Comments on: Ken Speaks Up

By: Spencer

Spencer — Thu, 10 May 2007 09:44:21 +0000

I have a comment regarding heresy in response to Rick Frueh. I’m definitely not a seminary student, but I have two brothers who are, and I am a student of philosophy at my university. I could be wrong about this, but as long as we’re talking about ecumenical churches, isn’t heresy just anything that jeopardizes anything stated in the creeds? I’m pretty sure that that is the theological definition. That way, the differences between Calvin, Luther, and Zwingli aren’t heretical. Maybe I’m wrong, I’ll have to call my brothers when it isn’t 4:00 in the morning, but that’s how I understand it.

By: Jimmy Eldridge

Jimmy Eldridge — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 03:33:05 +0000

Ok…I have a question…who the heck is Ken Silva? What is he the pastor of? I have read his comments over at AM and think that all he is accomplishing is being a hate-monger.

Oh yeah…and if he is so sure of himself and his opinions…why does he not allow comments on his beloved AM website?

Just wondering!

By: nathan

nathan — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:50:41 +0000

While I don’t agree with your theological stance on Rob, Warren and others, the fact still remains.

Ken said he was not a Calvinist, yet publishes three posts on Why I am a Calvinist. Calvinist theology would not support this statement:

“Generally, many of us view people like Rick Warren and Rob Bell and others as teaching heresy in some areas. If gone unchecked and if expanded upon we fear their teachings will eventually lead to apostacy”

The elect can never go into apostasy in Calvinism. I just want to know what Ken believes.

By: Joe Martino

Joe Martino — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 03:12:05 +0000

That’s my point Nathan, Do you really think that he will answer? Has he ever answered one of our questions? The only thing I’ve seen is him side step the questions or not answer at all. I mean even with my wife (and I think she did a great job) he never really answered any of her questions.

By: nathan

nathan — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 02:35:11 +0000

wow… I am away for like 48 hours and miss all the fun!

Gentlemen, let’s not get off point. Ken Silva has yet to answer the questions asked him here and on my previous blog. For a man who is in a battle for the truth, he sure seems to be pretty elusive in his explanations.

Ken, would you please answer these questions?

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 02:29:37 +0000

I’d personally love to see Ken’s schedule. I’m a lay person at a local church and I’m so busy with volunteer work that I do there that I don’t have time to write lengthly posts.

By: Joe Martino

Joe Martino — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 23:45:21 +0000

Rick, I’m working on writing this all out for my own understanding and will probably end up posting it here. As for salvation I’ll say it again, I’m thankful I don’t have to be the one who decides who is and who isn’t. As for Ken calling me an apostate, we’ll let him answer what he meant by it.

By: Henry (Rick) Frueh

Henry (Rick) Frueh — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 23:38:46 +0000

Joe, in my mind a person can teach heresy and not be a heretic in the accepted sense. Heresy is just anything that isn’t true and we all fit into that catagory.

Labelling a person a heretic means he teaches things that are not Biblically Christian. It is an extremely serious label.

As far as apostate, that goes even further. An apostate is someone who has rejected the faith and has counted the blood of the covenant as an unholy thing. There is no coming back for an apostate, but a person can slide into heresy and later repent, but my understanding of Hebrews is when someone commits apostacy there is no returning.

I surely do not count you as apostate and probably Ken has used that term in a dramatic fashion but not in the terms I just explained. I would hope that is the case. You are not a heretic either, but I suppose if we traded doctrinal baseball cards I would find some in your collection that I would consider heresy. For instance, I consider the Calvinist view of election as a wrong teaching, but limited atonement is heresy.

That doesn’t mean that person isn’t saved, and Ken is brother who espouses the Calvinistic persuasion but he likes to be somewhat slippery about it. Now please understand what I am about to share because I in no way want to offend you but I do want to give you a better perspective about where many of us are (and Ken may not admit it but I would think he generally espouses what I am going to say)

Generally, many of us view people like Rick Warren and Rob Bell and others as teaching heresy in some areas. If gone unchecked and if expanded upon we fear their teachings will eventually lead to apostacy (which means the teachings are so deviant and compromised that they no longer contain the effectual revelation of the gospel). It has happened in church history before and it could happen again.

These are my sincere concerns and I appreciate you letting me share them openly in a forum that doesn’t lean in my direction. And I thought that maybe I could interject some substance between the pillow fight you and Ken were having. I was going to have to send you both to a time out!

By: Joe Martino

Joe Martino — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 23:23:04 +0000

Oh and Ken, I tire of your semantics. You published them. Why if you’re not?

By: Joe Martino

Joe Martino — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 23:13:07 +0000

Ken, I thank God that I don’t have to decide who is and who isn’t a Christian. You would certainly be a hard nut for me to crack, if that were the case. Here’s the thing Ken, you didn’t write it. You just quoted TeamPyro, but your posting would certainly lend one to think that you support it. You still haven’t answered the question: Why come here? You said, I’m apostate. Does that mean you don’t think I’m a Christian? Why waste your time on me? Here’s your chance to set the record strait.