| |
A Look at Christ the Rock’s Statement on C5 Contextualization
A Denunciation or an Affirmation?By Pastor Tim Snell
In light of my recent release of the video, “Teaching Another Gospel”, Christ the Rock Community Church’s (CTR) Statement on Contextualization – which their leadership is handing out - bears further analysis. What are they actually saying and what does it mean? Is it a denunciation of C5 contextualization, or is it an endorsement?
As we will see, an analysis of their words in this statement - in light of the words of the conference, and in light of John Travis’ contextualization scale - lead to one clear and inescapable conclusion: This statement, while well word-smithed to appear as if there should be no cause for concern, is actually a resounding affirmation of their embrace of the C5 contextualization method.
Let’s begin with the statement itself. I’ve included it here
Christ the Rock's Statement on Contextualization
WHAT WE DO BELIEVE
- We believe in the authority of the Bible.
- We believe in the person and lordship of Jesus Christ, who is the Son of Man and the Son of God; the only mediator between God and man and the only way to salvation.
Is the Allah of the Qur'an and the God of the Bible the same?
No. We do not believe that the nature and character of Allah of the Qur’an is the same as the nature and character of the God of the Bible.
That is why we strongly desire to introduce Muslims to the Risen Christ, because Jesus is the fullness of the Godhead in bodily form (Colossians 1:13-20).
The word Allah is simply the Arabic word for the English word God. Every Arabic speaking Jew, Christian or Muslim uses Allah for God. There is no other word. There are 15 million Arab Christians that use this word for the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Every Arabic translation of the Bible that has ever been, uses Allah for God in both the New Testament and Old Testament.
Is the Qur'an a holy book, the inspired word of God?
No. We do not believe that the Qur'an is the inspired word of God.
Is Muhammad a prophet of God?
No. We do not believe that Muhammad was a prophet of the God of the Bible.
Can Muslims become Christ followers and remain Muslims?
Spiritually, no. Culturally, yes, as long as the customs or traditions do not contradict the Word of God.
Gradually, as Muslims learn the Word of God, we believe the Holy Spirit will lead them to discontinue beliefs/actions that they previously held that are not biblical. Example – a Native American can become a Christ follower and remain a Native American culturally, but not spiritually.
Do you believe in the Trinity?
Yes! We believe there is only one God expressed in three divine persons, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Is Jesus the Son of God?
Yes! He is the Son of the Living God of the Bible.
So, where shall we begin?
Well, first let's begin where we find agreement. There is much in this statement to affirm. Their affirmation of the authority of scripture, their affirmation of the person and work of Jesus, their rejection of Allah (as understood within a Muslim context) as being the same God as the God of the Bible, their rejection of Muhammad as a prophet of YHWY, their rejection of the Quran as being inspired, and their affirmation of the triune nature of God – these we all stand in agreement on. I am pleased to see CTR clearly take a Biblical stance on each of these important issues. None of these are trivial matters to our faith.
With that being said, such affirmations and denunciations (while important) really don't cut to the heart and soul of what C5 Contextualization is, nor do they speak to the primary concerns Pastors such as myself have which lead us to call the C5 teaching heretical. While it is true that many C5 proponents would hold to perspectives other than what CTR has outlined here, it is also true that many C5 proponents would be in agreement with every statement on this page. Why? Because such statements really are only somewhat relevant to the entire C5 Contextualization issue.
As I mentioned in the video, C5 proponents will often trot out an evangelical statement of faith as if to say, "What is the problem?" But the issue is not their statement of faith (at least not when it truly is evangelical). The issue is they think that they can take such a statement of faith, and make it compatible with people coming to faith who would hold a very different statement of faith (i.e. Muslims), in the hopes that "after coming to Jesus" some of these unbiblical beliefs will fall to the side. Note a phrase in CTR's statement we will come back to in a bit: "Gradually, as Muslims learn the Word of God, we believe the Holy Spirit will lead them to discontinue beliefs/actions that they previously held that are not biblical." [Emphasis mine] That, church of God, is C5 in a nutshell.
However, we are getting a bit ahead of ourselves. Let's back up a bit and note the obvious.
My first observation when I read this statement was that there was no explicit denunciation of C5 Contextualization, nor what was taught at the JIQ conference, as heresy. An oversight? Maybe… but highly unlikely. Given CTR's leadership brought the JIQ Conference in, given its heretical nature, and given that Pastor Bill and Janet have endorsed the teaching publicly, it seems as if - if the church leadership really believed it to be heretical - they would have clearly denounced it and apologized so as to leave their people no doubt as to where they stood.
But they didn't.
