Sunday, July 01, 2007

More misinformation on the propagation highway: Greg Gilbert versus Brian McLaren

More misinformation on the propagation highway: Greg Gilbert versus Brian McLaren

“…McLaren misses what is perhaps the most astonishing surprise of the New Testament story: that Jesus filled the roles of the Davidic Messiah, the Suffering Servant of Isaiah, and Daniel’s Son of Man, all at the same time! That McLaren does not see this, or at least does not hint at it in his books, is all the more surprising because he is so careful otherwise to situate the story of Jesus in the narrative of the nation of Israel. The Suffering Servant of Isaiah and the Son of Man of Daniel 7 are not insignificant themes in the Old Testament, and neither were they insignificant ideas in the Jewish mind of Jesus’ day. How McLaren could ignore them so completely—not to mention the startling role they play in Jesus’ own self-understanding—is nothing short of a mystery.”

This is just one of the many points of misinformation and redirection. Greg Gilbert actually states that McLaren agrees with things like the atonement… yet twists things around such as in the case of the quote above to mean that McLaren is stating he really does not believe this after all… and that is called propagation and a lie.

What Greg Gilbert is doing is what he is actually saying McLaren has done! He takes what McLaren states then acknowledges it, then negates it.

And what Greg Gilbert ends up with is… a gospel “of "getting your butt into heaven,"… and a focus on the eternal the leaves us with nothing here and now of Jesus. And that is the point McLaren is making. Gilberts in this article confirms what McLaren is saying is true!

Now, anyone who has actually bothered to read Brian McLaren’s books will see that McLaren believes in an eternal life! Much of the books I have read states that and many of the lectures I have heard by him are nothing but mini N. T. Wright summaries… AND NO ONE WILL SAY N.T.WRIGHT DOES NOT BELIEVE IN AN AFTERLIFE!

So, once again we have people who admit McLaren is orthodox… and teaches the very things that many say he does nto… and in this case after doing that… Gilbert affirms what McLaren has set out.

I wonder why the focus is that one must try so hard as to redirect us from things that Jesus taught us to do NOW such as loving our enemies… as why would we need to if all our focus is on the eternal and not NOW.

So, as far as fairness, this may be one of the fluffiest propagation pieces I have read… but as far as grasping anything that is actually taught by Brian McLaren… it is a big miss…

If it was not so sad that someone has to write lies about another… it would be hilarious.

Be Blessed,


Chris Rosebrough said...


Out of curiosity. What makes you think McClaren is orthodox?

Can you provide evidence for that statement?

iggy said...



First off I want to say that some would accuse your views of not being true... though orthodox as you are coming from the Lutheran tradition. In that I would consider you very much within orthodox and within the teachings of scripture though we may have a few thing that we do not agree on.

Now that being said... I think many do not know how to read Brian McLaren.. nor do they understand that he is not giving answers... but sympathy... I have never heard he say, "I believe in Universalism." I have heard him say, "I can sympathize and understand how and why you have chosen to believe in Universalism." which is not the same thing as saying he is... I can sympathize with my unsaved friends... but not agree with them on many things.

Now. what evidence that he is orthodox? HAHA...

1. He wrote a book on having a generous orthodox that is open to acceptance of all in the faith in where we do agree... so there is an acceptance of the core values that we all share in the faith.

2. Here is something that I hope very few would disagree with which Brian wrote called the Jesus Creed.

The Jesus Creed
This creed was originally shared at the Emergent Convention, Nashville, May 2004.
By Brian McLaren

We have confidence in Jesus
Who healed the sick, the blind, and the paralyzed.
And even raised the dead.

He cast out evil powers and
Confronted corrupt leaders.
He cleansed the temple.
He favored the poor.
He turned water into wine,
Walked on water, calmed storms.
He died for the sins of the world,
Rose from the dead, and ascended to the Father,
Sent the Holy Spirit.

We have confidence in Jesus
Who taught in word and example,
Sign and wonder. He preached parables of the kingdom of God
On hillsides, from boats, in the temple, in homes,
At banquets and parties, along the road, on beaches, in towns,
By day and by night.
He taught the way of love for God and neighbor,
For stranger and enemy, for outcast and alien.

