The Maze Of Mysticism In The Emerging Church Movement

Ron Rhodes, Th.D.

Ron Rhodes is president of Reasoning From The Scriptures Ministries and adjunct Professor of Apologetics at Southern Evangelical Seminary.

The Emerging Church movement is a broad, trans-denominational movement that claims to be dedicated to discovering new ways of “doing church” in today’s postmodern (“emerging”) culture. Having read a substantive volume of material on this movement, I find myself in agreement with one critic who said, “Any author attempting to profile the phenomenon of the ‘emerging church’ faces a daunting task.” The movement is so fragmented, so varied, and so (for lack of a better

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 2

word) slippery that nailing it down is like trying to nail Jell-O to the wall.

The problem churches face today is that many people in postmodern western society are dissatisfied with traditional religion and are looking for something new. The emerging church movement seeks to meet this need, exploring new modes of expressing the gospel to postmodern western culture. Not surprisingly, no one is quite sure where the movement will end up, but it must go somewhere, proponents say, because the modern church, as it presently exists, cannot connect with the postmodern mind.

Though the emerging church movement is diverse,  one can observe a number of common or typical themes in the writings of its leaders. As will become clear below, some of these themes seem innocuous enough, while others constitute a dangerous and damaging departure from historic Christianity.5

1.  Participants in the movement seek to serve God “out there” in the real world rather than isolating themselves “in here” within the walls of the church or within tight-knit Christian communities of like-minded people. They do not sit passively in pews, but rather want to stay actively involved in things.

2. Participants are community-oriented in their lifestyle. They are “people” persons who value relationships. Instead of merely going to church, they want to be the church.

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 3

3.  Participants seek authentic experiences in preference to superficial religion. They also seek to be relevant in today’s changing (“emerging”) culture.

4.  The teaching that takes place in emerging churches features skits and narrative presentations as opposed to “dry” systematic theology or expositional sermons. We are told that postmoderns are not just open to but desirous of’ the use of images, artwork, film, and video in church services.

5.  Churches in this movement are open to new and creative ideas when it comes to worship. Because postmoderns are so experientially oriented, they want to enter into worship as an experience of the senses—what some would call multi-sensory worship.

6.  Many participants believe the Bible should be reanalyzed in varying contexts with a view to unveiling a multiplicity of valid perspectives as opposed to fixating on a single valid meaning of the text.

7.  Many participants likewise believe theology ought to be more flexible, as opposed to being fixed and rigid.

Among key players supportive of the movement are Robert Schuller, Richard Foster, Brennan Manning, Dallas Willard, Bruce Wilkinson, Erwin McManus, John Eldredge, Tony Jones, Doug Pagitt, and Leonard Sweet. Brennan Manning, a former Catholic priest who has written such popular titles as the Ragamuffin Gospel and The Signature of Jesus, has famous Protestant fans the likes of Max Lucado, Amy Grant, Michael Card, Eugene Peterson, Larry Crabb, Michael W. Smith, and Philip Yancey.

This article will not attempt to be a general treatment of the emerging church movement, for such treatments are widely available. Rather, this article will more narrowly focus on the mystical element within the movement. As a preface, however, it makes sense to first briefly address how some within the movement view the Bible, for it is the position of this author that a weak view of the Bible is a strong contributing factor for this plunge into subjectivism and mysticism.

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 4

A Weak View Of The Bible

There are those in the emerging church movement who give lip service to a strong commitment to the Bible. Many, however, choose not to use an objective approach to interpreting Scripture but rather believe there is a multiplicity of valid perspectives as opposed to a single valid meaning of the text. Emerging church leader Tony Jones says that “we must stop looking for some objective Truth that is available when we delve into the text of the Bible.”  It is thus not surprising that many in the movement say we can no longer look to the Bible alone as a guide for spiritual living. No longer is Scripture considered the sole normative standard of truth. It is claimed we cannot reach the new generation using the old ways. Many now supplement (some even replace) the Bible with tradition. What this ultimately means is that there are those in the emerging church movement who end up embracing a Christianity without the Bible—or, at most, a Christianity with minimal use of the Bible. For example, instead of drawing their beliefs and practices from the pages of the Bible alone, many in the emerging church movement want a more experience-oriented Christianity and thus incorporate various forms of liturgy borrowed from Roman Catholic tradition—prayer beads, prayer stations, medieval rituals, candles, incense, icons, stained glass, Benedictine chants, and the like—even though scriptural justification for such liturgical practices is completely lacking. Such liturgy allegedly leads to a much richer and more authentic spiritual experience.

