Just a thought – mind you…

In the Gospels Jesus speaks of those who blaspheme the Holy Spirit. Given the context of what had just happened, most take blasphemy of the Holy Spirit as attributing to Satan what is an act of the Holy Spirit.

I don’t think anyone can do the same today, but is this not a warning to be careful when ascribing works – whether or not you are ascribing them to Satan or God.

We may mock Ken (I kinds like the “lord silva” name as long as we use the lower case) and his ilk… maybe they deserve it, maybe we (or better, “I”) enjoy it a little too much.

That said, given the warnings of Jesus himself, they should be a little more careful in ascribing to Satan things that very well may be of the Holy Spirit. Or at the very least, do a much better job in discerning what is really being said.

Best concert experience of my life was front row seats in an old 1930’s style theatre for Steven Taylor and Shiela Walsh…

Chris P.
Thank you for showing me the love of God and calling me stupid. BTW, if you want to compare IQ scores or for that matter any standarized test score I don’t normally talk about them at all but for you I’d make an exception.
Calling me stupid? Is that the best you have?

And how does CRN get to call itself the “remnant”? That seems awfully pretentious.

Chris P.,

Why would you be sorry that my aformentioned concert experience was my best?

Neil S.

Wow
It’s a good day when you can irritate so many at one time.

Joe
I don’t talk about my IQ or my standardized scores either but I will make this an exception as well. My last IQ score was 137 and when I took the ACT test way back when, I was told I could get into any college I wanted even if I had straight D’s, which I did not. Anyway I chose not to go to any college. It seems that you are the only one who sees the point of my comment to be calling you stupid, and that is, well, just plain stupid. Like Paul we are being forced to speak foolishly here.

As for the remnant;CRN doesn’t call itself the remnant. CRN is a blogsite. However those who contribute exist as “part” of the remnant.
The remnant does exist, as God has always worked through a remnant from Noah until today.

Sorry Iggy
Paul says that we are to judge the church. 1 Cor 5:12-13 is applicable in any and all circumstances re:believers. Tolerance of any and all viewpoints, is not one of the fruit of the Spirit I suggest reading Matthew 7:1-5, especially verse 5, again.

Neil
I simply meant that I can think of others whom I would prefer to listen to in a concert setting. I apologize for how it was put. However, you ask a good question.
The question being; Is what Bell is doing/teaching of God? I believe that is what ken is getting at.

Finally;
John 1:
18No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, He (Jesus) has made him known.

Colossians 1:
15He (Jesus) is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.

John 14:
9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works.11Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves. 12″Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father. 13Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

Eph 2:
10For we are his (the Father’s) workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

1 John 3:
2Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he (Jesus) appears we shall be like him (Jesus), because we shall see him (Jesus) as he is. 3And everyone who thus hopes in him (Jesus) purifies himself, as he (Jesus) is pure.

John 5:
(Jesus speaking) 30″I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him (the Father) who sent me.

John 17:
(Jesus’ prayer) 20″I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, 21that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.

Eph 5:
4But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ–by grace you have been saved– 6and raised us up with him (Jesus) and seated us with him (Jesus) in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.

Romans 12:
4For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, 5so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

Romans 8:
29For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son (Jesus), in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

Now if God is “one”, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and Jesus the Son is the express image of the Father, and we are placed in the Son by the Father, and we are being conformed into the very image of the Son so that when He returns we appear, i.e. look exactly like Him, (identical siblings?), and Jesus who was obedient, did nothing, nor said nothing, outside of the Father’s will, and what He said and did, was actually done in the Father’s authority (name), and we are His body, i.e “literally” His body, created to speak and perform all that He (Jesus) did, and is doing right now, (a pox on wwjd), in even greater quantity………..;

Then; the church, the Body of Christ, (those filled with His Holy Spirit), is not just the place where Jesus Christ is seen, but also where the Father is seen. The church is made up of sons who ”show” the Father, by doing and saying whatever the Father is doing or saying. We speak in His authority.
If we cannot speak for God, then who can? This is not arrogance, as all of this is done by God’s election, and given to us. No one can say that this comes from his own abilities and/or will, and Ken has never made such a claim. Ken is simply doing his best to be an obedient son.

Several things that Bell says are problematic at best. He needs to be confronted.

Chris P.,

Problematic methodology is one thing – questioning his salvation, ascribing a ministry to Satan is quite another.

Chris P.

The ironic thing is, sometime I agree with Ken and the other watchbloggers when they question some of the methodology and even beliefs of some emergents – but Ken and the other watchbloggers completely lack the ability to discern (ironic isn’t it?) between neutral methods they happen to disagree with and true issues of the historic orthodox faith, they lack the ability/willingness to discern between emergent theologies.

