Philip Gulley Says the Church Is Not Christian

March 14, 2010 at 11:00 PM 7 comments

Did I hear the word JUDGMENTAL?

You know, you have to appreciate how fast and often we are hearing about how terrible the church is, how pharisaical her people are, and essentially how far we have come from the values that Jesus apparently taught.

Philip Gulley was raised in a home with a Baptist father and a Roman Catholic mother. He spent a good deal of time in the Roman Catholic Church, and then walked away from it. He eventually wound up as a Quaker minister and this latest book of his presents his reflections on the church and its alleged separation from the One who is building it.

Gulley’s book is filled with stories, anecdotes and accusations. He speaks of his struggles with a variety of situations that face every minister. He also speaks of his solutions to these same situations and how often he was met with animosity, anger, and in some cases, hatred for the particular stance he took.

Like Brian McLaren, Gulley comes down hard on those who oppose same-sex marriages, believing that this type of bigotry has no place in Christ’s church of love. He also has problems with the church for its unwillingness to offer some type of public ceremony for those going through divorce.

Beyond this, Gulley believes that the virgin birth of Jesus is nothing more than a myth, as is the Trinity. What is odd here though is that IF Jesus Christ IS God (as is the Father), then that is already two individuals who are God, so why not three in one? But I guess if Gulley cannot wrap his brain around the concept of the Trinity, then it just must not be true. How dare God try to be larger than any conceptualization of him that humankind can consider.

Gulley’s book is just under 200 pages, and it boasts 14 Scripture references. In fact, what is extremely noticeable is the LACK of biblical discussion. Gulley arrives at his conclusions based on what he thinks. He rarely refers to Scripture, and the Bible holds no real place in the process he goes through in arriving at his doctrinal beliefs.

It’s a shame that there are individuals like Philip Gulley purporting to be shepherds of the flock. One statement he makes, which floored me was that apparently, the church should not be concentrating on the fact that Jesus came and died a substitutionary death on Calvary’s cross. No way. Instead what the church should be doing is focusing on how to IMITATE Christ. So like many within the Emergent Church, Gulley’s focus is external, with nothing at all connected to the internal, the new birth that Jesus took the time to explain to Nicodemus in John 3. There, Christ spoke of a spiritual transaction. Gulley mentions none of this that I could locate in his book. Like McLaren, Campolo, Warren and a host of other Emergent luminaries, the emphasis on Christianity is on the external, although the internal is there as a factory for making me feel good about myself.

So for Philip Gulley, witnessing or evangelizing people is not really important. What is important for Gulley is that people should be ministered to, and this should be accomplished by meeting their needs, both socially and judicially. To hear Gulley tell it, Christians have never been involved in soup kitchens, have never organized mission trips to out of the way and third world countries. They have certainly never died for their faith.

Philip Gulley says to forget the atonement. That’s not important. What is important is turning the gospel of Jesus Christ into something social. Christianity is measured by our action, not our new birth. Of course, Philip Gulley can take this view and do you know why?

At the end of his “If the Church Were Christian” book, there is an excerpt from another book in which Gulley shares with us something so profound that it has changed his life. It has changed the way he views himself, and the way he views and deals with other people. It has given him hope, joy, peace, love and a high view of God. It has enriched and enhanced his life.

What is this profound truth? Simply that he believes that all people will eventually be saved. Did you hear that? If you’re a Universalist, then you’re probably clapping right now, that someone else “gets it.” If you happen to read the Bible, you probably already know that Jesus talked about hell more than any other subject. Apparently, it is a real place, and it is eternal. Gulley does not believe that though. No, he prefers to go by the way something makes him feel. I guess he also does not realize that he is calling Jesus a liar.

It is tragic that there are people like Philip Gulley in ministry at all. They do nothing for people except to provide them with platitudes and a smile. He really has nothing else to offer anyone that has any lasting value. He is itching the ears of those who reject the truth.

In some ways, Philip Gulley reminds ME of a Pharisee, although he says in his book that I am one. Bill Slabaugh and Philip Gulley should get together some time and share quips and anecdotes about all the Pharisees that have ruined churches.

Gulley’s Pharisaism stems from the fact that he in all likelihood does not have salvation, and because he is so liberal with the narrowness of God’s decrees, anyone who sits under his ministry may not have salvation either. How could they, since he believes it is more important to socialize the gospel than to evangelize people?

People’s needs ARE being met and the church has been at the forefront of those endeavors for centuries. Gulley needs to get off his high horse, stop determining doctrine based on his feelings and spend some time in God’s Word. Maybe, just maybe, the Lord might take the time to unblind his eyes long enough for him to see his error.

People like Philip Gulley need our prayers. I cannot imagine how dreadful it will be for those who have changed God’s Word, making Him to be seen as a liar. No wonder the statement rings so true, how dreadful it is to fall into the hands of the living God (cf. Hebrews 10:31).