Many in the movement are also open to spiritual encounters or experiences with Christ in the pages of the Bible. Patrick Flanagan, a mystic, explains the methodology: “Take a passage of Scripture, read it and reflect on it. Let it filter through you and notice the words, ideas, and feelings that draw you. Pick a word, a phrase, a sentence in the Gospels. Ask the Lord to reveal himself while you are listening. Let yourself become absorbed in what he is like, what he cares about, what he is doing.”  Flanagan urges: “Scripture is not the Lord, but a privileged place to meet him. We need to have a contemplative atti-

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 5

tude toward Scripture; let the Scriptures be themselves, listen to them, and ask the Lord to reveal himself while we are listening.”  “Imagine you are in a given situation with Jesus, Mary, Joseph, Peter, James, John, or any of the men and women disciples in the Gospels. Apply your senses—let yourself be at the place, see it, hear it, taste it, smell it, sense its atmosphere.”11  Such interaction with Scripture is obviously highly subjective in nature.

Theology has also fallen into disfavor by some in the movement. We are told that in these postmodern days, the credibility of Christianity’s truth claims hinges not on the strength of apologetic arguments and the prowess of theologians who can “make a good case” for Christianity, but rather on the love and good deeds that flow from the Christian community.

Of course, emerging church leaders who argue in this manner— rejecting the “old way” of apologetic and theological argumentation in favor of the “new way” of love and good works—have succumbed to an either/or mentality that is unbalanced. The better (biblical) policy is to adopt a both/and approach—that is, utilize both apologetic and theological arguments, and exercise love and good works.

In any event, it is alarming that many in the emerging church movement do not place a high premium on what must be considered essential doctrines of the Christian faith.  It is not uncommon to find many shying away from the view that the Bible is the absolute Word of God, that Jesus is the only way of salvation, and that Jesus is absolute deity in human flesh. Traditional Christian morality is also being undermined, with many (for example) shying away from the view that the Bible takes a clear stand against such sins as homosexuality. Dogmatic doctrinal and moral claims are said to be a part of an antiquated rationalistic Christianity in which people are no longer interested. People desire not the “hard facts” of absolute truth but rather experiential stories, skits, media presentations, proverbs, and the mystery and mysticism that are involved in knowing and interacting with

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 6

a transcendent God. Christian apologist Gary Gilley thus laments that before the emerging church leaders are done, “all the essential teachings of the Bible have been deconstructed, redefined, or dismissed. And what has been put in their place? Oddly, but consistent with postmodern thinking, nothing but mystery and questions.”

To many in the emerging church movement, theology is and always will be in a state of flux. It will never be absolute. More specifically, many hold that there has not been much consistency in Christian beliefs throughout the history of the Christian church and within Christianity’s many diverse traditions. Scot McKnight, himself favorable to the emerging church movement, argues that “the emerging movement tends to be suspicious of systematic theology. Why? Not because we don’t read systematics, but because the diversity of theologies alarms us,” and “no genuine consensus has been achieved,” and besides, “God didn’t reveal a systematic theology but a storied narrative.” The emerging church movement “doesn’t have an airtight system or statement of faith,” for those in the movement do not believe that “any one theology gets it absolutely right.” Hence, “a trademark feature of the emerging movement is that we believe all theology will remain a conversation about the Truth who is God in Christ through the Spirit, and about God’s story of redemption at work in the church. No systematic theology can be final.”

One emerging church leader goes so far as to propose a “heretical orthodoxy.” Heretical orthodoxy means moving theology away from “a study of God as object, or a theology that seeks to believe the right things” and toward an idea of “Christianity as trying to live in the right way.” So, it is more about daily experience than right doctrine?

An Inclusivist Approach

In keeping with a weak view of the Bible, Brian McLaren, a noted leader within the emerging church movement, is representative of others in his inclusivistic approach when it comes to different

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 7

religions. He asserts, “I don’t believe making disciples must equal making adherents to the Christian religion. It may be advisable in many (not all!) circumstances to help people become followers of Jesus and remain within their Buddhist, Hindu, or Jewish contexts.” Another emerging church leader credits Hinduism with helping him to become an inclusivistic Christian: “I am a Christian today because of a Hindu meditation master. She taught me some things that Christians had not. She taught me to meditate, to sit in silence and openness in the presence of God… . I believe that all people are children of God.”

Such a view seems preposterous in view of the fact that Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism have radically different concepts of God, the identity of Jesus Christ, the work of Jesus Christ on the cross, the doctrine of sin, the means of salvation, and the nature of the afterlife. Christianity and Judaism also have radically different views on God (a Trinity) and Jesus Christ, not to mention Scripture (Christians accept the New Testament). But in the subjective, experiential, and mystical world of the emerging church, such differences do not seem to bother anyone.

Indeed, D. A. Carson, in his book Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church, observes that “for almost everyone within the movement” there is “an emphasis on feeling and affections over against linear thought and rationality, on experience over against truth.” Researcher Don Closson likewise comments that in this movement “feelings and affections matter more than logic and reason, one’s experience more than prepositional truth claims.”20  Dan Kimball, author of The Emerging Church, observes that “the basis of learning has shifted from logic and rational, systematic thought to the realm of experience. People increasingly long for the mystical and the spiritual

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 8

rather than the evidential and facts-based faith.”  Gary Gilley thus notes the backward reasoning of the movement: “The old paradigm taught that if you had the right teaching, you will experience God. The new paradigm says that if you experience God, you will have the right teaching.”22  Subjectivism rules in the emerging church movement!

