Jump to content
Online Baptist

Recommended Posts

  • Members

What do y’all know about the Acts 29 network, currently led by Matt Chandler?

Our pastor announced to the body last week he’d like to join them.  From the research I’ve done thus far, they are very Reformed theology / neo-Calvinist minded.  They’ve also had leadership issues and seem to be very controlling over member churches.  But, I’m still learning about them, so my info at this point may still be somewhat incomplete.
 

I’m pretty concerned and have a meeting scheduled to talk to the pastor this week.

Anyway, prayers are appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

I have no direct knowledge of Matt Chandler. I did Google him this morning and see that he is Southern Baptist, which in my own opinion is no Baptist at all. Being Southern Baptist, it is no surprise that he wants to institute another "movement".

This is an Independent Baptist message board.We are Independent because we do not believe that Scripture teaches any sort of association or conventions of churches, but does teach that churches should be independent of any such thing.

To me, the Matt Chandlers of this world are flawed at a basic doctrinal level simply because they fail to understand the basics of what a church is and should be. So, they see nothing wrong with any para-church organizations. This basic flaw makes it easy to accept  and advocate flawed teaching on many important levels.

Ephesians 4:14 (KJV) That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

There is only one man that the redeemed are commanded to follow and His name is Jesus: Luke 9:23 (KJV) And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The Acts 29 church movement is part of the 'emerging' church. Numerous folks in leadership positions in the Acts 29 Movement have been removed due to sexual misconduct. There is no solid doctrinal statement to be found, somewhat Calvinist, ecumenical, and it is apparent the leaders of the movement will accept just about anybody in any position.

Jim Alaska is correct on his assessment of the Acts 29 Movement and Ephesians 4:14, "That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive," seems appropriate to describe the Acts 29 Movement perfectly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Sam Storms, the lead pastor at "Bridgeway Church," led the Acts 29 Movement to adopt the "5 Doctrinal Distinctives" , not called a, "Doctrinal Statement of Faith," for their churches. The "5 Doctrinal Distinctives" is very broad, ambiguous, emerging church statement, Calvinistic, and designed to accept any church in their movement. Member churches can have their own doctrinal statement; but, these individual doctrinal statements are considered, and I quote Sam Storms verbatim, "...doctrines of second importance." In the video below Sam Storms belittles the "Statements of Faith," found in churches not in the Acts 29 Movement.

If a church does join the  Acts 29 Movement their church doctrinal Statement of Faith is of no importance  to the leaders of, and subservient to, the Acts 29 Movement's "5 Doctrinal Distinctives." Here is the link to the Sam Storms "5 Distinctives" statement:

https://www.bridgewaychurch.com/

Also, if you look closely at the "5 Doctrinal Distinctives," they did not use the King James Version, has no real doctrinal distinctives (the Trinity, Sin, Salvation, the Second Coming, Heaven, Hell, the Scriptures, etc),  and were ambiguous.

Also, may notice in the link to the "Bridgeway Church" main web-page, you will clearly notice the "Rock" band.

As far as I am concerned, the Acts 29 Movement is non-biblical, is emergent church, pleasure-seeking, worldly, liberal, and Calvinistic. The end result is an ecumenical mess of pottage that will destroy any church that aligns itself with the Movement.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
44 minutes ago, Alan said:

 

Also, if you look closely at the "5 Doctrinal Distinctives," they did not use the King James Version, has no real doctrinal distinctives (the Trinity, Sin, Salvation, the Second Coming, Heaven, Hell, the Scriptures, etc),  and were ambiguous.

 

I noticed that, too.  The Trinity is a really big deal to me and it bugs me that they just left it completely out.

I told my wife this evening, “You realize we may be in a position where we just have no place here anymore and have to start looking elsewhere.”

Not a fun position to be in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
16 hours ago, Alan said:

Sam Storms, the lead pastor at "Bridgeway Church," led the Acts 29 Movement to adopt the "5 Doctrinal Distinctives" , not called a, "Doctrinal Statement of Faith," for their churches. The "5 Doctrinal Distinctives" is very broad, ambiguous, emerging church statement, Calvinistic, and designed to accept any church in their movement. Member churches can have their own doctrinal statement; but, these individual doctrinal statements are considered, and I quote Sam Storms verbatim, "...doctrines of second importance." In the video below Sam Storms belittles the "Statements of Faith," found in churches not in the Acts 29 Movement.

