Common Compromise
December 13th, 2007
(By Nathan Busenitz)
For many of you, this will be old news. But due to several projects I’ve been focused on the last couple months, I’m just now having an opportunity to respond. Please bear with me.
(First a little background. . . )
This last October, a group of 138 Muslim scholars and clerics produced an open letter to Christians entitled, “A Common Word between Us and You.” The letter was an attempt to bridge the differences between Islam and Christianity, to promote amicable relations, open dialogue, and even cooperation between the two faiths. Part of the letter read as follows:
So let our differences not cause hatred and strife between us. Let us vie with each other only in righteousness and good works. Let us respect each other, be fair, just and kind to another and live in sincere peace, harmony and mutual goodwill.
On November 18, just a month ago, several Christian scholars from Yale Divinity School responded with a full-page spread in The New York Times. Their response (which was endorsed by over 100 Christian leaders, including Rick Warren, Brian McLaren, and Robert Schuller) expressed delight in the invitation offered by these Muslims. Here is part of that response:
It is rather a deep insight and courage with which they have identified the common ground between the Muslim and Christian religious communities. . . . That so much common ground exists—common ground in some of the fundamentals of faith—gives hope that undeniable differences and even the very real external pressures that bear down upon us can not overshadow the common ground upon which we stand together.
(Now a few thoughts. . . )
Do Christians actually have “common ground upon which we stand together” with the leaders of a false religion? Is this the type of conciliatory attitude we should have toward those who actively promote Islam? Should we simply overlook our differences and embrace each other in a spirit of ecumenical tolerance?
Obviously not.
Certainly, the New Testament commands us to love other people. But the love of the Bible is not a free-styled, all-embracing, blind acceptance of every wind of doctrine for the sake of dialogue. It is, in fact, just the opposite. It is a love that speaks the truth (or as Paul said, “rejoices with the truth”), not a love that promotes tolerance at the expense of sound doctrine.
Just listen to how Jesus and the apostles responded to false teachers and those who embraced them:
Jesus said: Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
Paul said: If any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!
Peter said: It has happened to them [false teachers] according to the true proverb, “A DOG RETURNS TO ITS OWN VOMIT,” and, “A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire.”
John said: If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds.
Jude said: Woe to them! For they have gone the way of Cain, and for pay they have rushed headlong into the error of Balaam, and perished in the rebellion of Korah. . . . [They are] clouds without water, carried along by winds; autumn trees without fruit, doubly dead, uprooted; wild waves of the sea, casting up their own shame like foam; wandering stars, for whom the black darkness has been reserved forever.
The interchange between Muslims and evangelical Christians is just the latest example of the ecumenical compromise that has plagued American Christianity since the rise of 19th-century theological liberalism. In recent decades, the contemporary church has exchanged expository preaching for seeker-driven programs; doctrinal accuracy for postmodern ambiguity; and biblical precision for cultural popularity. Mainstream evangelicals started by abandoning the inerrancy and authority of Scripture, and along with it, an accurate understanding of the Gospel. Since then, they have capitulated on just about everything else.
It is a sad day in evangelicalism when the most shocking thing about this latest “interfaith dialogue” is that it really isn’t that shocking. In reality, Muslims and Christians have nothing in common. As Paul told the Corinthians:
Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? Or what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; just as God said, “I will dwell in them and walk among them; and I will be there God, and they shall be My people.” Therefore, “come out from their midst and be separate,” says the Lord. “And do not touch what is unclean.”
Over 100 “Christian” scholars may have affirmed this latest interfaith group hug. But Paul never would have. And neither would Jesus or the other apostles. As those following in their footsteps, that should make the issue pretty clear for us.
“Over 100 “Christian” scholars may have affirmed this latest interfaith group hug. But Paul never would have. And neither would Jesus or the other apostles. As those following in their footsteps, that should make the issue pretty clear for us.”
There were some impressive Christian signatories to that letter. Names which greatly surprised me. I wouldn’t have signed it, but I can’t put the word “Christian” in quotation marks for those who would or did sign that letter. There are other things that would cause me to write “Christian” to describe heretics and apostates, but signing that letter isn’t one of them.
To further clarify, “Christian” means false Christian, someone who will be eternally separated from Christ. And although that fits some of the signers, it can’t be said for *all* the signers.
Well stated, and biblically grounded.
