Chuck Baldwin recently had this to say on the subject. A small portion is below:
By definition, apostasy is the condition of those who once (in some degree) embraced the truth, but have now abandoned or forsaken it. Obviously, this applies only to professing Christians. Infidels, agnostics, and unbelievers have no profession from which to apostatize…
That said, I am personally convinced that, by and large, the churches of America (regardless of denomination) are in a state of apostasy. And as such, offer little or no resistance to the men of sin who seek to seduce and deceive our people.
When a professing Christian President can openly acknowledge his belief in universalism and attack the supreme doctrine of Christianity, that Jesus Christ is the Creator-God become flesh, and there is not an uproar of protestation and denunciation from pulpits all over the country, the Church is in a state of apostasy. And that is exactly what has taken place.
So, whether you’ve read the whole article, or just this snippet, let me ask you something. If you’re a Christian, did that offend you, or convict you?
I’ll admit, the full article is rather scathing. But I can’t see where he’s actually wrong. Of course, his point was about the apostasy of someone we’ll just call “W,” how that’s significant of the Church at large, and how we conservative Christians are willingly abetting this situation. To be sure, we – as a group – do tend to fall for anyone who carries a Bible and knows all the Sunday School answers.
The Bill Hybels / Rick Warren ”seeker friendly” movement is a cancer in the modern Church. The necessary outcome of this is that you water down the Word in order to make it more appealing to a broader base of people. The only way to make the offense of the cross palatable to the masses is to remove all meaning from Christ’s sacrifice on our behalf.
And here’s the crux of the matter: a worship service is not the place to reach out to unbelievers.
No, really. The purpose of meeting together regularly is to praise, not to proselytize. It’s supposed to be a time of worship, of renewal, of edification. Not explanation. We have all week to witness, to reach out, to talk to others about the saving blood of Christ. Besides, if you’re stuck at having to feed milk – no, water – to the unchurched, how do you ever get around to giving meat to the faithful?
Have you ever heard of the phrase “priesthood of the believer?” I think that’s part of it. IMO, the mainstream church has become far too enamored of – and dependant upon – professional clergy. There is no Scriptural basis for this. [Nor is there basis for requisite multiple advanced degrees from seminaries… but that's probably fodder for an entirely different discussion.]
The basic problem is that human nature dictates that we will take the path of least resistance: given the opportunity, we will all let someone else figure out for us the things we need to do; we will let someone else interpret Scripture for us. We’ll even let someone else study the Bible for us. [The proof of this is the “prosperity gospel,” and the way so many self-described Christians keep voting for such utter tools solely because someone with a pulpit or some other otherwise respectable ministry says, “he’s our guy."]
So then, this opens the door for the feel-good message of the Osteens of the world. If nobody does their own study, they don’t know that God doesn’t really care if you’re rich or destitute. They don’t know that God expects you to honor Him regardless of your circumstances. But the closest thing to “name it-claim it” I’ve been able to find is salvation itself, and that only by grace, though faith, given to us – individually – by a true act of a loving and merciful God.
In order to appeal to the largest number of people (the Prime Directive of the church growth camp), you have to risk offending the smallest number of people possible. If they feel bad about themselves, they may not buy what you’re selling, so you want them to feel good about themselves. Thus, you give the people a feel-good message, as opposed to a convicting message, and they feel good about themselves.
This means they don’t feel convicted of their own moral turpitude. [And let's not fool ourselves – anyone who thinks people are basically good has never had kids of their own.] If they don’t feel convicted of their degeneracy, why do they need a Savior?
If they don’t need a Savior – why was it they were going to church? (Enter prosperity gospel, stage right)
Possible foundations of this group:
I will give you hidden treasures, riches stashed away in secret places, so you may recognize that I am the LORD, the one who calls you by name, the God of Israel. (Isaiah 45:3)
[This would suggest the prosperity reader misses the fact that these "riches" and "treasures" are in Heaven.]
The rich man’s wealth is his fortress, the ruin of the poor is their poverty. (Proverbs 10:15)
[Which doesn't mean the rich man is more righteous, just that he's safer (in general) from the destructive woes of the indigent – and this would typically also make it easier for the rich man to disregard the broader adverse consequences of his actions; this is a double-edged sword.]
Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. (Matthew 7:7)
[This one must neglect the fact that the asker/seeker/knocker must have aligned his will with the will of the Father for this to come true – meaning that self-aggrandizing materialistic requests just might not make the cut.]
Am I suggesting that God does not answer prayer? Absolutely not. But I recall the Bible says something about God answering prayer according to His will and His purposes; this might not include a new Jaguar XK in my driveway.
It seems to me that the very existence of the “church growth” and “prosperity gospel” movements is prima facie a denial of faith in God and in His sovereignty. This declaration of faithlessness is the very reason the country is “turning away.” But we do have to “name” it, i.e., we have to ask for forgiveness and confess our faith in Christ Jesus as the only way to salvation.
That may end up upsetting some people… But better to offend my fellow man. The alternative is inconceivably worse.
