If we are going to post here about the not so accurate posts on the watchdoggie’s blogs, we need to respect them when they post accurate information or clarify a point. Mike Ratcliff recently did a second part on his blog about obedience and conflict. It is a much more biblical view than his previous statement of
“If you are being obedient to God and you are actually drawing closer to the majority of professing Christians then you only THINK you are being obedient to God.”
His latest blog opens with this line:
While Christians must pursue peace and unity with all whenever possible, that does not mean that they should ever be at peace with false teaching, false teachers, false preachers, or false leaders. The conflict that arises when we obediently confront error, as Jesus did and as Paul did, is most disagreeable. I, for one, do not like it. I have a deep desire to be at peace with everyone, but when those who disagree with the truth from God’s Word descend upon me simply for stating it, refusing to be sucked into unfruitful debate about it, or for rebuking those who refuse to repent then I must remain obedient and ready to continue in that obedience.
Kudos from me Mike. We may disagree over what a “false teacher” is, but I think we can agree that we should not be at peace with them. Keep up the good work.
![Image of The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31Jl6fhDLxL._SL75_.jpg "The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith")
45 Comments(+Add)
I do not think Mike is typical of the writers at CRN… in fact i am surprised he associates with CRN. though he has state it as expanded his ministry…. which opens a whole other topic….
I agree… and think it fair we give kudos when they are do… and think Mike is a move in the right direction for CRN.
Blessings,
iggy
“It is a much more biblical view…”
CRN.Info Fish translation: This time we happen to agree, so therefore we like it. Spiritual fourteen-year-olds, in my view.
Ken,
You said:
Actually, no. Since it is a Biblical view, we therefore agree with it. The previously expressed view was anti-Christian, and therefore NOT agreed with.
Yes, though, you are a spiritual fourteen-year-old, seeing how you’ve failed to answer a single question, responding only with insult and dissembling…
Ken,
We do not agree because we like it… in fact what much of what i have read from Mike i agree with from a biblical perspective…
Again though instead of insults… like a 14 year old… how about being a grown up yourself and actually be able to admit you can make mistakes…
BTW this sounds a bit conspiritorial on your side Ken like were are all out to get you… which is #4 on the cult leader signs list…
4. Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.
Blessings,
iggy
it also makes me wonder by your comments if you disagree with Mike being more biblical….
iggy
Well gentlemen, at least I tried to be nice about all this. It’s all I can do…sadly, often people see what they wish to see. For the life of me, I am a bit astounded that you don’t pick up on Chris L.’s quite childish: “rubber and glue, bounces off me and sticks to you” responses.
*sugh* O well, I just prayed for you anyway…
Iggy,
I’m moving my comment under “open question” to here, where it should have gone in the first place:
Regarding your cult list:
“Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.â€
Sounds a bit like the writers of the NT could have fallen into this category.
The people in many other countries in the world probably also have this as a worldview, based on the reality they see every day.
There is a spiritual battle going on. Isn’t there? What you see as “unreasonable fear†may be in fact a “reasonable assessment.â€
Wow, Ken…
As I noted earlier -
You consistently fail to answer ANY question, giving way to sanctimonious blether (like that crap “Oh well, I just prayed for you anyway” – I believe that as much as I believe campaign promised in an election year)
As it has been noted in numerous ways about you, Ken – When the truth is not behind you, you must take the low road, which you have not failed to do this past year…
I’ll move my comment too. I think the list is great. It is telling that so many seem to apply to CRN.com. Sadly, I know a lot of churches that operate on cult like principles.
Amy,
Not sure, but I think Iggy’s pulling from a list of characteristics of cult leaders (which 9/10 match for Ken).
To this point, Ken hasn’t given anything “reasonable” or a logical “assement”. The only spiritual battle I see is Ken (attempting to) rip living stones out of God’s temple faster than jackrabbit on speed, while studiously (and sanctimoniously) avoiding any sort of accountability (which is consistent for him, at least)…
Amy-
Early Christians weren’t paranoid wackos. David Koresh was paranoid. Not the NT writers. Neither are persecuted Christians around the world.
