I know there has to be a few of you who are reading this use this phrase time to time. So I want to know from you, what is non-essential?

    When I hear this, I think of things in the Bible that are non-essential(not important). My thinking is obviously wrong. From what I can gather from the Scriptures.
    Jesus said "It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God" (Matt. 4:4).
    Paul preached the whole council of God. "For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God." Acts 20:27
    Joshua 1:8 "This book of the law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it; for then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have success.
    I didn't see any proverb saying we have non-essentials in the Word of God. So please explain what you think.
    &

    This passage every jot and tittle in the Bible is essential (there are NO non-essentials):

    2Ti 3:16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

    2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

    *****
    And one more great article on Essentials is unity: http://www.truthguard.com/Articles/the-in-non-ess

    Kindest regards in Christ,

    James Sundquist http://www.theperfectpeaceplan.com

    Like

    • Sharon says:

      Thanks Mr. Sundquist for bringing this subject matter to light. For some time now, I also have had great concern over the idea of "agreement on essentials & non-essentials" and noticed that it is being increasingly proclaimed, especially within the Evangelical camp.

      I understand that there will be scriptural truths that not all believers will come to an agreement on or be ready to receive, [for many varying reasons], but I believe every Word of God, [jot & tittle], should be held to it's highest and when we put ourselves in a position to separate out what is essential & non-essential, it seems like we are putting a "restraining order" on the Spirit of God and assisting along a snare from our Adversary….

      …..maybe this is one more good reason why we are called to maintain fellowship with God, study His Word and walk by the Spirit [Galatians 5:25] … who is our Helper, so that we are better able to discern and be equipped as to when, how, where & why we employ His Word to each moment of life or each given situation or the people we encounter.

      Like

    • Darrel says:

      James, thank you so very much for your response to this growing wickedness in the church and the blogosphere. There is no one that I have found that will give an honest answer to the question as to who it was that decided what is to be considered primary, secondary, or tertiary (yes, there is now a third tier with no explanation as to what it may include). The tough questions that I have asked have been met with no real answer, only something along the line of "how dare you even ask such a question" and/or "don't question ME."

      If the primary/essential doctrines have only to with the salvation of one's soul, where would we find the doctrine of the Trinity? In the #2 pile? Not hardly. And what of the virgin birth, not necessary for salvation, so does it get a secondary rating also? The second coming of our Savior is not necessary to believe in order to be saved, but some, in their wisdom, have relegated it to a second place status. Two of the most powerful verses in the entire Bible that speak to the reality of the creation are found in John 5:46&47. Here, Jesus plainly teaches that if we do not believe the words of Moses, we cannot believe the words of Jesus (and thereby disqualify ourselves from salvation). But creation is one of those pesky secondary doctrines that is not necessary for salvation-oh, really? Men in their ignorance will teach this nonsense without considering that the whole of the Gospel is found in the first three chapters of Genesis and if these chapters can be negated, so will the Gospel.

      For those that are so quick to decide what is primary and what is not may I make a suggestion: the next time you are in prayer, you tell the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit that you have decided what is primary doctrine and what is not primary doctrine. I am sure your input will be much appreciated.

      I do not care to read or listen to the arrogant, narcissistic diatribes of those have made their choice as to what we are to believe to be "primary" doctrines. Such brazen boldness is found in Isaiah chapter 14. Indeed, every word that has proceeded from the mouth of God is essential with none of it becoming secondary in any consideration.

      Like

  2. Geno says:

    The visible church, as it exists and functions today, is light-years removed from God's purposes and plans.

    There WILL come a (false) unity, and the end-time religion will undoubtedly be "Christian", under the umbrella of Rome. This "Church" will persecute and even kill genuine disciples and followers of Jesus.

    We need to wake up… before the coming shaking and darkness engulfs us… and begin bonding with others who want the Lord in HIS way, not man's.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s