The serpent, of course, disguises himself as an angel of light. The bride, on the other hand, is still besmirched and muddied. Telling the true from the false is never easy. The former point reminds us not to be fooled by appearances. The latter reminds us that we will never find the perfect church. If you do, don’t join it because you’ll ruin it. Because neo-liberal churches are liberal, they are to be avoided. Because they are neo, they are not always easy to see. What follows then are a few diagnostic tests that ought to help you along the way.
1. If the church notes anywhere that it is part of the ECUSA, the PCUSA, the ELCA, the UCC, the UMC, the DOC, or any other mainline denomination, it’s not likely to be neo-liberal. It is instead paleo-liberal and you need to run for your life.
2. If the church trumps the plain teaching of specific texts in light of broad principles across the scope of the Bible, it is likely a neo-liberal church. Paul tells us, for instance, that wives are to submit to their own husbands, as unto the Lord. Neo-liberals trump this text with the general principle that we are to submit to one another, the broad principle of “servant leadership” and this little nugget, “I just can’t see Jesus insisting that a woman submit to Him…” This same principle is at work with respect to ordaining women in the church. Sure Paul tells us that women are not to exercise authority over a man, but we know the Holy Spirit calls people to this thing or that, and who are we to argue with the Holy Spirit?
3. If the church spends much time touting the wisdom of those outside the church, it is likely a neo-liberal church. To be sure blind squirrels do find nuts, and God gives grace to those outside the kingdom, but beware when the church is all abuzz with the wisdom of this advertising wizard or that psychology guru. If your pastor gets his reading list from Oprah, you are probably in a neo-liberal church.
4. If your church is so zealous to meet people where they are that they end up leaving them where they found them, you are likely at a neo-liberal church. This one is particularly sticky. Take, for instance, those who practice the perversion of sodomy. A sound church will of course believe, and act on the belief that the gospel is bigger than this or any other sin, that those who repent and turn will find their sins forgiven, and their lives empowered for obedience. On the other hand, a sound church will never embrace those who practice gross and heinous sin without repentance. If discipline is not practiced, if, any time discipline is mentioned leadership chimes in that they’re all about grace, not law, you are likely in a neo-liberal church.
5. If your church is ecumenical beyond the confines of the gospel, it is likely you are in a neo-liberal church. We all ought, of course, love our brothers and sisters in Christ even when we disagree on important, though non-essential issues. No one is suggesting that a warm attitude toward the Baptists down the street is a danger sign. A warm attitude toward the liberals down the street is a problem. A warm attitude toward Rome is a problem. A warm attitude toward peace-loving Muslims is a serious problem. What often drives this kind of ecumenical spirit is embracing “inclusivism” a clear doctrinal heresy that is becoming ever more common in churches that on the surface look evangelical. Here the view is that the grace of God is spread abroad to other faith traditions. This is often in turn driven by a cozy relationship with post-modernism wherein we confuse biblical humility with betraying Jesus. That is, when our narrative doesn’t allow us to affirm “Thus saith the Lord” or “There is no other name under heaven by which a man must be saved” because this makes us look like we have “cornered the market on truth” then we are in a neo-liberal church.
6. If your church is willing to make affirmations, but is unwilling to make denials, it is not really making affirmations and is likely a neo-liberal church. It is one thing to say, “Jesus saves.” It is another altogether to say, “Only Jesus saves.” It is one thing to affirm that we will enter into heaven when we die because we trust in the work of Christ. It is another thing to say that those who do not so trust will suffer the wrath of the Father into eternity. Here the sheer ugliness of hell doesn’t inflame our evangelism. It eviscerates it, because we would rather believe it doesn’t exist. If your church leaves open this question, open the door and walk away.
7. Last but not least, if your church leadership is often speaking about what they want to believe, rather than what they do believe, you might be in a neo-liberal church. This works in two directions. First, it may be a sound biblical doctrine that they “want” to believe because there it is in plain sight in the Bible. But something, namely worldliness, makes them hesitate. Second, they may mean that their convictions are formed not by what the Bible says but what makes them feel good. “I like to believe that hell is empty” is nice talk for “I don’t believe the Bible and what it teaches about hell.” “I like to believe that God gives everyone a chance, and judges us by the sincerity of our hearts” is nice talk for, “I don’t believe the Bible and what it teaches about the need for regeneration, faith and repentance.”
Remember, these folks will not hiss at you. They will tell you they are sorry to see you go. In reality, you are an aggravation to them, and they are a danger to you. When we agree that the Bible gives us our answers, we can overcome any disagreement. When one of us believes that the Bible is true, and must be believed no matter what the world says, and the other believes we need to look reasonable and accommodate ourselves to the world, we have unequal yoking. Get out, and get into a faithful church.