Bottom line; the broad brushed dismissal of everything emergent is either lack of ability to see the difference (that is ignorance on the subject they wish to speak) or worse, an unwillingness to discern (which is either laziness or intellectual dishonesty.

So basically, even of I were inclined to agree with you/them on a point I cannot align myself with someone who is either a) speaks form a position of ignorance, b) is too lazy to discern, or c) has discerned but speaks differently about it.

Ignorant, lazy or liar – are there any other choices?

Neil S.

Guys,

Ya don’t have to spend time in the pit of Hell to know it’s not the place to be —

Hey – this discernment stuff is easy if your brush is broad enough!

Neil S.

Even if Ken Silva hasn’t met the men he has written about it does not discredit his perspective. Ken usually writes about the theology of these men which can be seen in their books, articles, and podcast. It’s funny how people who have known and worked with Erwin for many years speak out against him they are dismissed because they are said to be too emotional. Then you have a man like Ken Silva who is writing from an outside perspective and he is dismissed because he has not met Erwin. Who is qualified to speak truth? Who is left?

Do you want to hear from the people that know Erwin the best, and what Erwin’s Ministry really produces? http://mosaicofpain.com/

Um Tito, go back and read what I wrote I was being a little ironic. Hey, did you know that Tito is the most made up name–for something like three years running? I’m just saying.

Tito, seriously, who are you? You’ve popped up on my blog and said some things that were out of line, and misconstrued my statements.

Joe,
Of course my son knows that arsenic is poison. That wasn’t my point. Maybe I should have used some food additive that people have only just begun to believe is poisonous, that my son wouldn’t know about. But I don’t know any.

The fact is, though, that people can be convinced that something like spiritual arsenic is okay. It only takes a person with the right kind of charisma and support from others to make them a big name.

Why is it that thousands of very intelligent people in seminary seem to loose their faith? Because they don’t recognize poison for poison. Satan is an angel of light and he can deceive people with the IQ of Einstein.

My children will always be my children, no matter how old they are. Often I do and will choose not to speak up about things. I gave my son 5-10 minutes of my time to share my burden with him – and you and Nathan criticize me. I hope that when your daugher is 19 or 20 and she brings home a book that you know all about, and you know that hundreds of people have been led astray by it, that you will have enough of a father’s heart to say, “Honey, that book may sound good, but it’s incredibly deceptive.” If you can’t do that, then something is wrong between you and your daughter.

Joe, I left commenting here because I was spiritually overwhelmed. I didn’t know that I gave the impression that I would never comment again. If I did, then I apologize for coming back. No, I probably don’t plan to stick around. There is something very, very disturbing about how you all look at discernment.

For me, if one person reads my concern about Rob Bell’s breathing video or my concern over Mcmanus possibly believing like Gordon, and gives a second thought to becoming involved with a “divine” that is not “divine;” then any apparent “humbling” that you all seem to want me to experience is worth it.

Joe,
I know that young people can discern. I have never intended to put down young people. Middle age people, old people, can discern. Sometimes children can see the evil or good in something before adults do. We ALL need each other. I spoke to my son because he brought the books home; if I brought such books home from the library, I would have been happy for him to talk to me about them. My son probably came to the same conclusions he would have re the books even if I hadn’t talked to him; I had a burden to talk to him and felt that I needed to be obedient to God and do it, no matter whether he needed it or not.

No, I can’t unpackage what is disturbing me – to unpackage it would mean to listen to Bell’s spirit audio again and explain point by point what bothers me. I knew then that I could not listen to that audio again and try to analyze it point by point for you; neither could I not say anything about it. I sat there after listening to it and knew that I was absolutely spiritually drained. As I said before, maybe in the future I can try to analyze it – not now. Before I would do such a thing, I would need to be very sure that it was a God-appointed task, because I would absolutely need to be relying on Him for strength and protection as I wrote it.

The article in which Jon Gordon talks about Erwin Mcmanus and “The Secret behind the Secret” has in it the same type of thing that bothers me about Bell’s talk. If Mcmanus “friendship” with Gordon allows Gordon to “Christianize” his teaching, and Mcmanus isn’t doing anything about it, then Mcmanus is guilty of aiding in false teaching – what Gordon is teaching is clearly false, and can lead people into a relationship with demons.

My guess is that if I could delve into the specifics of both of these topics, the theme would be, “For the Christian there can be no “divinity,” no “spirit,” no “power” no “energy” that sets itself as equal to or “chumming up” with the Spirit of God.