God is loving, patient, and forgiving. He is also just, holy, and righteous. Beyond that, He is very jealous for the honor due His Name. People like Gulley (and even myself) will most certainly come under the greater condemnation because we teach people. It is for that reason alone that we need to be as sure as possible that what we say that God is saying is what He is actually saying, not what we would LIKE Him to be saying, or what we THINK He is saying.

Woe unto those of us who are too cavalier about the tremendous responsibility we have before us.

Entry filed under: Atheism and religion, Demonic, dispensationalism, Eastern Mysticism, emergent church, Life in America, new age movement, Religious - Christian - End Times, Religious - Christian - Prophecy, Religious - Christian - Theology, salvation. Tags: if the church were christian, lies that people tell about god, new age gospel, new age spirituality, philip gulley, philip gulley quaker minister, will everyone be saved?.

Biblical Perspective on Illegal Immigration Speaking for God: Discerning His Truth

7 Comments Add your own

1. Bruce | April 2, 2011 at 1:29 PM

As we have a discussion Frank that has not produced anything except an agreement that we disagree, I say thank you. I have read your beliefs on your church’s website and have a better understanding now of how we differ in our belief. I too part with the knowledge that you also believe my belief to be wrong, and I can live with that also. When we meet God, we both will see our own errors of thought, for I am sure neither of us have the full truth. May God bless us both as we continue on our journey, giving us the compassion and love to share with all. Amen.

LikeLike
Reply
2. Bruce | April 1, 2011 at 5:10 PM

I see by what you have written that there is no use having a discussion about our personal beliefs, as mine and yours differ greatly. When you make assumptions as to how I believe and in what I believe, you stepped back into the unknown. I never stated any personal belief, just an opinion about a book. With that, I agree that we disagree.

LikeLike
Reply
- 3. modres | April 1, 2011 at 5:36 PM
  
  Bruce, Bruce, Bruce,
  
  Did you actually READ what you wrote BEFORE you hit the send button. If you were NOT stating your personal beliefs (but merely an opinion), whose were they? Of COURSE you stated your personal belief, unless your opinion and your beliefs are separate.
  
  It is funny how I am the one who is making assumptions about what you believe, yet of course, you did no such thing where I am concerned and it is also funny that the (implied) reason we cannot have a “discussion” is solely to me.
  
  Bruce, this may shock you, but I don’t add posts to my blog to invite discussion or debate. I don’t have time for it and I’m not interested in it. That is not being arrogant, but simply to say that my blog is a place for me to share my beliefs. If people don’t like my beliefs or opinions, that’s absolutely fine. To think though that you can come here and essentially tell me that I am wrong, that I am biased and more is a statement about what you believe about yourself, Bruce.
  
  I am constantly learning believe it or not. I have not memorized the Bible yet, and am learning new things about my relationship with God daily. I am all too well aware of the Emergent Church’s position as stated by the likes of Phillip Gulley. I’m sorry you believe that I am in error.
  
  So we will part company with you believing I am wrong. I can live with that, Bruce.
  
  LikeLike
  Reply
4. Bruce si | April 1, 2011 at 7:01 AM

I was led not by God, but by your total disrespect for opinions that differ from yours. I posted an opposing opinion to be fair to those that read your review.

And your total disrespect for my opinion is obvious as well, Bruce. Why should YOUR review be considered unbiased when it is clearly NOT? Normally when someone says “I was led…” they are usually referencing the fact that they believe they were led by God. You did not qualify your comment, therefore I understood it in its most commonly understood meaning.

Love says that we agree to disagree. I did not, nor will I attack you personally.

I beg to differ with you, Bruce. Please re-read your comments. You called me biased. You implied I was limited in my view. You also implied I do not love.

I have read Matthew 25:31-46 and the judgement to come. Sheep, those that showed love and compassion, those that did unto the least. Sheep, those that lived life as Jesus had lived his. Goats, those that did little to help those in need, for they lacked the compassion that one quality that makes us more like Christ.

Bruce, I don’t think you read the same parable as I did. The GOATS did quote a few things they did that obviously reduced pain and suffering (and they even did those things in Jesus’ Name), but since they did not know Jesus, they did those things in their own strength, not God’s. As such, their acts (as far as God was concerned) were worthless).

The ONE quality that makes us more like Jesus is AUTHENTIC salvation, Bruce. Everything flows from that. In all your ramblings, you have not said that ONCE. You speak only of God’s love as if that can be done OUTSIDE of true salvation. It cannot. It is ONLY in truly knowing Jesus through salvation that we BEGIN to live a life of love that pleases and glorifies Him. Without Him in our life, we simply produce garbage.

