Two weeks ago, I attended the Biblical Worldview Conference at Honeyridge Baptist church in Joburg.  I had been invited to attend a "bonus session" on a Response to the Emerging Church by Gary Gilley.  I didn't blog about it at the time because I was concerned that my anger would cause me to say something I'd regret. A fortnight has removed the emotion, but the anger remains. I wish I was spiritual enough to claim that the anger was a righteous anger. I pray it is.

The reason for my anger is that the session was disgraceful. There is no other fitting adjective - his session was disgraceful. Disgusting even - on many levels.
Firstly, from a presentation perspective, he was aweful.  He had been allocated 40 minutes, but tried to get through about 90 minutes of material.  He often put a slide up on the screen, clicking through it after 2 seconds while saying, "I don't have time to show you this information".  Sometimes he would flick through 3 or 4 of his Powerpoint slides explaining that he didn't have time to show us the slides, but this is what they were saying…  His slides consisted almost entirely of quotations (or, as I explain below MISquotations) of emerging church authors. 

Secondly, either he was lying or he is deluded, or both.  He started his session with a long introduction laying out his credentials to talk about a response to the emerging church.  The point he was most insistent on was that he had personally met or interacted with all the authors he was about to quote.  He said, "although they may not be happy with what I am saying about them, they all agree that I have quoted them accurately and am properly reflecting their beliefs."  I was quite impressed and excited - here was someone who had obviously done their homework (unlike DA Carson) and had taken the time to actually interact with the EC authors (unlike John MacArthur).  The reality, however, as Gary's session unfloded could not have been further from the truth.

I happen to know quite a few of the people he quoted personally.  I cannot believe that any of them would have agreed the Gary Gilley was accurately representing them.  The only truth in his statement is that the quotes he put on his Powerpoint slides were the actual words from the books he was quoting from.  BUT, he quoted almost all of them out of context.  He misrepresented the views of almost all of the EC authors he quoted, and must have knowingly done so on at least a few of them (i.e. he made the quotes say something different from what they obviously said if he were to give just a fraction more context.  It was often like seeing the famous quote:  the Bible says, "There is no God".  Of course, the Bible really says, "The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God'".  Context is everything!!).  Gary Gilley is either lying or deluded when he says he has interacted with these people and they agree he is representing them correctly.

It is a harsh accusation to say that a fellow Christian teacher is deliberately being untruthful. I do not make this charge lightly.  But I cannot believe that Gary Gilley is saying these untruthful things unknowingly.

Thirdly, his content was nothing more than a deluge of out of context quotations, often cobbled together from different authors and sources. The end result felt like drinking water from a fire hydrant.  For those who have never read any EC books (which seems like many of the critics of EC!), this may have been compelling.   Gary relied on sensationalist quotations (like Rob Bell's famous question about Jesus not being born of a Virgin).  He often put a question from one author together with he purported to be an "answer" from another author, as if the two had collaborated.  The overall effect was to sandbag all the EC authors.  It was a brilliant job of distorting the truth and hiding behind rhetoric.  Anyone who really wants to know what EC authors think would NOT find it Gary's seminar.  This is a pity, since he says he is trying to preserve the truth!

Fourthly, if the intent of the session was to present the Truth and allow people to make informed decisions, why was there no Q&A time?  Why was no-one from the EC movement invited to respond?  Why not have a panel discussion?  Clearly, the intent was to present a one sided view, not to find Truth.  A pity...

Fifthly, his attitude and lack of respect towards fellow Christians was disgraceful.  This came across in snide comments - comments he has obviously rehearsed and is proud of.  For example, when he first showed a picture of Brian McLaren, he commented on the fact that Brian is balding and keeps his head basically short shaved.  He indicated that this was noteworthy, and he'd explain why.  A slide or two later he showed a picture of Dan Kimball (if I remember correctly) and commented on Dan's hairstyle (which was quite kuif'ed).  He explained that "most people in the emerging church have cool hair".  He continued to make comments about people's hair throughout his presentation.  What this has to do with anything, I don't know.  But his contempt was evident.  It was unnecessary, irrelevant, trite and disrespectful.

Roger is doing a great job of responding to specific points of critique on his side of this blog.  Read his responses here.  Also read his response to the seminar by Gary Gilley.

For me, I cannot even bring myself to respond to Gary Gilley's content.  It was disgraceful, misrepresentative and untruthful.  Simple as that.  I wish I could be more charitable.  Two weeks distance has not changed my mind though.  If you have issues with the emerging church, there must be better ways to deal with these issues than this seminar.

Anyone who attended the session and who is genuinely seeking to live a life informed by a Biblical worldview is welcome to contact me for more information.