Amy,

I would second Joe’s comments. I believe there is a place for discernment – both individually via the Holy Spirit, and via reputable discernment ministries (a number listed by Scott of VS) – of which Slice/CRN is decidedly NOT.

Do they get some things right? Well, yes – but most of these are of the variety of me claiming to be an earth scientist because I can tell you that water is wet (or the Mormonism is a cult). When it actually requires discernment, do they get things right? Not with enough accuracy that I couldn’t call a weatherman to get just as good an answer.

I’d be really interested with what your problems were with Bell’s ‘breathing’ sermon. I understand how the GBA folks freak out that he quoted a Christian Yoga instructor (I know a local church in Indianapolis which used to have a Yoga class, but later changed it to “Christian Stretching and Exercise” to avoid the “discernment” whining going on. Were they teaching astral projection, mysticism, etc.? No – they were dealing with stretches and breathing techniques). I know that Phil Johnson took exception to the arminian view that people in hell were forgiven, but are in hell because they did not accept the grace and forgiveness offered to them.

With that said, though, I find Bell’s teaching and Mars Hills belief and practice to be far more spot-on with what Jesus taught than what I listen to (on occasion) from Johnnie Mac’s church in CA which is 95% faith and 5% practice (of which 30% of the ‘faith’ is condemnation of broad groups of other Christians who do such sinful things as worship with drums and guitars and hymns written after 1900).

However, I don’t write long articles condemning Johnnie Mac and his church for failure of orthopraxy, because it’s really none of my business, and it is up to that church community.

Last night on the treadmill, I listened to the podcast “The Theology of Plastic Surgery” from Mars Hill from a couple years ago (one I had missed), and it was probably one of the best messages I had ever heard on the topic of finances, stewardship and the church – one that was highly expositional in scripture and also highly practical in application.

I have had a HUGE number of folks thank me for pointing them to Bell’s materials, and an equally large number thanking me for defending Rob and others from the misguided wolves of Slice/CRN and the like.

What they’re doing isn’t discernment – it’s character assassination.

OT,
Why don’t you give us your name. It would seem you’re the only one playing a game.

OT, actually it was me that suggested nathan answer the questions on Mosaic, since (drum roll please) he’s the only one on this board (at least identified) who goes there. You know – first-hand information, and all…

Amy,

WOW, now that’s a new one… you call something spiritually oppressive – which I assume is a bad thing – you question it… but when you are asked to expound on why — you refuse… saying it’s too hard to listen to again?

The more I read from you the more I think you are only posing as someone interested in investigating and then discerning.

From everything you’ve said, your mind is made up, and in the name of needing more information you just go from one issue of condemnation to the next without really discussing any one point… ’cause as soon as someone brings up a counterpoint, or asks a question… you break off to another complaint.

Neil S.

Joe,
I don’t think my background has anything to do with my not knowing that you meant “Could you unpackage what is “disturbing” for you regarding my discernment?” when you asked, “Could you unpackage what is “disturbing” for you? and would you explain what you mean by “spiritually overwhelmed.”?

Apparently you were looking at my comment “There is something very, very disturbing about how you all look at discernment.” from 2:20 when you wrote that question at 2:46. I answered it at 3:12. Perhaps next time you could simply say, “You said, ‘There is something very, very disturbing about how you all look at discernment.’ Could you explain that?” As it was, since the question seemed to be connected with “spiritually overwhelming” I immediately assumed you were talking about what disturbed me before, after I listened to the Bell video.

Also, note that I was not speaking of your discernment in particular. I did not say “you,” I said “you all.”

To your question regarding what is disturbing about how you view discernment, I would answer that you don’t seem to be willing to get past Ken Silva to acually consider whether or not anything he says is of concern. Perhaps you can find some exceptions; I am speaking generally of what my impression is. Also, you have castigated a number of people who’ve come on here disagreeing with you, even though they may have valid things to say. No, they haven’t always been nice – but as a host of this site (I guess you are?) it seems like you could show a listening ear to people who have a different opinion than you.

As far as how “you all” view discernment – there seems to be somewhat of a general consensus that it is okay for teachers to spread their teaching throughout churches other than local ones, but it is not okay for people to speak out and warn others when they see the teaching as potentially destructive.

Neil,
I think your mind is made up as well, isn’t it?

Neil, I’m not going to go into my educational background, but I am perfectly capable of analyzing things. But I happen to believe in a spiritual world, and I believe that there are some things that are so much “DARKNESS pretending to be light” that I know I can’t “analyze” them without having God as my strength, without Him giving me the will to do it. I’m not going to push ahead of him, no matter how much you goad me.