The sheep enter into the kingdom, the goats into everlasting fire. Jesus speaks of that judgement, that day to come, but he will judge not by words, but by actions. Acts of compassion and love given freely without thought of reward, for the sheep did not even know they had done so, they were acts from the heart, given freely. Acts that Jesus himself performed during his life on Earth. Read any version of the bible you want, and all agree, Jesus led a life of compassion.

And how did He do that, Bruce? By living a life that was FULLY committed to constant submission to the Father. He did not simply do “loving acts,” but was Himself FULLY loving because He had fully given up His own life, thoughts, words, and deeds, in order to fulfill the will that the Father gave Him to do. Only authentic Christians can do that, Bruce, and authentic Christians do that from the inside OUT, whereas those who THINK they are Christians do that from the OUTSIDE only.

His only opposition, those that could or would not show compassion. Christian means Christ-like. To be Christ-like means to live Christ lived. To live like Christ lived means that we have to live like Jesus, filled with compassion. Jesus called everyone to live life filled with compassion, why else would he have told to love our enemies.

I agree Bruce, but it appears we disagree on HOW that life of compassion is achieved.

While I have never stated that I fully agree with everything in the book, I do agree that the mere fact that a call to live more like Jesus taught through his life should be every Christian’s desire.

First and foremost Bruce, Jesus taught that we should SUBMIT ourselves on a daily basis to God the Father. THAT is how He is then able to infill us with HIS compassion, not ours. A book that mixes truth with error (such as Gulley’s) is hardly a roadmap for authentic Christian living.

I respect your view, even if I disagree with part or all of it. Please respect my view by replying to it, not chopping it up.

I unfortunately only respect your right to HAVE the view you have. I don’t respect it at all, simply because you have twisted Scripture to serve your own ends, Bruce.

I left your original post (and this one) completely in tact, as you wrote it, simply inserting my comments in between yours. Mine are obviously bolded, which clarifies that these are my comments. The implication that because I inserted my comments in between yours somehow edits or ruins your comments is absurd, Bruce. It is far easier for people to follow the flow if I respond to some of your points IN your comments WHEN you state them, then having to wait until the end and then people have to constantly go back and forth and get lost in the process. I don’t always do this, but it makes more sense to respond to you this way so that people know exactly what I’m responding to in your comments. I’m sorry you find that offensive, but this is “conversational” in its approach.

You wrote me; I did not write you. The reason you wrote me is because of the fact that you differ greatly with my opinion. You do not respect my opinion, Bruce. You only respect my right to have it, as I do yours. If you respected it, you would not question or condemn it.

In order to live as Jesus lived, a person MUST be authentically born again. Without it, anything a person does, has nothing to do with salvation. What you “preach” is exactly what the New Age (as it has infected the visible church) preaches. It’s a modern day rendition of the Beatles’ tune – “All you need is love.” This has nothing to do with Christianity, Bruce. It has to do with man believing that he can actually love as God loves, WITHOUT the Holy Spirit indwelling a person. This type of “gospel” is no gospel at all.

The idea that Phillip Gulley or anyone, can condemn Christ’s Bride on the basis of their misinformed notion of what constitutes Christianity is the height of demagoguery. Because he couched his words as if he was a prophet of God reeling under the weight of the sin of humanity is something that folks like yourself will buy because it sounds so Christian. Gulley is a sham and so is his teaching. It is NO different than the drivel that McClaren, Campolo, and others teach.

With the “love” that you are talking about, all a person need do is IMITATE Christ by doing the same type of things He did. So people wrongly believe that being LIKE Christ is the same as doing the SAME things He did. It cannot be done without authentic salvation – period!

But folks like you will condemn me because I sound harsh. The REASON I sound harsh is because Gulley’s book is filled with LIES. He conveniently leaves out the need for salvation. Do you get it, Bruce? Because he does this, his entire approach goes in a direction that is based on WORKS, not FAITH. True works FOLLOW authentic salvation (through faith), not the other way around.

Campolo loves to tell people that someone who is a practicing Buddhist (as an example) may not even NEED to seek Jesus IF they are doing the things that Jesus did. In fact, Campolo goes so far as to say that individual “may already KNOW Jesus” by doing those acts. He is leading people AWAY from Jesus and so is Gulley.

I’m done with this, Bruce. If you are happy with Gulley’s book – or parts of it – that’s up to you. I firmly believe that what Gulley teaches is actually nothing more than a watered down version of what McClaren teaches. McClaren at least is far more nuanced than Gulley could ever hope to be, though still wrong, according to the Scriptures.

LikeLike

Reply
5. Bruce | March 31, 2011 at 11:33 AM

There many views relating to this book. The one problem I have with your review is its attempt to twist facts. One example is the ceremony for divorce. The author was approached by a couple wanting a ceremony to officially end their divorce. He never performed one, and by his own actions didn’t feel it appropriate. A review should be fair and unbiased, not written to boast your beliefs.