Instead we get some statement that is word-smithed so as to brush aside the concerns being raised without having to deal with them. It all sounds good. But in the end, the concerns are not just still present, they are resoundingly confirmed as being valid. We just have to take a closer look.
The real meat of the matter is found in the section where they actually deal with the issue of contextualization itself. Let's take a look at it.
"Can Muslims become Christ followers and remain Muslims?
Spiritually, no. Culturally, yes, as long as the customs or traditions do not contradict the Word of God.
Gradually, as Muslims learn the Word of God, we believe the Holy Spirit will lead them to discontinue beliefs/actions that they previously held that are not biblical. …
Did you catch it? The first line of their answer says that it is fine as long as it is “cultural” not “spiritual.” Yet their very next line affirms that it really will be about the Muslim’s religious beliefs.
“Gradually, as Muslims learn the Word of God, we believe the Holy Spirit will lead them to discontinue beliefs/actions that they previously held that are not biblical.”
So, they really were religious Muslims after all.
Interestingly, CTR’s Statement on Contextualization immediately tries to then switch it back to being just “cultural.”
“… Example – a Native American can become a Christ follower and remain a Native American culturally, but not spiritually.”
The reality is, the language used in the CTR Statement sort of lulls us to sleep when it should jar us wide awake. To help us see this dynamic, let me change the language slightly to put what they are truly saying in stark relief.
“Can Satanists become Christ followers and remain Satanists?
Spiritually, no. Culturally, yes, as long as the customs or traditions do not contradict the Word of God.
Gradually, as Satanists learn the Word of God, we believe the Holy Spirit will lead them to discontinue beliefs/actions that they previously held that are not biblical. Example – a Native American can become a Christ follower and remain a Native American culturally, but not spiritually.”
"Can Muslims become Christ followers and remain Muslims?
Spiritually, no. Culturally, yes, as long as the customs or traditions do not contradict the Word of God.
Gradually, as Muslims learn the Word of God, we believe the Holy Spirit will lead them to discontinue beliefs/actions that they previously held that are not biblical.
Obviously, if a church put out such a statement, believers from all over would be falling over themselves to decry it as heretical and point out the inherent contradictions it contained. Of course a Satanist can’t remain a Satanist and follow Christ. Satanism isn’t primarily about a culture. It is primarily a religious identity. And so it is with Islam. In that light, CTR’s example of “Native Americans” makes clear the bait and switch they are doing. Satanism, Islam, Buddhism, Baal worship, and … (you put in any other false religion you might choose), are primarily about religious observance, not benign “cultural identities.” The talk of “cultural” vs. “religious” and the inclusion of “Native Americans” are convenient ways to blur the truth. We are talking apples and oranges here.
To cut more to the point here, the same devil that is behind Satanism, and worshipped there, is the same devil behind the false religion of Islam. The demons worshipped in Satanism overtly, are the same demons worshipped in the faith of Islam more covertly. (After all, the spirit behind Islam is a spirit which denies the divinity, death, burial and resurrection of Christ. That is a demonic spirit.) If the more stark statement is heretical, than so is the one which masks the demonic reality with words more benign to our ears. One can’t have it both ways.
I don’t say these things just to be inflammatory, nor to get a “dig” at another church. Honestly, it all breaks my heart. I do it in the hope that we in the body of Christ are shaken awake, that our eyes will be opened to the truth, and in the prayer that we do not fall prey to a great deception the Adversary is propagating upon the church in the form of C5 heresy.
My friend let’s be clear. C5 proponents will pull this bait and switch I’ve described again and again. They will trot out an evangelical statement of faith, claim that all we are dealing with is a “cultural” Muslim, and yet again and again minimize key concepts and doctrines that are vital to our faith so as to not offend the Muslim who has that identity based on religious factors, not cultural ones:
- The Deity of Christ is not presented.
- It is okay if they continue to say the Shahada (The Muslim profession of faith which says: "There is no God but Allah and Mohammad is His prophet.)
- That it is fine for these "Muslim followers of Christ" to say the Salaat (The ritual Islamic prayer by which they believe they will merit salvation.)
- That they continue to view the Quran as a holy book.
Indeed, studies show that C5, because of this bait and switch does indeed produce a syncretistic blend of faiths. A study done in 1995 of 72 key indigenous influence Muslim people "converted" through the C5 approach found that:
- 50% continue to attend mosque on Friday
- 31% attend mosque more than once per day, uttering standard Islamic prayers affirming Muhammad as God's prophet
- 96% say there are 4 heavenly books (standard Muslim belief)
- 66% say the Koran is the greatest of the 4 heavenly books
- 45% do not affirm God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit
- 45% feel peace or close to Allah when listening to the reading of the Koran (even though they do not know Arabic)
The question we must ask is, "Are these Muslim followers of Jesus genuine believers in the biblical sense, or are they syncretists not unlike the substantial number of Christo-pagans of Latin and South America? What do results like this tell us?"
