Acts 29 and the SBC--let's get real for a minute

I've recently read a number of articles concerning a document written by a Missouri man and submitted to the Missouri chapter of the SBC, asking them to stop financially supporting any churches within the Acts 29 Church Planting Network. The Missiouri chapter agreed.

From what I've read, Moran attacks the emerging church movement, Acts 29, and Mark Driscoll.

Here's an article I found interesting about this subject. I especially like the comments section.

http://www.abpnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4151&Itemid=53

Because I am part of an SBC and ACTS 29 church, and have also learned a great deal from Mark Driscoll, I wanted to comment a moment on this issue--namely, I want to defend Acts 29 and Pastor Driscoll. While he is more than capable of answering for himself, it never hurts to support a good man, right?

Mr. Moran accuses Acts 29 of cultural liberalism--the idea that living out the gospel changes as cultural changes--namely because many Acts 29 people drink alcohol without apology. The above article states, "Moran says in attempting to re-invent the image of evangelical Christianity, the emergent church often compromises beliefs such as the SBC's traditional opposition to use of beverage alcohol".

He sees cultural and theological liberalism as conjoined twins and equally evil, while most with the Acts 29 network would see them as vastly different, and only theological liberalism as dangerous and damaging.

And while many leaders (such as Brian McClaren and Rob Bell) within the "emerging church" preach a gospel of malleable theology that does hold steadfast through history and will continue to change in the future, Mark Driscoll does not and has spoken against these men's teaching. Driscoll sees theology as steadfast and unchanging, rooted in God's infallible word and in the Cross, but he sees living out the gospel and the christian life as ever changing from culture to culture to best represent Christ to those who do not know Him. Pastor Driscoll's "cultural liberalism" is for the sake of God's renown, to which I shout AMEN. And while those within Acts 29 might throw back a pint of ale with their non-believing friends, Driscoll never promotes drunkeness or debauchery, never ever.

For more on Driscoll's unpacking of the emerging church, please listen to the sermon link below from Southeastern Seminary's Convergent Conference in Oct, 2007.

http://www.sebts.edu/news-resources/multimedia.aspx

To make my point about cultural liberalism, allow me an example.

Paul commands we greet each other with a holy kiss. This conveyed hospitality, welcome, and love--all Christian values, right?

Do we ever do this in the US? I don't think so. I'd like to see Roger Moran be greeted by a brother with a holy kiss. I'm sure he'd write a scathing article about it.

Instead, to convey welcome, hospitality, and love, we shake hands. Not Paul's exact command, but culturally relevant and the idea remains the same. We're all about the holy handshake.

People like Moran what to live Christianity like we did in the 1950's. They might say they want to do it like during biblical times, but they aren't kissing people now are they? And honesty, I'm pretty sure some of those biblical characters shared a glass of wine with their friends. Jesus certainly did.

Unfortunately for Mr. Moran, I think people like Pastor Driscoll have growing churches and 1000s of examples of lives changed by Christ to defend their cultural liberalism. I'd like to know how big Moran's church has grown? I'd like to know how many people he's shared Christ with whose lives where changed for the better. I think if he spent as much time loving his neighbor as he does hating his brothers, he might have a change of heart.