In light of Cantrells "Emergent or Divergent" article (endorsed by the President of the BUSA) and now Honeyridge Baptist's Biblical Worldview Conference with the Gary Gilley spectacular, it seems like Honeyridge Baptist church has been mandated to carry the torch of truth...or should I say the torch of "Baptist truth". The time for the Baptist church to take a long, hard look at what is actually going on in their own churches is long overdue. There are many who sit in their pews week after week, especially young people, who identify with many of the issues been raised by Emergent movement, but would not dare to speak up for fear of being declared a heretic, and summarily excluded. Now there is some truth about which the Baptist church needs to hold a conference.

reply to this comment

Posted by: Rowan 10 Sep, 2007 - 13:30:24

Dude - why bash the Baptists - we all know that the institutional church in general is at fault in their disunity!!! About this Gary fellow - if what you say is true sir then I am deeply saddened by it - the future of 'christian institution' lies in the EC and if people are struggling to see this, misguiding others about it or even poorly informed about it then there is little hope.

reply to this comment

Posted by: Richard 26 Sep, 2007 - 08:22:28

Richard, Brian McLaren has often pointed out in his books that we all have a weakness for seeing the faults in those we know (and love) the best. I grew up a Baptist, and so too often my radar is tuned on them. You are right, the rot has set in in many places. It just seems most obvious to me in the Baptists. And Honeyridge Baptist has taken a particular stance against EC. That's the only reason.

reply to this comment

Posted by: Graeme 26 Sep, 2007 - 08:25:49

Thanks for the maturity guys...It gives me a lot of hope for a church thats ACTUALLY emerging out of the bog of interdenominational offence.

Its (mos) good when the brothers dwell together in unity!

reply to this comment

Posted by: geesbouer 26 Sep, 2007 - 11:47:00

Graeme - Empathy. I too have suffered at the hands of (in my case) Ch*rism*tics for the sin of conversation.

Stop me if you have hreard this one before, but

I
was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. I immediately ran over and said “Stop! Don’t do it!”

“Why shouldn’t I?” he said.

I said, “Well, there’s so much to live for!”

“Like what?”

“Well … are you religious or atheist?”

“Religious.”

“Me too! Are you Christian or Jewish?”

“Christian.”

“Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?”

“Protestant.”

“Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?”

“Baptist.”

“Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?”

“Baptist Church of God.”

“Me too! Are you Original Baptist Church of God, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?”

“Reformed Baptist Church of God.”

“Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1879, or Reformed
Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915?”

“Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915!”

To which I said, “Then die, heretic scum!” and pushed him off.

reply to this comment

Posted by: nic paton 28 Sep, 2007 - 18:34:27

Richard wrote this : "the future of 'christian institution' lies in the EC and if people are struggling to see this, misguiding others about it or even poorly informed about it then there is little hope."

Well, I know you put 'christian institution' in apostrophe's, but I just wanted to reaffirm that if the EC becomes institutionalised then it has also - sadly - lost the plot. Once it becomes an institution, it's all over.

My personal feeling is that the future of the christian church is neither EC, Baptist or whatever. It's Kingdom - It's Church - It's Christian. None of this labelling stuff works. The future of the church is Jesus, and the church is going there - EC with Baptists. The baptists may take a little while to see what the EC is bringing in helping to build the church, but that's something they will probably deal with eventually. We can wear EC on our shirts as a proud label too, if we want, and end up becoming just as defensive and hypocritical as any other institution. EC is not a label, or a movement. It's simply a conversation. Please, please, let it stay that way.

reply to this comment

Posted by: Ryan P 18 Oct, 2007 - 13:58:04

Hi Graeme
I recently listened to a mp3 of an one hour plus talk that Mark Driscoll gave at an emerging church conference in North Carolina entitled “Convergent”. I had a similar unease about Driscoll's talk that you had about Gary Gilley's. During this talk, Driscoll made some of his most public denouncements of Emergent Village and specifically Brian McLaren, Doug Pagitt, and Rob Bell. I was just wondering if you ever heard it - it's all over the web and what your thoughts on it would be? It's news to me that such open disagreements within the emerging movement exists...

reply to this comment

Posted by: Sipho 07 Dec, 2007 - 10:26:34

GUYS. at this point in time i believe that there is too much "backlassing" going on. By this i mean: They say-so i say etc. I have always believed that when i am convinced about what i believe, i won't always feel the need to have to "defend" it and definitely not have to waste all my blog space like MOST EC blogs do, lashing back at the Baptists!

reply to this comment

Posted by: stui 29 Jul, 2009 - 09:00:50

Um...stui - you're almost 2 years late to this blog post, so when you say "at this point in time" are you talking about 2 years ago, or now? In either case, your point doesn't make too much sense...

This blog isn't "lashing back at Baptists." If you take the time to read Graeme's post, you'll quickly realise he is writing about Gary Gilley, not all Baptists. Graeme's contention is that Gilley is being deliberately untruthful - if you'd like to make a meaningful contribution, please respond to contention.

reply to this comment

Posted by: Roger Saner 29 Jul, 2009 - 09:42:05

stui, Roger beat me to my comment...

