Beware the Bridgers by Ingrid Schlueter

Beware the Bridgers

by Ingrid Schlueter

Tuesday's Crosstalk Show will be a look at the "bridge people" of spiritual deception. The work of subverting the Gospel can't occur without those who attempt to bridge the gap between biblical Christians and emerging spirituality teachers. "Bridgers" are the authors and leaders with well-polished doctrinal statements who cannot be faulted on paper (or their websites) for believing heresy. Their role is different than that of the  obvious Wolf that openly stalks its prey.

The role of the Bridger is that of the Judas Goat, famed for attracting sheep to slaughter. The Judas Goat is not the actual  instrument of death. It attracts the sheep to the place where it will be slaughtered. So while a Bridger will not stand in a church and teach from his pulpit or at conferences that there is no literal hell or that the substitutionary penal atonement of Christ was Divine child abuse, he will favorably quote from the books of those who do teach that. Or he might ask a Wolf to endorse his latest book on the back.

The Bridger will speak at conferences with these same Wolves and have photos taken with them. He will quote, selectively, from the Wolves and throw in the qualifier that he "doesn't agree with everything the guy teaches or writes", but he has found so and so's book on leadership really helpful.

When you go to the Bridger's website, however, and click on his doctrinal statement, confusion begins. The Bridger is Trinitarian. He believes in salvation through the work of Christ on the cross. He believes we all have sin. He believes in God's grace. He ascribes to the Apostle's Creed. The Bridger doesn't fit on the heterodoxy chart. He must be OK after all.

This is increasingly the way error is disseminated. Flagrant heretics like Brian McLaren are not difficult to spot. His open denial of cardinal doctrine raises red flares to anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of Scripture and belief in its authority. The enemy of souls is not so stupid as carry error forward only on the backs of the ravening Wolves. He needs the Bridgers. He helps them find useful dupes among Christian apologetics leaders whose egos are flattered by a sense of importance in being chosen to "dialog" with a them. Chummy photos are taken. Credit is given where none is deserved. Warm handshakes occur, private late night phone calls are exchanged, remarks are made over coffee…and another Bridger is given credibility publicly, successfully providing a gateway to error for those who are taken in.

I believe that just as believers are called to specific jobs in the church, the enemy of souls has assigned jobs to those in the hierarchy of spiritual darkness. There are high level roles and less visible roles. The end result for which they work is the same: the destruction of the biblical Gospel and the promotion of a spirituality that is anti-christ.

We cannot afford to be naive in this hour of growing spiritual delusion. We who are believers in Jesus Christ and who hold fast to the bedrock truths of Scripture cannot afford to give an inch to the Bridgers. Satan works in the area of pride and Christian leaders who have not checked that impulse in their hearts and who lust after credibility as  bloggers, apologists, speakers, authors or teachers can unwittingly become the dupes of the Bridgers.

In the book of Nehemiah, we see the response recorded when Sanballot and Tobiah came to "dialog" with God's people. Several times they sought to stop the work of wall building that was underway. The response sent back by Nehemiah to the troublemakers down below was short and clear: "We are building a wall. We cannot come down."

That must be the response of bloggers, podcasters, radio broadcasters and authors when they are invited to "dialog" about spiritual things with emerging church teachers. Truth is not to be debated with false teachers, it is to be proclaimed. That is our role, like the Apostles of old, in the the middle of this encircling spiritual darkness. May God keep all of us faithful.

Distributed by www.worldviewweekend.com 




On Mar 13, 2011, at 12:52, Chris Rosebrough wrote:

Jason,

I've read and reread your proposal and appreciate what you are trying to accomplish. That being said, despite my willingness to discuss this topic with you, because you've requested that certain topics that I believe are central to issue at hand be considered outside of the scope of our conversation, I cannot agree participate in the discussion. The topics that you've stated should be outside of the scope of our discussion are:

• Whether Ingrid (or others) have applied the term to people wrongly
• Whether the term itself is reasonable and worth using
• Any comments on the way you (or others) have criticized the term or those who have used it

Since I have been clear from the start that it is my firm contention that Ingrid is the one who coined the term Bridger, it would simply be impossible for me to properly discuss this topic without referencing:

• Ingrid's publicly stated definition(s) and use of the term Bridger 
• Who is a Bridger according to Ingrid's definition(s) 
• The unbiblical standard of evidence employed by Ingrid in determining who is a Bridger 
• Ingrid's use of the informal logical fallacy, Guilt by Association in order to brand Christian leaders as Bridgers
• How Ingrid's failure to provide proper evidence in context and her use of logical fallacies has resulted in a witch hunt mentality that casts suspicion on leaders in the church who actually believe, teach, confess and defend the Biblical gospel.
• Ingrid's publicly stated prescription for protecting the Body of Christ from Bridgers. 

Therefore, I will not agree to any discussion on this topic that restricts me from putting forward what I believe the problem is and providing the supporting evidence needed to defend my thesis.

I do not believe that a dialogue, no matter how amicably handled, that is limited to some abstract discussion of the concept of Bridger, detached from the context of current events will help the cause of truth or unity.

Chris