Tickling One’s Own Ears, Part Two (or The Art of Intellectual Contortionism)

Posted by: Chris L
in Hall of Fame, Ken Silva, Linked Articles, ODM Responses, ODM Writers
17
Jan

Source: Verum Serum

Comments: Scott picks up from Part I of his series examining ‘watch doggies’ (or ‘watch bloggies’), this time examining the psyche, methods and dubious sourcing often used.  He uses “Reverend” Ken Silva as an example, though he not the only one employing such methods, and does an incerdibly thorough job analyzing the inbred sourcing of ‘watch bloggies’.

Memorable Quotes:

SUMMARY: Using just one article as a primary source/starting point, I tracked back the embedded links three levels deep. As one moves from the primary to the secondary and the tertiary, the results are clear. Within the three levels of interwoven confusion, the “Reverend” Ken used a grand total of 394 embedded links to support his contentions. Of these 394 links, 264 of them were references to articles written by his own hand.

CONCLUSION: By a 2 to 1 margin, “Reverend Ken” is his own best proof and support! Why bother to try and prove or support anything using scripture and logic and reason when you can just write another article that can become the proof of the first one, while the first article can be the proof for the second.

—

  • Share/Bookmark
This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 17th, 2007 at 10:46 pm and is filed under Hall of Fame, Ken Silva, Linked Articles, ODM Responses, ODM Writers. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

 

+/- Collapse/Expand All

3 Comments(+Add)

1   Russ N.    http://russ-ramblings.blogspot.com
January 19th, 2007 at 7:29 am

I’ve noticed this as well – one article in particular (now gone from SofL) linked to Ken’s site. I tried, I really did, to follow the logic and the links and it was mentally exhausting trying to keep track of everything.

Hats off to Scott for giving us the count – I don’t have that kind of mental fortitude.

Russ

2   Patrick Lane    http://www.sliceolaodicea.com
January 19th, 2007 at 1:14 pm

Honestly, Do you ever think Ingrid says to herself…”What was I thinking?”

3   Darren Sapp    http://www.vaporministries.blogspot.com/
January 21st, 2007 at 10:35 am

Below is typical of my exchanges with Ken Silva. This is from the worldview weekend (the link is below but the comments are posted here) on one of his T.D. Jakes articles. I am 40 in TX and he is 51 in NH. I just cannot seem to have a discussion with this guy. He will never answer my real question. This is at least the third time he just tells me I don’t know what I am talking about.

Press On, Darren

http://www.worldviewweekend.com/secure/cwnetwork/feedback.php?&ArticleID=1439

Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)
Posted On: 01/17/07 01:54:19 PM Age 40, TX
Pastor Ken, I think I can tell you why you are not joined in your outrage by Dr. Page and others. While I agree with your assessment of T.D. Jakes theology, there simply is a difference of opinion as to when and when not to work with someone who does not mesh theologically. Right next to your article are products being sold for David Jeremiah, Bob Lepine, and Frank Harber. Are you sharing the stage with them? If you say you are not, you are sharing the stage with Brannon Howse who runs the site and sells the product. You have told us that David Jeremiah is promoting contemplative. Brannon Howse himself has condemned Bob Lepine for promoting Rick Warren on Family Life radio with Dennis Rainey. Frank Harber was a mega church seeker sensitive pastor (I have been there) who recently had to resign from his church. You can share the stage while disagreeing with their theology but Ed Young is not given that privilege. One more example: Ingrid Schleuter points to Joseph Farah articles on WorldNet Daily that uses immodest women to sell t-shirts. Do you have a problem with that? Darren
Click here to reply to this post

Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)Posted On: 01/19/07 07:43:40 AM Age 51, NH
• Darren, in your apparent effort to simply be contrary (and we’ve been through this before) you widely miss here. The issue with Jakes and Young, Jr. is the Holy Trinity – the very nature of God Himself. Jakes consciously holds a view which as been condemned as heresy for 1800 years. Apples and oranges my brother. It’s a tired old horse Darren, you really ought to put her out to pasture now.
Click here to reply to this post

Re: Re: Re: T.D. Jakes and Oneness Pentecostalism (aka Modalism)Posted On: 01/20/07 11:58:11 AM Age 40, TX
• Pastor Ken, There is not effort to oppose you for opposition sake. I am trying to get to a core issue that you pick and choose when it is appropriate to share a stage with someone. You may want to put this to pasture because you have no answer. This is the third time I have brought this issue up with you and you never answer it. I have applied this argument to people who do not deny a core doctrine so don’t try to suggest this is a special case. You apply your best ad hominem argument and dismiss me as if I were an annoying, yapping dog. Here is the question again; let’s see if you answer it. When is it o.k. to share the stage with someone? You have stated that with T.D. Jakes it is a no because he clearly denies a core doctrine of the church. I agree that he denies it. Would you share the stage with David Jeremiah, Bob Lepine, Frank Harber? If you say no, then why are you sharing the stage with Brannon Howse who sells and promotes their products? Please read my original post and tell me why you support the way Joseph Farah sells t-shirts. Here is the question again. Where do you draw the line at which you would not share the stage with someone? Tell us why T.D. Jakes and Ed Young are apples and you and David Jeremiah are oranges. Darren
Click here to reply to this post

One Trackback/Ping

  1. The World According to Bruce » Blog Archive » Ken Silva and his money for truth plan or Hiring someone to speak for You!    Jan 18 2007 / 7pm:

    [...] I would like Rev. Silva to tell me just how much does it cost to “speak out”? Perhaps, he is talking about  the costs to have an hosted web domain like Apprising Ministries? Such services are cheap. Perhaps he is talking about the costs to type his investigative missives? After all, the laborer is worthy of his hire right? But then , according to CRN.info site most of the hard research Rev. Silva puts into his missives is his OWN writings. Surely, he is not charging himself for his own writings. I want to set a good example for Rev. Silva. I pay all my domain expenses and I write free of charge.  I receive freely and I give freely.  There is no price on the truth at The World According to Bruce. Now if anyone wants to freely send me a buck or two I will gladly receive it but I never want to be accused of hustling for the ministry. [...]

Back to top