We have confidence in Jesus,
Who called disciples, led them,
Gave them new names and new purpose
And sent them out to preach good news.
He washed their feet as a servant.
He walked with them, ate with them,
Called them friends,
Rebuked them, encouraged them,
Promised to leave and then return,
And promised to be with them always.
He taught them to pray.
He rose early to pray, stole away to desolate places,
Fasted and faced agonizing temptations,
Wept in a garden,
And prayed, "Not my will but your will be done."
He rejoiced, he sang, he feasted, he wept.

We have confidence in Jesus,
So we follow him, learn his ways,
Seek to obey his teaching and live by his example.
We walk with him, walk in him, abide in him,
As a branch in a vine.
We have not seen him, but we love him.
His words are to us words of life eternal,
And to know him is to know the true and living God.
We do not see him now, but we have confidence in Jesus.

Now, here he may not used words like atonement though I have heard him say he believe it... yet also sees room as I do for Christus Victor which many hold in your own tradition... and was taught by the early fathers before substitutionary atonement was fully developed as a doctrine. IN fact the book of Mark if to be understood is about the suffering Christ. ( I personally hold that both views are valid as I stated Mark teaches of the suffering Servant and SA is taught in many other places in scripture.)

Also, I have read N. T. Wright... and have heard McLaren speak of him highly... and even from the same platforms and at he same conferences... if one listens closely they are voicing much the same thing.

Now, I always say don't take my word for any of this... I have read a few of his books... and have not read some others... I have listened to many, many lectures... some might say I have been "taught" by him... LOL! (inside joke to some that many not get that).

So, to ask what make me think McLaren is orthodox makes me really wonder what one means by that if they can't see he is?

He has a high Christology which is a bit confounding to those who hold strictly to the Bible having the final authority... (which actually teaches Jesus does and if one understands that authority is only given by the Author then one can understand the "how" the bible is authoritative)

Anyway again, thanks for stopping by...

Chris Rosebrough said...

Thanks for the lengthy response. I want to chew on it a while before I respond. I'm not interested in winning a debate with you. I'm more interested in the dialogue.

iggy said...


Thanks, I appreciate that.

I am not interested in a debate either... my only point is that over and over again... I see that many accuse Brian and others of saying things or teaching things and being one that has read and listened... I just have not heard it. Some (whom we both know) just say I do not have ears to hear or eyes to see... yet when I read a lengthy article that acknowledges Brian does teach orthodox views... then turns around and says he does not... and I see they actually affirm what Brian was stating... AND THEY MISS IT ENTIRELY! I get a little concerned... not for Brian, but for those who blindly or purposely bear false witness against another person... let alone a brother in Christ.

You see it is like those who would bash Catholics for their belief in the Eucharist... Though both hold view close... there is a slight difference... but with that many that would accuse the emergent for being ecumenical... would also state a Lutheran in their view that the eucharist is symbolic yet is literally transformed into the Body of Christ as it is eaten... is also "too Catholic" as in the case as some raise against Rick Warren.

Meaning in all of our traditions and slight differences instead of Mercy with triumphs over judgmentalism... we seem to be satisfied with judging at the expense of mercy over slight differences of opinion rather that actually stone cold doctrines like the incarnation and the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

We seem to not care if we harm each other over style and form and miss the big picture that we are to worship in Spirit and in Truth and a place, style, or form are truly secondary issues and based more on ones own preferences than anything biblical. (I have heard some accuse the ec of being too catholic over using liturgy.)

So, how am I as an person of the ec persuasion who sees all this to be persuaded I am wrong and another is right... How can I look and see that one is fighting that their "right" is more "right" than mine? How is their "Self right" more right than my own "self right"... we are only arguing over whose self righteousness is more righteous! Doesn't the bible teach that none are righteous and that is why we need Jesus? I just see that some think they believe that but in no way practice it... while the people I am standing beside and often defending are actually doing the very things the bible calls us to do! Who do I listen to? The ones that hear but seem to not do? Or ones that hear and do?

I guess I am giving you more to chew on... in that I will hold back a bit in my side of the dialog... yet as you can see from all the attacks against my friends and myself I am left a bit bewildered as to what and who they are talking about... and why there is so much hatred aimed at people like me in the Name of Jesus... are we not to overcome by the Blood of the Lamb in that we are willing to lay down our lives even for our enemies? BTW most of these are rhetorical questions I have already dealt with... I am not necessarily asking you for answers other than for you to ponder over.