“The only spiritual battle I see…”
Classic case in point concerning my earlier comment about those who apparently just do not have eyes to see or ears that here (e.g. Isaiah 6:8-10).
“Ken hasn’t given anything ‘reasonable’ or a logical ‘assement’. ” Which is nothing but an opinion, and it in itself proves absolutely nothing.
Pastor Ken,
If Dr. John MacArthur shared a view on biblical doctrine that was counter to your view would you assume his is the non-biblical view? 1 Corinthians chapter 2 offers us some guidance on how the Spirit guides us but also assures us that no one of us can know the mind of God. Some of us have an incredible ability given by God to really understand the Scriptures but none of us knows it all. That is why we must all humbly admit that we cannot know with 100% certainty everything there is to know about our Lord and His Word. Some folks feel it necessary to take a firm position on every single verse but many fine men and women disagree on Calvinism, Hebrews 6, remarrying after divorce. I think that if any of us find a church where we agree 100% on every verse and every doctrine, it will be a church of one.
Press On, Darren
“Some folks feel it necessary to take a firm position on every single verse…”
I don’t.
That’s a start, Ken – at least you answered someone’s question, this time (or, in this case, a portion of it).
You said:
Actually, Ken, it’s a fact – aside from your first comment to Nathan’s post yesterday, it has been consistent dissembling and sanctimonious name-calling from you.
For instance, you seemingly felt the need to deride me for disagreeing with Chris P’s stance on the Imago Dei, yet you’ve not replied to my detailed, Biblical response…
Just more name-calling and whining…
Matt,
I agree that early Christian writers weren’t paranoid wackos and they are definitely not to be compared to David Koresh. But if one just takes the statement at face value, it looks like a mild description of how NT writers view the world. Bottom line, they, through the inspiritation of the Holy Spirit saw Satan working in the world in some ways that seem clearly evil, and in other ways that seemed like “light.”
Ken,
First you make a swipe about Chris acting like a 14 yr old – then you say “Well gentlemen, at least I tried to be nice about all this…”
I’m starting to see how deeply rooted the anger really is if that’s being nice.
Your brother in Christ,
Neil
On the contrary Amy,
read the Book of Acts and you will see they had very little fear… for they feared God more… in fact they rejoiced when they were persecuted as they believed God saw them worthy of the persecution…
Ken fees the fears of others and feeds on that fear as well… to do sort of mind control that is typical of people like David Koresh and other cult leaders. They feed the followers half truth and build into them a sense that “others” are attacking them. They build straw man arguments then knock them down as proof of their superior knowledge of the “others” who are out to destroy what they are protecting.
On the contrary again… Men like Iraenius wrote very detailed arguments against heresies like Gnosticism and went point by point against the leaders of that sect. In know way was it out of paranoia, as those men were twisting the scripture and infusing Platonist/dualist views into Christian writings…
Ken does not do that… he gives drive by shot-pots and then refuses to interact with those on a level above snide remarks… then calls US 14 year olds…
I still think Ken has more to offer the Kingdom of God than this and hold to a higher hope for him… otherwise, really he has not real relevance to where I am. Other than on rare occasion someone asked about a “thing” they heard about the EC and I have to straight it out.
7. There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.
Notice Ken is quick to call names (which is abuse) and many have written to point out errors and abuses of truth on CRN. Much is even documented on this very site! And you are a witness to it!
Blessings,
iggy
Oh well, Ken. I still think that what Mike wrote today was more biblically based than other posts he had written on the subject. Therefore, I decided to let him know that I thought.
You made this statement
This time we happen to agree, so therefore we like it.