An Increasing Openness To Mysticism

Many in the emerging church movement are increasingly open to various forms of mysticism. This includes (but is not limited to) deep breathing, yoga, chanting (like Benedictine monks), the use of mantras (involving the repetition of holy words to help induce a deep meditative state), and contemplative prayer (which typically involves an altered state of consciousness and a sense of oneness with all things). It is believed that such practices will yield a richer, more authentic spiritual experience, even though there is no mention of such practices in the Bible, and even though this is much more akin to Eastern religions than to Christianity.

New Age mysticism has certainly penetrated the Christian church. In his book Quantum Spirituality, for example, emerging church leader Leonard Sweet speaks in New Age terms in his assertion that as the church we “are connected to one another within the information network called the Christ consciousness.”  The term “Christ consciousness” is common in the New Age movement but completely foreign to the pages of the Bible. Sweet even quotes from the writings of New Agers and famous mystics of the past—including Matthew Fox, David Spangler, Ken Wilber, Joseph Campbell, Thomas Merton, Carl Gustav Jung, and John Shelby Spong. It is therefore baffling to see his books endorsed by so many major Christian leaders today.

Some in the emerging church movement seem to believe that mysticism is part and parcel of “true” Christianity. In his book, The Barbarian Way, Erwin R. McManus writes:

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 9

Somehow Christianity has become a non-mystical religion. It’s about the reasonable faith. If we believe the right things then we are orthodox. To know God in the Scripture always went beyond information to intimacy. We may find ourselves uncomfortable with this reality; but the faith of the Scriptures is a mystical faith. It leads us beyond the material into an invisible reality.

Sweet asserts that “somewhere on the journey from Jerusalem to Jericho, there must be a Damascus Road. It does not matter whether these ambushing, energy-releasing experiences of God are of the intensity of a floodlight, or a flashlight. For each person the experience will be of different candlepower.”  Each of us, though, allegedly has the capacity to embrace and experience some level of mystical encounter with God.

McManus describes a mystical experience he himself had that is similar to what New Agers call cosmic consciousness (the consciousness that all things are one):

For a period of about 20 minutes, I felt that every tree, every blade of grass, and every pool of water became especially eloquent with God’s grandeur… . These specific, concrete things became translucent in the sense that a powerful, indescribable, invisible light seemed to shine through. The beauty of the creations around me … seemed … to explode, seemed to detonate, seemed to radiate with glory. An ecstasy overcame me that I can’t describe. It brings tears to my eyes as I sit here and type. It was the exuberant joy of simply seeing these masterpieces of God’s creation.. .and knowing myself to be among them. It was to be one of them, and to feel and know that “we”—all of these creatures, molecules, and phenomena— were together known and loved by God, who embraced us all into the ultimate “We.”

There are quite of number of mystics who speak of the beauty of creation as a means of inducing—or at least helping to foster—a mystical state. Patrick Flanagan writes: “We should begin by focusing on

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 10

something other than ourselves. It may be looking at natural beauty, listening to music or the sound of the surf, or gazing at the moon, anything that will absorb us. By enjoying nature, we begin to see beauty as the garment with which the Almighty clothes himself.”

Artwork can also be used as an “entry point” for mystical contemplation. In the book Spiritual Classics, edited by Richard Foster and Emilie Griffin, we read:

Consider using a visual focal point for contemplative prayer. A painting of the face of Jesus may serve in this way. If you choose a painting with many different objects or people depicted (such as a painting of the Last Supper), you may wish to begin with the whole scene and then slowly narrow your concentration to a single detail. An exquisite object, such as a rosebud (being a sign also of God’s grandeur) may also serve as an entry point to contemplation.

Of great concern is the fact that many mystics believe not only that one can personally commune with God, but that God can communicate to them matters beyond what is found in the Bible. One can allegedly hear God’s voice in the mystical state. One can experience personal visions, hear inner voices, and receive private illumination. This, combined with a rejection of the authority of the Bible, spells disaster for the Christian church.

The Mystical Practice Of Contemplative Prayer

Perhaps the most significant manifestation of mysticism in the emerging church movement is contemplative prayer. Among the more vocal modern promoters of such prayer is Richard Foster, who often cites the works of famous Christian mystic Thomas Merton (1915–1968).  Merton’s writings, in particular, have served to take contemplative prayer out of the monasteries and bring it into the Christian mainstream.  Foster says that Merton’s book, Contemplative

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 11

Prayer, is “a must book.”  Foster approvingly quotes Merton in supporting his view that contemplative prayer offers the participant “an understanding and light which are like nothing you ever found in books or heard in sermons.”  But the Christian must be willing, Merton says, to receive this light, for the Holy Spirit will not waste such gifts on the unwilling.  Other Christian mystics of old often cited in support of this practice include the likes of Ignatius of Loyola, Catherine of Siena, John of the Cross (a Carmelite monk), Theresa of Lisieux, and George Fox.