While social peace between the two faiths is much to be desired, mutual admiration is not. Such pretenses render the gospel benign by pointing to common lifestyle standards as if they are synonymous with a common faith. Who needs to evangelize someone who is living a “good” life anyway?
-Jeff
didacticworship.wordpress.com
Nathan,
As to the 100 scholars that have signed this and other ecumenical documents … it brings to mind something that John Piper once said. I have it written down and taped to a prominent place in my office: “There is no necessary correlation between insight and [academic] degrees. Most of the worst teachers in the world have advanced degrees.” The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Walter Heaton
In this letter, the signers start out be asking forgiveness of the “All-Merciful One” for alleged sins committed by Christians in the past. How is this not blasphemous? What part of “I Am the Lord, there is no other” don’t they understand?
This letter is carefully drafted to leave the reader thinking there is no difference between the God of the Bible and the Allah of the Koran. Further, the deity of Jesus Christ — which Muslims reject — is never even addressed in this letter. Even those serious theological problems do not begin to address whether it is politically advisable or wise to respond as these men did.
How any so-called Christian leader can sign onto such a blasphemous document is beyond me.
Where is the outrage? Will any of these men be disciplined by their churches?
Could you provide a link to the letters so that we might read them.
You can read the letter and see the list the names that have been signed at the following link:
http://www.yale.edu/faith/abou-commonword.htm
Having read the letter I, for one, don’t think it to be wrong to call these leaders “christians”. Some of the signers were “christians” before they signed the letter. Sadly, it is going to be viewed as a letter that all Christians have agreed to. An anonymous quote: “Tolerance is a virtue for those who have no convictions.”
The Muslim letter can be found here:
http://www.acommonword.com/
And the Yale response is here:
http://www.yale.edu/faith/abou-commonword.htm
Wonderful exhortation!
We love our enemies for the sake of the glory of the LORD our One True God, YAH the Redeemer God Messiah (Christ) Jesus.
To deny Him in loving them is to hate them and to wish them to eneter Hades. Would our LORD wish us to love people in this age, without speaking the truth concerning their eternal reward apart from His grace and mercy?
I believe the answer is simple and clear: “speak the truth in love”.
For us to ignore the fact that people are persishing because they “trust upon an arm of flesh” for their deliverance, is to be unloving.
We ought to boldly procliam the truth in love concerning Devine salvation by grace alone through fait alone in Christ Jesus alone, to do any less is to fail in our love for the lost and to fail in the Lawof grace.
How am I to keep the Law of grace & liberty:
Luke 10:27
“So he answered and said, “ ‘You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,’ and ‘your neighbor as yourself.’”
We ought to seek to save sinners, of who where where once. Let us never forget our first love, the LORD our Deliverer and merciful Redeemer.
In the grace, mercy & compassionae care of our LORD God Jesus the Holy Spirit, our Advocate.
Just a footnote. Didn’t John Stott sign that document? If so, OUCH!
Good post, Nathan.
A couple more thoughts to consider…
First, as you and many others have rightly identified, the ecumenical compromise at the heart of the “Christian” response is no less than betrayal of God’s Truth and failure to obey His commands. The magnitude of betrayal is striking when you consider the media visibility afforded to the Muslim open letter to Christians as it was placed on the world stage. What a HUGE open door, giving opportunity to step on to that same stage and proclaim to ALL Muslims that they NEED Christ, and that He died for their sins too! To those leaders who endorsed the New York Times response I offer Proverbs 24:11-12
Deliver those who are drawn toward death, And hold back those stumbling to the slaughter. If you say, “Surely we did not know this,” Does not He who weighs the hearts consider it? He who keeps your soul, does He not know it? And will He not render to each man according to his deeds?
Which leads to my second thought, and to no small measure of grief. Why is it that we who know better than to compromise the truth in this manner are always consigned to post-game criticism? Open doors like this do come along every now and then and in my recent memory it has been some self-assembled, pro-ecumenical group (as in this present case) or the Vatican who walk through the door and into the global spotlight. Shame on us! I know I’m guilty of this too… I’ll see followers of some false religion step into the media spotlight to invite an ecumenical response from Christians and rather than recognizing an open door I start a mental countdown wondering “how long will it be until some bogus group offers up a squishy, we’re-all-God’s-children response?”