This is what separated what we do here from what you do at CRN. We recognize it when we agree with other brothers and and sisters on a subject, even though we don’t see eye to eye on others. I have never heard you write a piece on what you AGREE on with Rick Warren, Rob Bell, or Erwin McManus (and there should be plenty that you do agree on).
my goodness how the heck could a simple amen to something Mike said turn into a war? the things we do to tear each other apart…
Iggy,
I agree about the absence of fear. Knowing that God is in control is what keeps people who believe in scriptures about false teachers and who believe that there are many prophesies in scripture that haven’t come true yet from becoming neurotic.
I’ll look at the rest of your post another time. I would like to say now though, that I wouldn’t describe Ken as being fearful . I think he thinks that he is seeing things as they are and has a tremendous burden to communicate what he sees. How much he is “seeing things as they are,” God knows.
For myself, when I see false teaching, especially if it is affecting friends of mine, I have a burden to share the truth with them. For example, I have had friends who believe Word Faith fallacies that bind them in fear, afraid to speak negatively because they might call a curse on themself. I haven’t hesitated to tell them what I believe about such thinking.
Amy,
I agree, I see no fear in Ken either. What is there is a very very deep seated anger which shows itself in nearly every post, every time he attacks the person not the issue. But I don’t see any fear.
I agree that he see the fears in others and plays on them, whether this is intentional or not – who knows. The whole premise of Slice 1.0 and 2.0 is fed by people’s fear on America not being Christian anymore.
Maybe Ken’s rage has some underlying fear of the future that isn’t like the past – a fear of the unknown, the unfamiliar, the uncomfortable – but that’s not for me to say. It’s certainly possible, but to say that that is the case would be doing him an injustice.
Neil
The fear in Ken is that if the emerging church is right then all he knows is wrong…(which is not really true) so it is easier to hate what you do not understand than to actually try to understand it. That is a fundamentalist trait. To react with a cry of heretic… without all the facts.
Fear has to do with punishment also. SO Ken think he has to do as he does… so God will be pleased with him… yet that is called “works righteousness”.
Also anger comes out of fear… if you scare someone the usually get angry right afterwards… so the base of anger is fear. Ken has shown his anger here in that he cannot engage in a conversation with anyone here as we are not “human” but the enemies… we labels us (as with the other post) then he can with a rationalized conscious, attack and mock without feeling he is hurting actual people…
Blessings,
iggy
iggy,
I suppose all of that could very well be true and it would make sense of the constant name calling and ad hominem attacks.I don’t know Ken well enough to completely agree… on the other hand, that assessment would explain a lot.
It reminds me of the tactic of labeling and dehumanizing an enemy in war. If you call them Gooks, Japs, Krauts, Commies… etc. it’s easier to kill them. It makes it easier to blow the head of a man who’s carrying a picture of his wife and kids in his pocket, just like you are of yours…
Theologically speaking, if you label ‘em, deny that they are brothers in Christ, call ‘em all sorts of names – it’s easier to kill them (metaphorically speaking). Of course here the analogy breaks down, in war the enemy is usually trying to kill you as well – in this case none of the guys who are the subject of Slice wrath are reciprocating or provacating.
Neil.
Neil
“The fear in Ken is that if the emerging church is right then all he knows is wrong…”
FYI, this is an unbiblical judgment of my motives. I just thought I’d alert the Bible scholars among you. The Lord is my witness that I fear nothing on this earth…
Neil,
That’s exactly the point I was trying to make with the ‘labels’ post…
Thanks,
Chris
Iggy,
Per your comments on Ken, it is more likely pride than fear… Having dealt with him for going on 9 months now, it is definitely pride that is the issue. Thus all the smarmy attempts at put-downs with never an admission of error – even when proven beyond the shadow of a doubt.
Wow, Ken:
How about removing the plank from your own eye (and website) before you remove the speck from someone else’s?
Again the irony of all this was that we agreed with Mike having a more biblical post… and Ken got angry over that…
So, Ken either admit that it is a more biblical post, or take it down as “heretics” are in agreement with something on CRN….
Out of all this it only confirms you are a very prideful man…
And I say that with my own plank in full view… LOL!