George Fox is worthy of special mention, not only because of his significant influence in church history, but also because his writings are prominently featured in the work of modern mystics like Richard Foster.  According to the testimony of George Fox (1625–1691), he had endured years of spiritual conflict during which he was seeking authentic Christian faith (much like those in today’s emerging church movement). He traveled throughout England speaking to priests and religious leaders, and he searched the Scriptures daily. He found no satisfying answers, however, and this was a great discouragement to him (much like today’s postmoderns). Fox was about to give up when he encountered a glimmer of hope. He recalls, “When all my hopes in men were gone, so that I had nothing outwardly to help me, nor could I tell what to do, then, oh! then I heard a voice which said, ‘There is One, even Christ Jesus, that can speak to thy condition.’ And when I heard it my heart did leap for joy.”

Through his direct experience with Christ, Fox came to believe that God gives every person a gift of divine Inner Light or Inner Voice.

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 12

Every human heart is viewed as an altar or shrine of God. All one need do is wait upon God, and God will speak to the heart of the sincere seeker. Depending on how people respond to that Inner Light (God desires obedience), people can be given more light. Fox’s main message thus became “Christ is here among us, and He will directly teach our hearts if we are receptive to it.”

This Inner Light doctrine ultimately meant that, for Fox and his followers, revelation was no longer limited to the Holy Scriptures. Even though the Bible is to be valued, its words should not be taken as God’s final and definitive revelation. New revelations could come today just as they did in the days of the apostles. After all, the men who wrote the Bible did so under the power of the Holy Spirit. Since that same Holy Spirit works through us today, revelations can continue today. Even when we do read the Bible, we must depend on the Holy Spirit who wrote those Scriptures to guide us in our understanding of them.

Those who have studied Fox’s beliefs see definite parallels with today’s emerging church movement—the yearning for spiritual authenticity, an alleged lack of answers in the Scriptures alone, discouragement with status-quo spirituality, a mystical encounter with Christ, waiting upon God, the idea that the Bible should not be viewed as God’s final and definitive revelation to man, and an ongoing modus operandi of subjectivism and experientialism.

The emerging church teaching on contemplative prayer also draws heavily from Buddhism, Hinduism, and the New Age movement. One often encounters such terms as “enlightenment,” “oneness,” “emptiness,” the “void,” and the “nothingness.” During contemplative prayer, one is said to experience a profound mystical silence. Despite obvious Eastern influences, contemplative prayer is consistently presented among emerging church enthusiasts as a Christian practice—rooted in teachings of ancient Christian mystics.

In this form of mystical prayer, one becomes totally silent in order to listen to God. One becomes deeply quiet, empties the mind (as in Eastern meditation), falls into an altered state of consciousness, and goes into the “center” of one’s self where one merges with the divine. This is why this form of prayer is sometimes called “centering prayer.” In this state, one can allegedly engage in imaginative encounters with Jesus Christ in the silence of one’s soul.

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 13

Such a state is said to involve “pure awareness.” One enters into a state of complete non-thinking, letting go of all thoughts so that only pure awareness remains. In this state, one cultivates an empty mind by surrendering all thoughts. Rational thought is completely transcended. At this point, one is said to experience a sense of oneness with all things, something known among New Agers and advocates of Eastern religion as “cosmic consciousness.” One gains the sensation that he or she is utterly immersed in God so that God and the mystic are no longer separate but one.

Much of this sounds amazingly similar to Zen Buddhism. According to Zen proponents, Zen (from the Japanese word ch ‘an, meaning “meditation”) cannot be objectively described in words. One must simply subjectively experience it. In a non-thinking state, in which rational thought is excluded, one experiences the truth.  It is not without significance that Thomas Merton, whose books have introduced contemplative prayer into the Christian mainstream, was long regarded by Zen masters from Asia as the preeminent authority on their kind of prayer in the United States.

Two modern authors, who have written extensively on contemplative prayer, blending Christianity with Eastern mysticism, are Thomas Keating and Basil Pennington. Ray Yungen addresses these individuals at length in his book, A Time of Departing. Pennington’s treatise is titled Centering Prayer, while Keating’s classic on the subject is titled Open Mind, Open Heart. Yungen categorizes these two as “major evangelists for contemplative prayer.”

Christian apologist Marcia Montenegro makes special note of Keating’s view that the Holy Spirit will not “barge in” if a person is using merely reason and intellect. Indeed, Keating says, it is “only when we are willing to abandon our very limited human modes of thought and concepts and open a welcoming space that the Spirit will begin to operate in us at this divine level… . When we Center we practice leaving our human thoughts and reason behind and attending

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 14

to the Divine, to the Spirit.”  Keating espouses the view that contemplative prayer involves a state “in which the knower, the knowing, and that which is known are all one. Awareness alone remains. The one who is aware disappears along with whatever was the object of consciousness. This is what divine union is.”  Indeed, Keating notes that “God and our true Self are not separate. Though we are not God, God and our true Self are the same thing.”42

Montenegro likewise notes Pennington’s emphasis on “a shift in consciousness” and the need to go beyond “ordinary consciousness” into a state of “pure consciousness” in which we leave the “false self for the “true self,” thereby attaining a “unity-consciousness” with God. In Pennington’s view, “so long as a man is aware he is praying, he is not yet praying,” for the person who is truly praying must “rise above thought.”