What keeps a group of Truth-loving Christians from drafting a Biblical, Christ-honoring response and beating the compromisers through the door and onto the stage? Sure, it’s probably not going to be the NYT who agree to publish a full page of Biblical truth but certainly a coordinated, widespread response through various media outlets could be noticed and picked up by others. To those of us who know better, I offer Luke 16:8b
For the sons of this world are more shrewd in their generation than the sons of light.
John Stott did sign the document. “Ouch” is right!
Of all the signers John Stott being in the number broke my heart. He surprised me the most that he would willfully compromise like this. My prayers are that he will renounce this letter.
Matthew 7:15-23
15 “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 “You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17 “So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 “A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19 “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 “So then, you will know them by their fruits.
I think the question should be “What kind of fruit is Islam bearing?”
Because….
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, `Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 “Many will say to Me on that day, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 “And then I will declare to them, `I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’
I wonder if the Muslims will be willing to tell the world:
1. “You must be born again.” (John 3:3)
2. Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me. (John 14:6)
3. Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me. (Matthew 16:24).
4. “I and the Father are one.” (John 10:30).
5. “But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” (Rev 21:8)
6. “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. (John 3:16).
The clearest expression of God’s love for mankind is seen at the Cross Of Christ.
Are we “Ashamed of the Gospel?” I pray that we are not!
Quite a list of signatories. Many of those I would have expected (mainline churches, liberal seminaries), but I was quite surprised by some of them, including John Stott and Bill Hybels.
As noted in the article, Rick Warren is there, along with a “healthy” representation of Emergent folks, including Brian MacLaren, Tony Jones and a couple of others from the Emergent Village.
The number of members from less liberal seminaries was rather discouraging: 2-3 from Gordon-Conwell, Wycliffe, Tyndale. Quite a few from various missions agencies.
“Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.” Jude 3 (ESV)
I, too, pray that Dr. Stott would repent and renounce this letter. But I am much more willing to give Dr. Stott the benefit of the doubt in view of his advanced years.
I am less willing to extend the same benefit to people such as the President of Wheaton College, who signed the letter along with the College’s Provost AND CHAPLAIN, if you can believe that. Taylor University and now my own alma mater, Hope College, have also signed on. (I am very glad to see that John Piper and John MacArthur did NOT sign it.)
I am hard pressed to believe these men did not understand what they were doing when they put their names to this.
My question is, will the trustees of these colleges address this matter and hold these men accountable? Will their churches discipline them? These men are not just nobodies, they are holding themselves out as Christian leaders who represent Christ and His Church. Yet they sign onto a letter which de facto denies the deity of Christ for the sake of “world peace” and gives the clear impression that Yahweh and Allah are essentially the same!
Yesterday I was able to get on the air with Dr. Al Mohler to ask him for His response to this debacle. Here is the link to that question:
http://colonialbiblechurch.org/home/140001747/140001747/audio/QNA%20A%20Common%20Word.mp3
Nathan, thanks for posting on this. It seems that I haven’t heard much from some of the more well known, conservative/Biblical outlets as I would like to have seen. Thank you for your ministry.
Thank you Nathan Busenitz for the article; it was new news to me. Thank you also to James Kubecki for providing the links which I will read late today. I am very interested in the 100 who signed.
Can anyone explain who/what Allah is? I often have students mis-think that he and Jehovah are the same “god.” They think that the name differences are just language differences. It would be good to be armed with knowledge and Scripture if this comes up in discussion again.
Tolerance, compassion, love…sure.
Abandoning the Gospel…never!
God help us.
Just a footnote…didn’t John Stott sign that document too? Correct me if I’m wrong, please.
Never mind that last post of mine..sorry I didn’t see that someone responded to my question. Another question: Has Pastor MacArthur made an “offical” statement about all of this nonesense? I would really like to hear what he has to say about this.
many people are fearful of terrorism and religious jihad, personally the spiritual war that is now ablaze via this
wretched ecumenism is cause for anxiety. we should warn all of our brothers in Christ THERE IS NO GOD BUT ONE and HIS NAME
is at stake, and HIS NAME has been REVEALED BY HIMSELF
HE IS THE GOD OF ABRAHAM ISAAC AND JACOB - THE GOD AND FATHER OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST! lets see the muslims sign
this statement! they wouldnt dare for they have more respect for their god and more tenacity, regarding those “Christians”
we can’t tell but if there are some who are faithful among them
SHAME UPON THEM INDEED!
John Stott was the reason why I did not want to say that *all* the signers were “Christians” with the word Christians in quotation marks.
I agree with Walter.