In the end, I don't think we can escape the conclusion that, not only is the paradigm of C5 an unbiblical compromise of the core truths which undergird our faith, the fruit it produces is a fruit which blends and pigeonholes Islam and Christianity together in a way that is not Biblical faith at all.
Sadly, the CTR leadership's Statement on Contextualization only reaffirms what Pastor Bill has already endorsed. CTR believes and practices C5. For all of the things that can be affirm as good in their Statement on Contextualization, in the end their very words mirror those of all proponents of C5. Let's be clear here, C5 Contextualization, because it promotes a blending of Islam with Christianity in evangelistic contexts, is heresy, plain and simple. As such, my prayer and hope continue to be for CTR to repent and denounce this teaching clearly and publicly – as heresy - so that God's people are not led into error. It is my further prayer that they break off all ties to C5 groups and quit practicing C5 in any way in their ministry. This can be the only way forward if we as leaders are to be faithful to our Biblical mandate to "guard the flock of God."
This Statement on Contextualization given by CTR's leadership certainly does not point us in the right direction.
|
| |
An Open Letter to the Fox Valley Evangelical Minsters Fellowship from the Biblical Missiology Society
| To Whom It May Concern: |
25 July, 2011 |
|
The Biblical Missiology Society is a Christian consortium of scholars and ministers from diverse religious and ethnic backgrounds, whose fundamental goal is the promotion of biblical missiology. The advancement of the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ is the shared commonality that makes the Society enthusiastically inclusive of those who, though not members formally, are members informally by virtue of our mutual labor. It is for this reason that we endorse the video of Pastor Tim Snell of Christ's Church of the Valley in Appleton, Wisconsin. In his video, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DY4zE97JuV4&feature=related ) the pastor takes a stand in defense of biblical truth that is undermined in a "Jesus in the Qur'an" conference held in August, 2009, at Christ the Rock Community Church in Menasha, Wisconsin. The Jesus in the Qur'an conference is but a symptom of a greater problem in the Church: the insider movements/C5 decontextualization of the Gospel. The Biblical Missiology Society stands with Pastor Snell as he heeds the appeal of Jude 3: "I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints."
We urge you to take the time to listen to and carefully weigh Pastor Snell's arguments in light of what the Bible teaches. All of us are aware of how difficult it can be to confront others, especially within the Church. Just as we are all thankful for the Apostle Paul's willingness to confront the Apostle Peter about his compromising the truth of the Gospel (Galatians 2:11-21) those who minister to Muslims are especially in need of leaders within the Church, like the Apostle Paul, to speak with a clear voice to the issues of syncretism with Islam that threaten the purity of the Gospel. For those of us who minister to Muslims, including the majority of us who are a part of the Biblical Missiology Society, these are not mere hypothetical arguments but real issues that affect our ability to minister as we ought. It should not be forgotten that if these compromises are not addressed and withstood the Muslims themselves are left with a message that cannot save them even if they sincerely accept it. None of these things are honoring to our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, who is worthy of us taking a stand for Him. We encourage you to stand with our brother, Pastor Tim Snell and take a public stand against this method of missions.
For more information and comments please see: www.biblicalmissiology.org
For more information on IM: Critical assessment Conferences on DVD see: www.i2ministries.org and www.insidermovements.org
Sincerely,
Rev. Adam Simnowitz, a minister with the Assemblies of God (Dearborn, MI)
Jay Smith, 'Brethren in Christ' Minister, Apologist, Polemicist, and Debater with Muslims (London, England)
Georges Houssney, President, Horizons International
Joshua Lingel, President, i2 Ministries
Mark Stephan, Missionary to Muslims, Editor-in-Chief, BiblicalMissiology.Org
John Span, Theological Author
Joie Pirkey, Executive Director Shouts of Joy Ministries (Rwanda, Africa)
Elijah Abraham, Founder/Director LIVING OASIS MINISTRIES P.O. Box 863743 Plano TX 75086 www.livingoasis.org
Patrick Dennis, Pastor from Indiantown, Fl. Formerly ministered in North Africa
Tripp Martin, Ruling Elder, Orthodox Presbyterian Church (Farmington Hills, MI)
Rev. Fred Farrokh, Executive Director, Jesus For Muslims Network, Metro New York City
Roger Dixon, PhD Intercultural Studies, MDiv, ThM.; ordained United Methodist minister, VA Conference; 34 years resident missionary in Muslim communities in S.E. Asia.
| |