Even our youth today are being drawn into participating in the mystical practice of contemplative prayer. Tony Jones, the U.S. National Coordinator of Emergent-US and a minister to youth at a church in Minnesota, was a featured presenter at the Zondervan National Pastors Conference held in early 2006. The back cover of his book, Soul Shaper: Exploring Spirituality and Contemplative Practices in Youth Ministry (Zondervan), states that this book “is hands down the most comprehensive primer on the study and use of spiritual and contemplative practices for the benefit of your teenagers—and especially your own soul.”

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 15

The Use Of Mantras

A popular practice commonly used to induce a mystical state in contemplative prayer involves engaging in breathing exercises (much like Taoists) and using a mantra (or sacred word), which is repeated over and over again. What is a mantra? Ray Yungen tells us:

The translation from Sanskrit is man, meaning to “think,” and tra, meaning “to be liberated from.” Thus, the word literally means to escape from thought. By repeating the mantra, either out loud or silently, the word or phrase begins to lose any meaning it once had. The conscious thinking process is gradually tuned out until an altered state of consciousness is achieved.

It would seem that many modern Christian mystics believe that simply because they utilize a Christian sounding mantra makes the practice itself a Christian practice. Gary Thomas urges: “Choose a word {Jesus or Father, for example) as a focus for contemplative prayer. Repeat the word silently in your mind for a set amount of time (say, twenty minutes) until your heart seems to be repeating the word by- itself, just as naturally and involuntarily as breathing.”  By use of such a mantra, one can allegedly experience the love of God47  as well as enter a deeply mystical state in which one feels a sense of euphoria and oneness. A mantra enables one to slip into a state “beyond our ordinary consciousness.”  In such a state, participants believe they have made a genuine connection with the sacred—the divine.

Another well-known proponent of contemplative prayer, Dom John Main (who studied meditation in the Far East and was heavily influenced by the fifth-century writings of mystic John Cassian ), ‘suggests using the word maranatha as a mantra:

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 16

Sit down… . Breathe calmly and regularly. Silently, interiorly, begin to say a single word. We recommend the prayer phrase MA-RA-NA-THA. Recite it as four syllables of equal length. Listen to it as you say it, gently but continuously. Do not think or imagine anything—spiritual or otherwise. If thoughts and images come, these are distractions at the time of meditation, so keep returning to simply saying the word.

Popular Catholic mystic Brennan Manning likewise teaches, “Choose a single, sacred word… . Repeat the sacred word inwardly, slowly, and often. Enter into the great silence of God. Alone in that silence, the noise within will subside and the Voice of Love will be heard.”  Gary Gilley informs us that “it is apparently the repetition of the mantra that triggers the blank mind. With the mind blank and the heart open to whatever voices or visions that it encounters, accompanied with a vivid imagination, the individual enters the mystical state.”52

Misreading The Bible

Amazingly, many who practice contemplative prayer try to argue that there are verses in the Bible that support such a practice. Victoria Pierce claims that the practice of silent contemplation has been a part of the Christian tradition for thousands of years. “There are many examples in the Bible where people spent time alone in silence communing with God… . Even Jesus spent time alone, at one point wandering the desert for 40 days in solitude.”  Of course, Pierce fails to mention that there is a big difference between people spending time alone with God (like Jesus) and the mystical practice of contemplative prayer in which an altered state of consciousness is induced via a mantra (contrast Matt. 6:7).

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 17

A common verse often cited is Ps. 62:5, where we read, “My soul, wait in silence for God only, for my hope is from Him” (emphasis added). Some take the waiting in silence as being a form of (or at least something similar to) contemplative prayer. In context, however, the verse has virtually nothing to do with prayer or contemplation, but rather simply encourages believers to wait without distraction in eager expectation for God to act in deliverance.