Yet, the difference is I admit it… and can see it in myself…
Blessings,
iggy
Ken,
i got a laugh (oh the irony) out of your objection that someone was judging your motives… as I said in my post, iggy went farther than I would have, that is, into the assigning of motives.
but given that this is your basic mo on your own blog- it is kinda funny you find it offensive and unbiblical when the tables are turned.
i would that the speculating on motives would not be part and parcel to anyone’s argument. that’s why i just came out and ask you why you feel the need to be so hostile.
yet, so far, your only response has been to deny you are – then call us a bunch of names….
your brother in christ,
Neil
Chris L and Iggy,
I wonder if it’s not a mix of both pride and fear. Ken’s worldview is being challenged and so there is fear in that. At the same time, the pride shows through in comments and posts and works to hide the fear that pieces/parts of his worldview might be incorrect.
Well, it seems Mike doesn’t want to be left out. Have you seen his latest post? If I was the sarcastic type I might say that I had to wipe a tear out of my eye.
Amy, this was the best example of modern day flase teaching that I have seen you write.
“For myself, when I see false teaching, especially if it is affecting friends of mine, I have a burden to share the truth with them. For example, I have had friends who believe Word Faith fallacies that bind them in fear, afraid to speak negatively because they might call a curse on themself. I haven’t hesitated to tell them what I believe about such thinking.”
I have experienced this same thing. I think that it is a HUGE problem among the word of faith movement. It has burdened and hurt so many people close to me.
And, your wording was right as well… “false teaching”. While I speak out against this false teaching, I don’t think that because of this they are leading people to hell. Word Of Faith and I agree over so many essential things of the gospel that I am not going to call them heretics over it. I am not going to back down from calling their “speaking blessings/cursing” theology at all. But, we can certainly still fellowship together.
“Ken got angry over that…” I’m not angry at anything.
“your objection that someone was judging your motives…” I wasn’t “objecting” to anything, I was merely drewing attention to a fact.
“Ken’s worldview is being challenged and so there is fear in that.” The faith to accomplish my mission was given to me by Christ, the Lord is with me so I “fear” nothing, and as much as guys flatter yourselves you literally “challenge” nothing in me. Sorry to disappoint all the virtual high-fives, but I’m afraid you’ll have to do better than this…
I honestly think that Ken is motivated by the “fear of the Lord,” which is not “fear” as we usually think of it, but a deep respect and knowledge that he must obey what he believes God wants him to do. There is a chapter in Ezekiel about a watchman having responsibility to do such a thing – and if he doesn’t do it, the blood is on his hands. I think that Ken sees himself as such a watchman. For myself, I believe that there is a watchman role that Christians can play today. Whether Ken is doing that in the manner that God intended him to do or not is something that I feel I personally shouldn’t try to judge or evaluate at this time. Maybe that will change at some point.
If I am right about his being motivated by “the fear of the Lord,” then his motivation is coming from a pure heart. Having pure motivation doesn’t mean that one carries out the task that God gives them in exactly the manner that God desires. For now, perhaps because there are so many of you taking him to task, or perhaps simply because the Holy Spirit is leading me to stay mum, I don’t care to put in negative words about his motivation or his actions.
It is difficult to raise money for a ministry if there isn’t the threat of impending doom and, therefore, a need for the ministry.
You might think I’m joking or being sarcastic, but not as much as you think.
How many “ministries” are there out there, really? Thousands. Each has their own bad guys, apostasy lists, etc. and they gather the like-minded followers to send in money for this battle.
You can’t raise money for a peace and love ministry. There has to be a bad guy.
Amy,
I have never heard you disagree with Ken on anything. I am not saying that you need to. But, you used to say that you were trying make up you mind on the subjects discussed here. It seems now that all you do is defend Ken. So, I give you this question: Have you found anything about Ken’s “watchman” ministry that you disagree with during this time of searching?
Amy,
I’m sorry, but I’ve not seen anything legitimate come from Ken’s pen that my 9th grader couldn’t have discerned OR (much more often) that was slanderous and defamatory. That would make him a ‘false teacher’ at best, and an agent of Satan, at worst.