I suspect that if I were to analyze Bell’s talk, what I ended up saying might be very short. But I know that I could sit here for hours in front of my computer and not be able to listen to that talk again, much less write something about it. I’m just trying to obey God, okay? You can keep assuming the worst, but nothing you say is going to make me try to attempt something that I don’t believe God wants me to do right now.

And as for bringing up issues and dropping them, I challenge you to find anyone on this site who has discussed anything to the length that Chris and I have – see the whole discussion on Bell’s sermon on Peter and the calling of the disciples, and the Oneness Trinity discussion. For that matter, look at my past “discussions” trying to understand Ken Silva. I also would have been happy to continue discussing the problems with Warren and Obama – but apparently nobody wanted to discuss them.

Look at the substance of your own comments – what could you say about them?

Amy,
I think you lived overseas, so I am going to assume for the sake of discussion that you were/are a missionary. If I’m wrong it’s OK, because this argument will still prove valid.
Suppose I said, “There is just something wrong with the way all you missionaries make everything so melodramatic.”

Wouldn’t you if you were in that group take that a little personal? So when you said, “there is something very very disturbing about how ‘you all’ view discernment” I admit I took that to mean me.

Neil,
Sorry, I simply meant, made your mind up about me. You’ve said things several times regarding me that I know to be untrue.

A general statement: People can have orthodox doctrinal statements and be teaching something that contradicts them. Perhaps dynamic leaders can do this even more easily than laymen in the church, especially if there is no one in place to hold them accountable.

As for Mosaic, mostly what I’ve done is ask questions, including the one I asked on here, regarding “The Secret within a Secret.” http://www.jongordon.com/newsletter-070219-thesecret.htm Notice that I did not automatically condemn Mcmanus, but rather asked Nathan if Jon Gordon is simply using him to Christianize his teaching. Notice that I said that this article related to my other questions about what was meant by creativity and power.

I have way more experience with people who are Christians harnessing “energy,” putting themselves in a place where they could be open to “visions” from Satan, than I care to expound on. As I have mentioned before, I have in a sense lived “in the middle of the occult.” I believe that God has allowed me to have some of the experiences I’ve had so that I can help people be aware that it’s not okay to put oneself in a position where one could come in contact with the “divine” that is not the divine.

So I’m sorry if I come across as someone who gets some kind of thrill out of finding deception. The fact is, deception is simply out there, and I would like to be aware of where it is so I can help other people from being deceived by it.

Silva thinks he is God???? I hoope he remembers one particular person who made that same claim, that Cornish hen dude that got fried in Waco……..

Chris P,

Let me prove all I said the way Ken Silva proves all his points.

Link # 1 here

Link # 2 Here

I could add more but I think you get my drift…

He is his own authority on all things…

Peace,
iggy

Nathan,
Thanks for your kind remarks. I can assure you that Ken Silva is not my guide. If he were I simply wouldn’t be wasting any of my time trying to look into things on my own.

However, I have said before that it may be that if I worked through some of the issues he brings up on my own, I may end up having some of the same concerns that he does. I still believe that.

I’ve been wondering, do you have a problem with Jon Gordon’s teaching? Do you have a problem with Mcmanus’ name/teaching being used on his site in the way it is? Does Mcmanus think that it is okay?

If you don’t want to answer these questions, it’s fine – I know I’ve already taken a lot of your time. Just so you know where I’m coming from – if my pastor had a friendship that allowed his name to be coupled with Gordon’s teaching, I would first talk to him – and if he thought that Gordon’s teaching was “a little off, but not that bad” or if he thought that by letting Gordon use his name, message he could “get the gospel out” – I would very likely end up leaving that church.

A friendship with an unbeliever can be a good thing – but when an unbeliever and believer’s friendship allows them to work together for “religious enlightment” that is an unequal yoke; and the believer’s scriptural message is compromised by that of an unbeliever. There are few worse messages than having non-believers think that the “divine higher power” they can contact through various practices is something that is good, divine. If they manage to contact some higher power they may think that it is good, divine, and never see the need for salvation through Jesus Christ. They may even have visions of a “false Jesus” and think that they know Jesus Christ, without ever having confessed their sins or come to the understanding that He died in their place; without ever even knowing that He is God. They will, either on this earth or after they die, discover that the “divine higher power” that they have contacted is a power from the pit of hell.

In my understanding of Scripture, God is not willing to share his “glory” with anyone else. I regard teaching such as Gordon’s as being possibly demonic at the root. I take the strong warnings in both the Old and New Testament about staying away from magic, etc, as applicable to such things.