Another verse often taken out of context is Ps. 46:10, where we read, “Be still, and know that I am God” (KJV, emphasis added). The act of being still is taken to be an act of deep contemplation. Again, however, in context this verse has virtually nothing to do with prayer or contemplation. As Ray Yungen put it, “once the meaning of still is examined, any contemplative connection is expelled. The word means to slacken, to cease or abate. In other words, the context is to slow down and trust God rather than get in a dither over things. Relax and watch God work!”  Marcia Montenegro adds this warning: “This verse is not about becoming absolutely still to ‘listen’ to God. There is no biblical support in this verse or any other for practicing certain breathing techniques, for repeating a phrase over and over, for letting the mind go blank, or for going beyond thinking in order to experience a ‘merging’ with God, as taught in spiritual techniques adapted from Buddhism for Christians, or as taught in mystical teachings usually labeled as contemplative or centered prayer.”55

A Christian Assessment

It is difficult to know where to begin in critiquing the emerging church movement—especially in regard to its marginalizing of the Bible and its openness to mysticism. Suffice it to say that from a biblical viewpoint, the movement is truly a target-rich environment. As Norman Geisler and Thomas Howe put it, the emerging church is more accurately called the diverging church since it diverts from orthodoxy on its view of the Bible and its openness to Eastern mysticism. It seems clear that what this movement “has ‘emerged’ into is not Christian in any traditional, historic, or orthodox sense of the words. Indeed, it

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 18

has emerged from orthodoxy to unorthodoxy,… from objectivism to subjectivism… and from absolutism to relativism, and from relativism to agnosticism.”  Let us now consider some details.

God’s People Are Being Deceived

One might initially find it difficult to believe that so many Christians in the church today could be so woefully deceived. However, the biblical testimony is that God’s people can indeed succumb to false doctrine. Ezek. 34:1–7, for example, indicates that God’s sheep can be abused and led astray by wicked shepherds. Moreover, Jesus warned His followers: “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves” (Matt. 7:15–16). Why would Jesus warn His followers to “watch out” if there was no possibility that they could be deceived?

Jesus also warned His followers: “Watch out that no one deceives you. For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many… . Many false prophets will appear and deceive many people” (Matt. 24:4, 11). Why would Jesus warn His followers of such deception if it were not possible that they be deceived and end up believing a lie?

In 2 Cor. 11:2–3 the apostle Paul warned Christians: “I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him. But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ.” Paul clearly saw the possibility that Christians could be deceived and led astray by false doctrine.

In Acts 20:28–30 the elders of the Ephesian church were warned: “Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood. I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.”

Eph. 4:14 likewise warns that people can be “tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 19

the cunning craftiness by which they lie in wait to deceive.” Second Tim. 4:3^4 warns us that “the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.”

In view of such passages, it seems clear that Christians can indeed be deceived and led astray by false doctrine. Those who are ungrounded in biblical truth are especially vulnerable. In today’s experience-based culture, the deception is massive indeed. I have made special note of these verses because if there has ever been a time when apologetically minded Christians need to contend for the faith once-for-all delivered to the saints (Jude 3), that time is now. The church is endangered.

The Folly of Marginalizing Scripture

While emerging church services feature multi-sensory worship (using skits, storytelling, and various forms of media), Jesus emphasized the centrality of the Word of God in making disciples: “If you abide in my word, you are my disciples indeed” (John 8:31). While emerging church leaders say we can no longer look to the Bible alone as a guide for spiritual living, church leaders according to the Bible are to preach God’s Word “for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, with the edifying of the body of Christ” (Eph. 4:12). While emerging church leaders say we should merely “love” people into the church, biblical Christians are called to “always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear” (1 Pet. 3:15). While emerging church leaders say they want to find new ways of “doing church,” they fail to recognize the biblical teaching that the church is “the pillar and the foundation of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15).

Not one to mince words, the apostle Paul sternly instructed young Timothy: “Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers” (1 Tim. 4:16). He affirmed to Timothy that Scripture is fully sufficient: “From infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:15–17).

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 20

Paul certainly recognized the importance of the words spoken by the Savior: “You will know the truth and the truth will make you free” (John 8:32). The tragic reality is that many today have abandoned the truth—holding to a Christianity without the Bible (or, at most, a Christianity with minimal use of the Bible)—and consequently find themselves in bondage to a whitewashed (Christianized) mysticism that may look good on the outside, but on the inside is nothing but Eastern religion, a false religion.

The sad reality is that some people distort Scripture “to their own destruction” (2 Pet. 3:16). Contrary to this, we should avoid distorting God’s Word and should set forth God’s truth plainly (2 Cor. 4:2). Paul states: “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15, emphasis added).

An incorrect way of handling the word of truth is the emerging church policy of seeking a multiplicity of valid perspectives on Bible verses as opposed to the one meaning intended by the text. The International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI) published a small book in 1983 titled Explaining Hermeneutics: A Commentary, in which Article VII states, “We affirm that the meaning in each biblical text is single, definite and fixed.”  The commentary for this Article tells us that the affirmation here is directed at those who claim a double or deeper meaning of Scripture than that expressed by the authors. It stresses the unity and fixity of meaning as opposed to those who find multiple and pliable meanings.

It is especially important that we not superimpose mystical meanings onto Bible verses but should rather seek the biblical authors intended meaning. In approaching the Scriptures we ought to put nothing into them, but rather draw everything from them. As Norman Geisler rightly notes, what a passage means is fixed by the author and is not subject to alteration by readers. “Meaning is determined by the author; it is discovered by readers.”