If a church does join the  Acts 29 Movement their church doctrinal Statement of Faith is of no importance  to the leaders of, and subservient to, the Acts 29 Movement's "5 Doctrinal Distinctives." Here is the link to the Sam Storms "5 Distinctives" statement:

https://www.bridgewaychurch.com/

Also, if you look closely at the "5 Doctrinal Distinctives," they did not use the King James Version, has no real doctrinal distinctives (the Trinity, Sin, Salvation, the Second Coming, Heaven, Hell, the Scriptures, etc),  and were ambiguous.

Also, may notice in the link to the "Bridgeway Church" main web-page, you will clearly notice the "Rock" band.

As far as I am concerned, the Acts 29 Movement is non-biblical, is emergent church, pleasure-seeking, worldly, liberal, and Calvinistic. The end result is an ecumenical mess of pottage that will destroy any church that aligns itself with the Movement.

 

 

It looks like part of the so called New Calvinism Movement!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
1 hour ago, Yeshuafan said:

It looks like part of the so called New Calvinism Movement!

Yes.

This actually makes a lot of sense, now that I look back on things.  Our pastor has been emphasizing the sovereignty of God in salvation a lot lately.  Of course, I don’t have any issues with God’s sovereignty!  But now I see the tie-in to Acts 29.  Also, he started with the Gospel Project awhile back.  I didn’t know until yesterday from my own study that every editor on the Gospel Project is Calvinist.

I’m beginning to think the only real outcome of my meeting this week will be to discover that I need to start looking for a new church home.  I don’t  want to be that pessimistic, but the die seems to be cast.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
6 hours ago, NotAshamed said:

Yes.

This actually makes a lot of sense, now that I look back on things.  Our pastor has been emphasizing the sovereignty of God in salvation a lot lately.  Of course, I don’t have any issues with God’s sovereignty!  But now I see the tie-in to Acts 29.  Also, he started with the Gospel Project awhile back.  I didn’t know until yesterday from my own study that every editor on the Gospel Project is Calvinist.

I’m beginning to think the only real outcome of my meeting this week will be to discover that I need to start looking for a new church home.  I don’t  want to be that pessimistic, but the die seems to be cast.

I am old school calvinist, as we look with suspencion on the new cals, as they seem to want to blend into rock and roll into worship, as well as spiritual gifts operating!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
11 hours ago, Yeshuafan said:

I am old school calvinist, as we look with suspencion on the new cals, as they seem to want to blend into rock and roll into worship, as well as spiritual gifts operating!

And, you know, Yeshuafan, I'm fine with you.  Several years back I studied quite a bit on Calvin and read quite a bit from Institutes of the Christian Religion.  I ended up referring to myself as a "closet Calvinist"!  Perhaps some of this was a reaction to the free-wheeling carnival ride I went through in the Word of Faith movement!

I wouldn't say I was full-blown Calvinist.  But, I did accept a lot of it.  In the last year or so, I've reexamined things and have some scriptural difficulties.  Nevertheless, my purpose is not to launch into a debate.  I'm trying to show that I get the theology and I don't hate Calvinists.

But, like you, I'm suspicious of this new bunch.  For starters, they hide their intentions.  If they were up-front about their theological motivations, it wouldn't be a problem.  But, they try to sneak it in on people and churches.  Serious issues seem to hound the leadership of the movement, as well.

Thanks to all who have commented and to @wretched for praying!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
6 hours ago, NotAshamed said:

And, you know, Yeshuafan, I'm fine with you.  Several years back I studied quite a bit on Calvin and read quite a bit from Institutes of the Christian Religion.  I ended up referring to myself as a "closet Calvinist"!  Perhaps some of this was a reaction to the free-wheeling carnival ride I went through in the Word of Faith movement!

I wouldn't say I was full-blown Calvinist.  But, I did accept a lot of it.  In the last year or so, I've reexamined things and have some scriptural difficulties.  Nevertheless, my purpose is not to launch into a debate.  I'm trying to show that I get the theology and I don't hate Calvinists.

But, like you, I'm suspicious of this new bunch.  For starters, they hide their intentions.  If they were up-front about their theological motivations, it wouldn't be a problem.  But, they try to sneak it in on people and churches.  Serious issues seem to hound the leadership of the movement, as well.

Thanks to all who have commented and to @wretched for praying!

Just seems that they want to reconcile Christian rock and full blown spiritual gifts into the local assemblies!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 37 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...