I think that the tone of this entire website is very positive and aimed at looking forward, not backwards.

On this particular (old) post, I was specifically responding to an actual event I attended (by invitation). The pastor who issued the invitation has since been basically ejected from his church on the charge of unteachable, and started a competitive church within a few kilometers of the old one. I say that because I remain convinced that Jesus was right: "By their fruit, you shall know them".

Gary Gilley was fundamentally untruthful in his presentation. I'd be happy for you to point out where I was wrong in my analysis. I'd also be happy for you to explain why truth doesn't matter when you're convinced about what you believe.

We're happy to engage on this blog. But we need to have a substantive point to engage with.

Let us know if you're interested in a conversation on this.

reply to this comment

Posted by: Graeme 29 Jul, 2009 - 10:09:48

ROGER AND GRAHAM. This is the kind of feedback i would of expected to get. Roger, i think you hit the nail on the head by asking whether i'm stuck in the past etc...fact is i think that the entire Institutional EC are 2-4 years behind their time.i.e the EC was great about 2-4 years ago, and then the creative juices dried up. many EC thinkers have just become like their Modern and Post Modern opposites. Graham...i'm sorry that you, as the administrator(?) of this site, experiences it possitive. i always ask how others are going to experience my contents. I must be very honest, i feel very alienated by your postings. i want to get away from traditional/institutional issues and yet it seems that wherever you turn to at some or other point, that which tries to be different soon becomes the same... I am only asking: should we not be conversing on subjects. I want to tlk about REAL issues not someone elses issues. I said absolutely NOTHING about "truth not mattering." the fact is that truth matters very much. I wish i could see more issues on truth and less on issues egarding talks we attend that upset us. Lastly, Graham, are you ok with the pastor who has been removed from his church? I wondered at the sorrow in your heart...the same Jesus who said "by their fruit," said "bless those who curse...and pray for them..." remember?

reply to this comment

Posted by: stui 30 Jul, 2009 - 10:14:27

stui,

I'm sorry you have experienced something other than intended on our blog. But, I am slightly baffled. Are you actually reading it?

You say you want to debate real issues. Have you read the posts on homosexuality? Or the stuff about how to interpret the Bible?

You say you want positive content. What about my latest post on new hymn writers? Or the previous one on evangelising the generations? Or the one on the Jesus Manifesto? Or Rich Stearn's speech on mobilisation agains poverty? Or the one on the Call? Or maybe you'll read my next one on the new world movement for social justice?

Roger's recent postings inclue promoting a workshop at a church, and supporting justice in Zimbabwe.

With all due respect, I don't think you're reading our blog properly.

reply to this comment

Posted by: Graeme 30 Jul, 2009 - 11:08:28

Graham. Thank you for the respect. You still have not given me an answer on your personal feelings toward the pastor who has been released from his church.
Anyway, will be reading your blog and I do hope that my perspective will soon be changed.

reply to this comment

Posted by: stui 31 Jul, 2009 - 07:38:39

Stui,

Answering your question about my personal feelings towards the pastor in question would amount to gossip. I can't see why it would be relevant, and so I will refrain from doing so.

Looking forward to seeing your interactions on this blog.

reply to this comment

Posted by: Graeme 05 Aug, 2009 - 18:08:51

I was a little surprised to finally hear from you years after I first confronted you by email but never heard back from you, or any time since both of my books on you were published. I was further surprised that you would send an invitation with such short notice to plan a trip there. You have required that I remain silent for three days before I am allowed to speak.

reply to this comment

Posted by: giochi del casinò on line 24 Apr, 2010 - 08:27:17

<p>You will need to do a little bit of Prom Dressesand visit some Cheap Prom Dress to find out the important information you are not familiar with buying Prom Dresses 2010. It's always good to take the Prom Dress and check prices and see Prom Dresses 2010 you can afford. Everybody has a Cheap Prom Dresses taking some time out to check your local Plus Size Prom Dresses can really help you with your plan.Typically the type of <a href="http://www.wholesale-weddinggowns.com/plus-size-

reply to this comment

Posted by: 3333333333333 28 May, 2010 - 08:06:32

The Wholesale Wedding Gowns belonging to the an excellent high quality Wedding Gown needs to be colorless the clarity or Cheap Wedding Dresses, the capacity of the light to pass readily round the Low Price Wedding Dresses the cut will be the shape of the wholesale wedding gown the cut may also have an effect on the actual short wedding gown all appearance of the designer wedding gown.A poorly cut one will not casual wedding gown. The carat is the weigh from the formal wedding gownthat will have an impact the strapless wedding gowncost of the diamond.If you are trying to find diamond jewelry which simple wedding gown big and striking then a asscher or emerald cheap wedding gown is going to do.

reply to this comment

Posted by: wedding 28 May, 2010 - 08:23:26

This item is closed, it's not possible to add new comments to it or to vote on it

Subscribe for email updates updates

Click here to manage subscription