Amy,

Let me get this straight – now, when Slice/CRN attacks someone, we need not only defend the person unfairly attacked, but we have to go out and find any heretic who quotes the person being attacked and prove a lack of Guilt-by-Association?

“Have you now, or have you ever been…”

Please.

The onus is on the attacker to prove his/her case, not the one being unfairly attacked…

 

Anything less is to confirm ‘proof by assertion’

Chris L,
Have you read this? http://www.jongordon.com/newsletter-070219-thesecret.htm

If I were a pastor and a friend of mine ran a site that I considered new age/demonic and quoted me in this way, I hope that God would give me the strength to:

1)Ask God for forgiveness for anything I had done in my relationship with that friend that seemingly gave them permission to do such a thing.
2)Apologize to my friend if I had not shared with him how dangerous his teaching was, to himself and others.
3) Ask that my name and my teaching be removed from the site so that
a) Christians would not be confused into thinking that what Gordon is teaching must be okay since he is quoting me. I would not want any Christian practicing anything that would give Satan an open door to their mind.
b)Non-Christians would not be misled into thinking that the power that they may contact by following my New Age friends teaching had anything to do with Christ. They might even think that they have become Christians, when they have never met the Christ of scriptures.

I would then write something that could be read by the public so that there was no confusion, not to protect myself from GBA nitpickers but to protect Christians from falling into demonic practices and to keep non-Christians from possibly believing they have come into a relationship with the Lord Jesus in a way that TRAMPLES ON THE BLOOD OF CHRIST.

Chris I have been in a situation a little bit like this. A couple of young married women came up to me after a women’s bible study overseas and were chatting. One of them asked about my wedding ring. She said she has always wanted one. She asked me if she could do a trick with it. I thought that she was going to do a “magic trick” in the way that we normally think of “magic” as in “slight of hand.” I gave it to her – and I don’t want to go into details, but basically, she told my future. Somewhere in the middle or right after this, I realized that this was no slight of hand. I walked home, overwhelmed by what I had let happen, in church no less, with the whole women’s group looking on. A few days later, on Sunday, I found the two women after church and said, “Did you really believe that what you found out about my future was true? Were you not just playing a game?” They affirmed, without shame, that yes they believed it was true; no they weren’t playing a game.

Sometime shortly after that, I think with in a week or two, I was scheduled to speak at the women’s meeting. I explained to all the women there, including the women who had done the magic trick, that I felt that what I had participated in was very wrong and that I needed to apologize. I shared several scriptures about divination, etc, and told them that I realize that these kinds of things have been a part of their culture for a long time – but that the Bible says that they are sin. I told them that I realized that they may have never even read these passages because they don’t have them in their language. I explained that God talks about them so seriously because they aren’t just superstitions, but that there can be demonic power behind them.

Nathan,
Here’s on more response toyour quote: “If God is working towards us becoming more like him, then I would say that his desire is to create something “heavenly” inside of us (our hearts). God wants to use us to help make this world obey and honor HIM.”

Jesus says, “When he (the Holy Spirit) comes, he will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgement: in regard to sin, because men do not believe in me; in regard to righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; and in regard to judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned.” (John 16:8-11, NIV)

God wants men to feel convicted because of their unbelief, not believe that he is in them, helping them to obey and honor him, in spite of their unbelief. There is no “kingdom of God” on this earth without the personal acknowledgement, confession, and repentance of sin.

Satan would love to have people feel that they have the “kingdom within” without personal salvation.

Nathan,
I don’t believe that God is an evil war lord.

Essays are the only way I know how to try to deal with such a complex topic.

I know from a few things I read in the last few days that I am not the only one who is struggling with “the kingdom within” and “creativity” and “changing cultures” as taught by Mcmanus; and it appears that some of the people who are struggling with this are people who have been in Mosaic. Yes maybe we’re all misunderstanding; but what if even one of the things that people are concerned or baffled about are legitimate concerns?

No matter how much I’m understanding or misunderstanding, I believe that Gordon’s quoting Mcmanus on his website has great potential for doing a lot of harm to a lot of people. You apparently don’t see it that way. I wish, for the sake of a) a Christian who may meet a spirit guide through following Gordon’s teaching or b) a non-Christian who may think he has met Jesus through Gordon’s now “Christianized” teaching, that you agreed with my concern and were willing to bring it up to your church.

Do I think that SBC would permit and support Mosaic events if Mcmanus’ theology was wacky? I don’t believe any denomination has leadership that is incapable of making errors in discernment.

Anyway, end of essays, end of conversation.