I believe that the promptings (or at least some) for wanting to write such a response come from a place that I agree with wholeheartedly. But the response itself comes from another place that I disagree with entirely. And this instantly makes the response the wrong one. As good as their intentions were, the problem is that I am not sure if all the people who signed it (who are much smarter than I am) recognized this in signing it. Perhaps many did recognize this and still signed anyway. But I don’t doubt that there are some who did not recognize this and signed. I’m thankful that Christ’s perfect life and death moment-by-moment supersede the things that I will inevitably fail to see and respond to.
Col. 1:17
John Stott has been a leader of the ecumenical movement for some time. He was warned by D. Martin Lloyd-Jones when DMLJ refused become involved.
We have another leader of this movement who has done the same thing, and the saddest part is that we put up a statue honoring this blasphemer and compromiser. Anyone care to guess who it is?
Dear saints,
We must be about true preaching and teaching of God’s Word. People will hear the truth, and believers will be discerning because they study the Holy Bible.
1Corinthians 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
The pseudo righteous “reconcilliation” with the enemies of Jesus Christ and the truth of scripture, is just another “politically correct” bit of posturing people do to feel good about themselves and seek the praise of men rather than the only living God, Savior and Christ the Lord.
The Truth of the Scriptures is the only way to teach a lost humanity their sinful and dangerous state before the Almighty Creator of the Universe, and the blessed hope and freedom from sins power over us that is through Jesus Christ alone, by His grace, through faith.
Compromising with false religions and conversing with ecumenical groups is clearly Satan’s trap……….it’s like trying to dialogue with Hitler. He already lost the war and is in Hell….clearly God’s enemy. So why would anyone who is truly regenerate and on God’s team want to make friends with God’s enemies who already lost the war?
We’re on the winning team, so lets not compromise with the enemy. It’s God’s war and He already won it! There are some Catholics who are really nice folks but unfortuately they believe just about anything (namely that Allah and Mohammed are in Heaven and are the same God of the living) and that’s why they will fall for anything……..not to be trusted there.
It is frightening to think that the signers knew full well the theological significance of the terms used in the document and signed it anyway. It is equally frightening to think that 100+ so called Christian leaders, thinkers, and self proclaimed “scholars” would not have known the true meaning of all the terms used. In either case, how can we continue to allow such people to maintain any type of leadership role within the true Church? We need more leaders to boldly step forward and expose these false teachers.
Why not give the evangelicals who signed this document the benefit of the doubt? As long as they believe that salvation is found in Christ alone I’m fine with it. Apart from liberals from Harvard and Yale conservative evangelicals have signed the document. Timothy George of Beeson Divinity School, Stanley Jones from Wheaton College, John Stackhouse from Regent, John Stott, Christopher Wright, People from Frontiers, YWAM, Ray Bakke, Robert E. Cooley President of Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary as well as others. When I first heard about this document I was a bit taken back as well. Caution is a good thing. I would like to hear the reason why these evangelicals signed the document and then make come to a conclusion.
It is sad to see how quickly today’s “Christian” leaders accept false religions. It is just one more step in the process of becoming like the world, namely: relativism. “I’m right, you’re right, everybody is right.” This reveals the fact that these men do not believe that the Bible is absolute truth. If they did, they would also believe that it is the only absolute truth. Islam does not and cannot merge with Christianity; it is like trying to mix water with oil. Christians can live among people of false religions, but when “Christians” take a step toward embracing false religions, they have just taken a step away from the absolute truth of the Bible.
Brian Fairchild,
Thanks for the link to your question regarding the open letter from Crhistian clergy to Muslim clergy. Dr. Mohler’s reponse to your question was enlightening. I recommend it strongly to all here.
WorldNetDaily.com has printed a three-part interview with Rick Warren. His signing of the document came up in the first interview about half-way through. His response demonstraates that sometimes men like Warren will jump on a popular band-wagon, especially one pushed by other prominent religious leaders, so they can maintain their own influence among the movers and shakers of the day.
It’s sad to see the lack of discernment displayed by men like Warren and Stott.
Blessings,
Steve Lamm
Nathan
Thank you for the post. I spent 6 years working in Algeria and while there never met anyone that would agree that Jesus is God. These folks seem to believe that peace will come by compromise. Let’s take a little Islam and a little bit of Christianity and a bit of this and that and create a god that we can all worship together. The bible has a word for this, IDOLOTRY. Creating a god to suit yourself is idolatry. No common ground here at all.