Article XIX of ICBI’s Explaining Hermeneutics addresses this issue: “We affirm that any preunderstandings which the interpreter

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 21

brings to Scripture should be in harmony with scriptural teaching and subject to correction by it. We deny that Scripture should be required to fit alien preunderstandings, inconsistent with itself… .” The point of this article is to avoid interpreting Scripture through an alien grid or filter (such as an emerging church grid) that obscures or negates its true message. For it acknowledges that one’s preunderstanding will affect his understanding of a text. To avoid misinterpreting Scripture one must be careful to examine his own presuppositions in the light of Scripture.

This is all the more important when we consider Christ’s strong stand against false doctrine in His words to the seven churches of Asia Minor in Revelation 2—3. In this passage, Christ chastises those who tolerate false doctrine and commends those who take a stand against it. For example, Christ commends the church at Ephesus because it “put to the test those who call themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false” (2:2). He commends the church at Pergamum because it “did not deny My faith even in the days of Antipas, My witness, My faithful one, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells” (2:13). But He also chastened this church, saying: “I have a few things against you, because you have there some who hold the teaching of Balaam,” and “you also have some who in the same way hold the teaching of the Nicolaitans” (2:14–15). He also chastened the church at Thyatira: “You tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bondservants astray” (2:20). May it burn into our minds that Christ from heaven even now observes and evaluates our own stand against false doctrines in the church. Let us not be found wanting!

Christians today are called to follow the practice of the Bereans, who examined the Scriptures daily to ascertain whether the things they had been taught by the apostle Paul were really true (Acts 17:11). Let us resolve to focus our sternest attention not on mystical encounters with Christ but on the word of Christ: “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom” (Col. 3:16). For, indeed, it is the Word of God alone that is “a lamp to my feet and a light for my path” (Ps. 119:105).

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 22

Abounding Self-Contradictions

One cannot help but notice the contradictory nature of the truth claims of emerging church leaders. The affirmation of some leaders that there is no such thing as absolute truth is itself presented as an absolute truth. Many leaders of the movement relentlessly assert that we cannot know truth with any certainty—and yet they seem rather certain in making this claim. They continually criticize different sectors of Christianity for arrogantly claiming that they have the “correct interpretation” of Christian doctrine and practice, apparently blind to the fact that their own views claim to be the “correct interpretation” of these matters. And while claiming that these different Christian sectors are wrong in imposing their beliefs on others, emerging church leaders certainly feel free to impose their mystical beliefs on everyone. Emerging church leaders seem clueless that their thinking abounds with such self-contradictions. Contrary to their problematic views, the Bible reveals that Christianity rests on a solid foundation of absolute truth (see 1 Kings 17:24; Ps. 25:5, 43:3, 100:5, 119:30; John 1:17, 8:44, 14:17, 17:17; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 4:15, 6:14; 2 Tim. 2:15; 1 John 3:19; 3 John 4, 8).

The Illogic of Inclusivism

The openness of some emerging church enthusiasts to other religions constitutes another example of the illogic that is part and parcel of the movement. Inclusivism does not make sense because (for example) the leaders of the different world religions set forth radically different and contradictory ideas about God (theism, pantheism, panentheism, polytheism, etc.). Moreover, while salvation in Christianity hinges on personal faith in Jesus Christ with no works involved, salvation in other religions (Hinduism, for example) hinges on a life (indeed, many lifetimes) of good works. Finally, while Christians believe we live once, die once (Heb. 9:27), and look forward to a future day of bodily resurrection after which we will individually live forever in fellowship with a personal God (1 Cor. 15:42–57), Hindus say the soul is born over and over again in human bodies with the ultimate goal of escaping from the wheel of karma and being absorbed into the impersonal Universal Soul. If one of these religions is right (Christianity), then the others (not just Hinduism, but all others) must necessarily be wrong, for contradictory truth claims cannot all be true at one and the same time.

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 23

The Problem With Mysticism

There are notable dangers in engaging in mystical practices. First, mysticism is insufficient as a ground upon which to build our knowledge of God. The Bible stresses the importance of objective, historical revelation.  For example, John 1:18 tells us, “No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only [Jesus], who is at the Father’s side, has made him known” (emphasis added, insert added). In the empirical world of ordinary sense perceptions, Jesus was seen and heard by human beings as God’s ultimate revelation to mankind. No wonder Jesus said, “If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well” (John 14:7). Likewise, the apostle Paul stressed the importance of objective, historical revelation. In Acts 17:31, for example, he warned the religious men of Athens of the objective reality of future judgment based on the objective evidence of the resurrection of Jesus. Based on how people respond to this objective, historical revelation, they will spend eternity in a real heaven or a real hell. No mysticism or subjectivism here!