Bruce, you’re entitled to your opinion of course, but I have yet to find a completely unbiased review of anything. It’s next to impossible.

Gulley’s book so frequently distorted Scripture (when he wasn’t disagreeing with it altogether) that the divorce situation was simply another nail in the coffin. The fact that he considered it at all was wrong, in my opinion.

It, the book, is about moving from one limiting mindset into a more loving mindset, just like Jesus himself emulated in his daily life. We read John 14:6, but if we read just six lines later, Jesus himself tells us we are to do the things he did. The New Testament is a call to action, and what action is more Christ-like than to do the things he did. What better way to save, then to be living proof of his life here on earth.
Since I don’t conform to your way of thinking I am sure this will be deleted shortly after being posted. But I was led to post this comment.

Of course, I’m not loving, because I have a more “limited” mindset. Good one.

Actually, the New Testament is a call to SALVATION, Bruce. Action should follow that, but without salvation, any action is worthless, as far as God is concerned. Have you not read the parable of the sheep and the goats?

The reality Bruce, is that people like Gulley are consistently guilty of grouping two separate groups into one: the visible church and the invisible Church.

The visible church is made up of the people we see who attend church, or may not attend church and simply call themselves Christian. The Invisible Church is Christ’s Bride, made up of ONLY wheat, no tares allow. Not so with the visible church which is made up of both wheat and tares.

Bruce, do you know how many times I have read the implied “threats” that literally dare me to post a person’s post? Your post isn’t automatic, Bruce, because of all the spam on WordPress. Every post has to be approved by me and I have rarely not approved posts, unless they are merely ad hominem attacks or way off topic.

Oh, and you were LED to post it. Really? That’s terrific, so I guess since you were LED to post it, then it HAS to be of the Lord, correct? That means that if I do NOT allow your post, then I am disobeying the Lord. How do you KNOW you were LED to post it, Bruce? How do you know that it was not simply Bruce deciding to make some comments because Bruce disagreed with me? You were LED to post your comments. Okay, so if I come up to you and say, “Hey Bruce, I was led to tell that you need to do such and such…” would you do it? The implication though is that if I was truly LED to do something, then I was LED by the Lord, correct? If the Lord LED me, then how can you say you will not do it? That would be rebellious of you.

So the implication is that since you were LED to write your comments, then if I do NOT post them, I’m being disobedient. How ludicrous. Other people disagree with me and don’t hide behind the “the Lord told me to say it” argument.

You’re far more judgmental toward me than I was toward Gulley. Where’s the love, Bruce?

If you took any time to read any of my blogs as well as some of the posts I’ve “allowed,” you would not have had to make such an asinine statement.

We can DO the things that Jesus did, but if we are NOT authentically saved, it does not matter (again, READ the Sheep and the Goats parable). In order to ACTUALLY and AUTHENTICALLY be able to do the things Jesus did, we first must have had that birth from above that Jesus spoke of to Nicodemus in John 3. Without it, we are simply imitating Jesus in our own strength and the Bible tells us that our “righteousness” is as filthy rags.

The worst part of Gulley’s book is the way he teases himself and his readers with the belief that all people get to heaven. He certainly sounds like he is leaning toward adopting Universalism, by the end of this book.

Universalism negates God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, and a few other attributes, just like you did, because all you mention is LOVE. That’s the same thing that the New Age movement emphasizes. It’s the same thing the Emergent Church emphasizes. God’s love most certainly needs to emphasized and it needs to be shown in our daily lives. At the same time, the more doctrinally correct we are (not legalistic), the better we are able to love God and people because we come to understand far more about God than simply what our emotions tell us.

I’ll ask you to forgive any harshness in my response to you, if you would, Bruce. I just get a bit tired of people calling me – or implying to me – narrow, limited, unloving, etc. Whether you did so directly or implicitly, you still did it.

Phillip Gulley should not be a pastor, in my opinion. Like Brian McClaren, Tony James, Rob Bell, Tony Campolo, Henry Neuwen and a host of other leaders within the Emergent Church, they are leading more people AWAY from Jesus than to Him. That angers me because souls hang in the balance.

LikeLike
Reply
6. Dawn | January 4, 2011 at 7:31 AM

Thank you for this thoughtful and well stated review. I didn’t even know Philip Gulley’s name until today when I saw a quote of his used to intro a book from a professor at my old seminary (CIU). I had to look him up after reading his quote on how he no longer believes that Jesus is God and there are other ways to God. After seeing his sites I looked up Christian views of Philip Gulley and yours popped up. God bless you for remaining true to the Word of God.

LikeLike
Reply
- 7. modres | January 4, 2011 at 8:08 AM
  
  Thanks for your comments, Dawn.
  
  LikeLike
  Reply

StudyGrowKnow