It’s not about motivation – it’s about actions, which with Ken are consistently found wanting.
As far as motive I really do not care what it is…
If Ken preached the Gospel… but her does not… he preaches against the Gospel of reconciliation and a gospel of divisiveness.
He throws out accusations and innuendos that can harm a ministry… like the post on Beth Moore…. we are to conclude that Beth Moore is an apostate because she charges $55 a seat….
Yet as i pointed out… the very people that CRN supports charge more for their events and products…
Not one person actually gave a reason other than “money” as to that Beth Moore is a “bad ministry”….
So, with that kind of posting on CRN one can only conclude that they are divisive and do not care for facts… and write on the level of the National Enquirer… CRN is a joke at best… and a Satanic front at worse.
Blessings,
iggy
Iggy,
I’d be careful comparing CRN to the National Enquirer, as they (the Enquirer) might sue for defamation of character.
Amy,
FYI. I went back and listened to Rob Bell’s ‘Breathing’ podcast, and I’m not exactly sure what the big deal was, though I’d make a few observations:
1) I don’t think it was a sermon. It was about 15-20 minutes shorter than Mars Hill sermons, and about the length of a meditation before a special event (communion service, baptismal service, etc.).
2) If it was a sermon, it was below par for his normal sermons – both in Biblical exposition and in content. This also leads me to conclude it was a meditation for a special event.
3) I can see how the reference to yoga (which dealt with nothing offensive, and was a salient point on how we are to face challenges) might make a weaker brother uncomfortable, especially if he/she had dealt with yoga as something other than an exercise class.
4) With that in mind, it might have been better to not post the sermon/meditation in the first place. There was nothing satanic about it, but, like eating meat sacrificed to idols, the freedom in Christ expressed might make a weaker brother stumble. One would have to question, though, at what point the weaker brother holds some responsibility in the matter. After all, if you go into something seeking to be offended, you are almost certain to find what you’re looking for.
Amy,
I don’t think anyone questions Ken’s sincerity. And as I’ve said, from time to time he makes a good point. It’s just that his anger – so, he’s not angry… his hostility and questionable logic overshadows most valid points.
For the life of me I cannot figure out what Ken (or Chris P. to a lesser degree) thinks he accomplished with such nasty tactics.
Neil
Neil,
It is easier to preach to an “Amen” choir then hit the streets and actually face people and witness. If one acts busy they think they are doing something for God… yet, business does not equate obedience and doing the work of God.
Ken, personally is a busy body who could focus on actually doing something for the kingdom but chooses to fight what he considers “weaker” brothers. In that he becomes the weaker… if anyone truly understands how the kingdom of God works.
Also, it is easier to cast stones if you think you are “doing good for God”… I am of he mindset that I would rather being doing what God wants instead of “doing for God”. God does not need me to do anything for Him… i am to believe and depend on Jesus… totally.
I just see people who when they stand before Jesus that they try to show all their fruit they produced… and Jesus will not be impressed… for it was THEIR fruit and not His…
Blessings,
iggy
Nathan,
I have spent plenty of time questioning Ken Silva. Chris L has referenced some of those somewhere on this site. My questions have had to do with accountability, how he views himself, and how he comes across.
As he himself pointed out, God is the motives-heart judge. So perhaps it was out of place for me to even suggest that I feel his motive is fear of the Lord. But it’s “done done.”
As for all the questions I had before regarding him, they were a bit like popcorn just waiting to burst – I felt they had to be asked. I still have questions, but they are more like old forgotten popcorn sitting inside a dusty container in some back corner of the cupboard.
At this point, I believe that the issues that he is concerned about are much more important to discuss than him.
Chris L,
I have always appreciated how you take the time to look into things and seek to discuss them. I will let you know if I ever listen to the breathing video again. I hope to – I need a chunk of time and the Lord’s “permission” so to speak, before I do it.
These days are really busy for me – lots of relationships that I need to put time into, plus putting a garden in.