Second, those who place faith in mysticism seem blind to the possibility of spiritual deception. What if that which mystics assume to be genuine “god-consciousness” is in fact less than God, or at worst Satan, the great impersonator of God and. the father of lies (John 8:44; 2 Cor. 11:14)? R. D. Clements wisely warns, “Satan is quite capable of providing spiritual experiences for the undiscerning. And there is evidence that some, if not all, of the mystic experiences obtained by using Eastern meditative techniques are being exploited by Satan in this way.”  Even mystic Richard Foster admits it is possible to encounter “spiritual beings” who are not on God’s side when participating in contemplative prayer. He says he surrounds himself with “the light of Christ” and verbally requests that all bad spirits leave. Former New Age psychic Marcia Montenegro says this reminds her of her old psychic days when she and other psychics would foolishly try to invoke a “white light of protection” against evil spirits.

Related to this, Christian apologists John Weldon and John Ankerberg warn that almost all meditation other than biblical med-

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 24

itation can lead to spirit contact and inculcate a nonbiblical, occult worldview.  They also warn that the number of well-meaning people who have embarked on a visualization program for physical health, psychological understanding, or spiritual advancement and ended up involved in the occult is not small. Books on visualization carry numerous anecdotes of how even the well-intentioned and seemingly nonoccult use of visualization catapulted people into the New Age movement, psychic development, and/or spirit contact.64

Third, altered states of consciousness can be dangerous and can lead to harmful consequences. For example, there are increasing reports of people who have found the practice of Transcendental Meditation to be harmful.  Moreover, some deep meditators have developed increased anxiety, confusion, and depression.66  Too much deep meditation can hinder logical thought processes.  One researcher found that “as a person enters or is in an ASC [Altered State of Consciousness], he often experiences fear of losing his grip on reality, and losing his self-control.”68

Fourth, contemplative prayer’s emphasis on attaining a sense of oneness with all things (including a sense of oneness with God) lies in direct contradiction to the biblical view of the eternal distinction between God the Creator and His creatures (Isa. 44:6–8; Heb. 2:6–8). Put another way, the Eastern worldview (monism) directly conflicts with the Christian worldview (theism).

And fifth, mystical contemplative techniques can actually hinder true contemplation. In other words, we cannot really use our brains to objectively contemplate God in His Word if we have previously numbed our brains via Eastern meditation. That makes about as much

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 25

sense as my purposefully crashing my computer before trying to use it to write this article.

The Case For Christian Meditation

Scripture defines meditation in terms of the individual believer objectively contemplating and deeply reflecting upon God and His Word (Ps. 1:2, 19:14; Josh. 1:8) as well as His Person and faithfulness (Ps. 119; cf. 19:14, 48:9, 77:12, 104:34, 143:5). There is obviously a big difference between subjectively emptying one’s mind to meditate on nothing and objectively filling one’s mind with the Word of God to meditate on the Living God.

Christian meditation calls us to look upward to God so that our minds may be filled with godly wisdom and insight and so that our hearts may be filled with comfort, happiness, and joy. To echo the opening words of the psalmist, “Blessed is the man … [whose] delight is in the law of the Lord, who meditates on his law day and night” (Ps. 1:1–2).

Many words in the Hebrew language are rich with nuances of meaning that sometimes fail to come across in the English translation. The Hebrew term for “meditation” is such a word. In different contexts, “meditate” can mean to utter, imagine, speak, roar, mutter, meditate, and muse. For example, the word is used in Isa. 31:4 to express the roar of a lion. It is used in Isa. 38:14 in reference to the sound of the mourning of doves. In both cases, the idea seems to be that outward expression is an outgrowth of strong inner emotions and thoughts.

The Hebrew term for “meditation” seems to carry the basic idea of “murmuring.” It portrays a person who is very deep in rational thought, mumbling with his lips as though talking to himself. When David meditated on God’s Word, he concentrated so intensely that he no doubt murmured with his lips as he read. This is the kind of objective meditation Christians may participate in.

A Closing Warning From Charles Hodge

Charles Hodge was a Reformed theologian of days past who issued a strong warning against reliance upon mysticism. His words, though uttered long ago, are still relevant for our day: “The prophets came saying, ‘Thus saith the Lord.’ Men were required to believe and obey

CAJ 7:1 (Spring 2008) p. 26

what was communicated to them. … It was the outward and not the inward Word to which they were to attend.” He states, “In no case do we find the apostles calling upon the people, whether Jews or Gentiles, to look within themselves, to listen to the inner word. They were to listen to the outward word; to believe what they heard, and were to pray for the Holy Spirit to enable them to understand, receive, and obey what was thus externally made known to them.” Indeed, Hodge says, “Without the written word, men everywhere and in all ages, are ignorant of divine things, without God, without Christ, and without hope in the world.” He warns that “there is no criterion by which a man can test these inward impulses or revelations, and determine which are from the spirit of God, and which are from his own heart or from Satan, who often appears and acts as an angel of light.” Therefore, “to tell men to look within for an authoritative guide … is to give them a guide which will lead them to destruction.” [1]


[1] . Vol. 7: Christian Apologetics Journal Volume 7. 2008 (1) (2–26). Matthews, NC: Southern Evangelical Seminary.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.