Steve
Great to hear from a fellow Expositor’s Institute attendee. Yes, I read the WorldNet Daily article you mentioned. Another point on Warren is his willingness to dialogue (although he said he doesn’t really mean it), with the hopes that somehow we might avoid persecution. How tragic that these leaders are willing to compromise the very core beliefs of Christianity in order that they may avoid difficulty. At last check, isn’t that all Jesus promised his followers in this life? No cross, no crown!
Persevere for the Truth!
May God Strengthen You By His Grace
Brian
I did not sign the document- Hahaha!
I did notice that at least of the signatories was a hinduish guru:
Brother Satyananda, Minister, Self-Realization Fellowship;
Did “Brother” Satyananda not read the title, or did he figure the ecumenical nature of the document was an invitation to all religions? Bizarre.
Rick, Canada
I have on my blog a list of several of the key names listed. On it you can click on their names to read about them and what school or church they are from. Also, you can click on an email address to contact either them directly or their churches or schools to tell them of your disgust with their signatures. I think it is important that we let them know they have crossed a line that is very dangerous. Just click on my name and go to my site. Then look for “Due to bad weather (theology)…”
Great comments on here. Love the post!
Of note is those to whom the letter is addressed. No one I’d consider a leader worthy of unmitigated or nearly-unmitigated respect. But maybe they’re not talking to me.
There’s Pope Benedict XVI, a bunch of Orthodox high-ups, the Pope of the Coptic Church (the memorably-named Shenouda), leaders of other historically Christian churches, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the ELCA, the World Methodist Council, the Baptist World Alliance, and the World Alliance of Reformed Churches. It would have been nice to see a bone thrown to someone like SBC Pres Frank Page, John MacArthur, Al Mohler… even Billy/Franklin Graham. As it is, a significant portion of their supposed audience goes unaddressed.
And they lose points for addressing the General Secretary of the World Council of Churches, to be honest.
Reading thru the actual text, I note that this (Muslim-penned) document frequently refers to “the Unity of God”. Given that this is not a theological document but rather a start of dialogue ostensibly aimed at producing peaceful relations, it is a little funny to me. Almost like the authors are tossing a few snips at the Trinitarian concept of God while laying out peace. It’s what I would do, honestly. But maybe I’m just reading too much into it, and either way it’s just a quirky sidenote. All that to say, when a Muslim says “Unity of God,” he doesn’t mean it the same way a Christian does - “unity” to the Muslim entails an (unjustifiable) assumption of unitarianism.
The document’s big gaffe is almost unbelievable in its clumsiness. On the .pdf page 15 of 29, it asks: “Is Christianity necessarily against Muslims?”
The answer, of course, is that this question is silly. Christian doctrine is that men everywhere must repent and request forgiveness for their sins from the Savior Jesus Christ, which will lead to their salvation from that sin and to eternal life. Where did the idea that Christianity might be against Muslims come from, so that they added the word “necessarily”? This alone is almost enough to tempt me seriously to disregard this document entirely, as either disingenuous or just ill-conceived.
A much better question is: “Is Christianity necessarily against Islam?” to which the answer is “yes.”
Or one could ask: “Are Christians against Muslims?” to which the answer is: “Any Christian who acts without love against a Muslim who is not attempting to blow him up or something is acting in a sinful manner.”
We are then told: “We therefore invite Christians to consider Muslims not against and thus with them, in accordance with Jesus Christ’s words here,” based on three out-of-context quotations from Jesus Christ in Matt 12:30, Mark 9:40, and Luke 9:50.
To be honest, when I meet a Muslim in the US, I look on him/her as almost certainly a peaceful person who is a sinner, but also with a greater amount of suspicion than that with which I look upon an Argentine, a Chinese, or a Singaporean.
I’m glad these authors invite me to consider them “with” me (I assume they mean with me in the pursuit of peace on earth), but I have to withhold unconditional acceptance of that from “Muslims” until I see more than a kind of poorly-written document from some Islamic scholars.
Finally, the authors (again, clumsily) seem to lose track of the goal of their document with this closing statement: “Let this common ground be the basis of all future interfaith dialogue between us, for our common ground is that on which hangs all the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 22:40).”
I’m not interested in “interfaith dialogue” as it is usually meant in modern parlance. Followers of Islam need to hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ and need to repent and believe it. “Interfaith dialogue” might be a good vehicle thru which such might be accomplished, so on that level it’s great. But it must not become the end for the Christian, b/c it is pitiful in its short-sightedness.
That said, I come away from this document a little more hopeful that the attitude expressed therein can lead to more peace in this world. I hate war. May God grant the people of the world reprieve from war. I need to see alot more from the Muslim side, however, before I could have a lot of optimism that the hostility endemic to their religious system has been conquered by modern sensibilities. One document does not erase Qur’anic statements directing Muslims to conduct violent jihad nor their bloody history of military expansion.
We are to avoid the appearance of evil. For the men who are otherwise sound conservative Christians, whatevers that is, they need to be called to account. I do not think that there is a reasonable explanation for signing. But, someone with repect should ask.
Romney’s presidency has thown this very discussion into the public light. Now is the time for clear, sound voices. They have the platform, they will be heard.
The whole concept of Christians joining with false religions is simply preposterous. It’s like joining the circus!
If I truly love God and my human brothers who practice religion in accordance with Muslim doctrine, why on earth would I enable them to suffer apart from Y’shua?
This is a sad document showing how far the so called “church” have fallen and corrupted the Truth of the Gospel of the Lord and Master Jesus Christ the Messiah. I can barely see any notice of the fact that the letter signed by Hybles, Warren and others makes a repeated allegation that God of the Bible and “god” of Koran is one and the same! This is an utter and absolute blasphemy. It is absolutely outrageous, outlandish and mockery of the Word of God!
Public appealing lies build on false and skewed willingness to please people who in the name of cooperation and works will deny anything not to mention the “inconvenient” exclusivity of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the Lord. People, so called “leader and teachers” who signed this letter have publicly denied their faith and have denied the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and his Son Jesus and Holy Spirit. Shame on you! You have proclaimed the lie and propagated it by signing this hellish document in the name of your shallow and worldly interests if influence. False teachers and restless minds. You might as well go on and teach that Isaiah believed that Baal was the same God as YHVH. Did anybody catch this? Do you see that those people equate and put on the SAME LEVEL Word of God and a satanic lies contained in Koran? What a travesty and the sad part is that most people going to churches will not even now about this statement and even if they would know they would applause it in the name of corruptly understood reach out…
Sad, very sad but the Lord is over this too.
Here is the link, in case anyone wanted it, to a list of email addresses of some of the key people who signed the letter. It also has links to their schools or churches.
http://time2changechurches.blogspot.com/2007/12/due-to-bad-weather-theology.html
Perhaps we need to teach about Pergamum more often. (Rev 2:12)
How can these “Scholars” miss the meaning of the double edged sword?
This document is a very big deal! These people who signed this document are standing on very shaky ground. There is no reverence for God the Father nor His Son Jesus Christ in that document. In fact, it minimizes their glory, majesty, and deity! I thought I’d jot down a few scriptures on just who God and His Christ are. the scriptures from Isaiah came straight from the Father’s mouth. To the signators: read’em and weep!
I am the Lord; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another or my praise to idols. (Isa 42:8)
You are my witnesses, declares the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am He. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me. I, even I, am the Lord, and apart from me there is no savior. I have revealed and saved and proclaimed–I, and not some foreign god among you. You are my witnesses, declares the Lord, that I am God. Yes, and from ancient days I am He. No one can deliver out of my hand. When I act, who can reverse it? (Isa 43:10-13)
…You are my witnesses. Is there any God besides me? No, there is no other Rock; I know not one. (Isa 44:8)
Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God. (1 Jo 5:5)
We accept man’s testimony, but God’s testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which He has given about His Son. Anyone who believes in the Son of God has this testimony in his heart. Anyone who does not believe God has made Him out to be a liar, because he has not believed the testimony God has given about His Son. And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. (1 Jo 5:9-12)
One is life and the other is death. One is in light and the other is in darkness concerning just who Jesus is. I have one question. What do you get when you mix a glass of clean water with a glass of septic water? Would you drink it? Neither would I.
Curtis
Thanks for all the good information and links.
I was very disappointed too, to read the names of those that signed the Yale letter. Stott, Warren, Hybels, along with George Verwer former head of OM, also Maiden the present leader of OM, too depressing.
Then followed so quickly by the ridiculous remarks of the AB of Canterbury…
And just today I read about Esposito (another signatory of the Yale letter Oh what company they keep) with his hateful remarks at Stanford…
Dhimmitude creeps up on those unaware.