Hallelujah: What’s Right With the World
One of our frequent commenters, Julie Neidlinger, who runs the Lone Prairie Art Works blog (which I recommend as a nice down-to-earth and often quite humorous place to visit, whether she’s talking about graduation slogans, drawing cartoons, skewering the watchdawwgies, or her own personal wall of shame) recently made this observation:
["Pastor" Ken] Silva single-handedly introduced me to Rob Bell. He can’t stand Rob Bell, and I took that as a recommendation.
I have to agree with her sentiments, as I’ve found a number of excellent Christian writers (Erwin McManus, Dan Kimball, Mark Driscoll, Bob Hyatt and others), conferences and resources that I never would have found without Ingrid, Ken and company. Their scattershot (and shoddy) approach to attacking Christians hits so many God-honoring and Christ-serving men and women (along with those who truly are questionable), that they do offer a service they probably do not intentionally provide.
Today, the mysterious “Editor” (who hypocritically hides behind anonymity, which was a key point in Ingrid’s meltdown and the disappearance of Slice 1.0 – but that’s another topic for another time) pointed out an excellent resource for artistic and production volunteers and staff – the 2007 Willow Creek Arts Conference, entitled: “Halleluhah: What’s Right With the World”. From the conference website:
The world we live in has many dark places, and artists are often more sensitive than others to the pain of our broken world. That is our burden, and our gift.
It’s easy for artists to become cynical and tired. But as men and women who also follow Jesus Christ, it’s imperative that we continue to use our gifts to open a window of hope to others.
This year’s theme, hallelujah: what’s right with the world, is a powerful reminder that artists must overcome the tendency toward cynicism and weariness; artists must choose to look through the darkness and glimpse the light, and then reflect that beauty to the world. At the Arts Conference, you’ll be surrounded by other artists who are tackling this monumental task every week, just like you.
Together, we’ll be reminded that fostering life transformation through better weekend services is worthy of our very best efforts. Come—and bring your entire worship/programming team—for an unforgettable experience that will refuel your heart and soul to accomplish that job with excellence.
Now, the implication from the “Editor” is that we shouldn’t be focusing at all with “what’s right with the world”. After all, we know there’s a lot wrong with it. Right? Granted, I expect the apoplexy level at Slice 2.0 to go up as we get closer to mid-June, as the speaker line-up is a “who’s who” of CRN’s “Most Wanted List” – including Dan Kimball, Erwin McManus and Donald Miller plus music from David Crowder.
I will not argue that there is much going wrong with the world that we, as Christians, are called to confront. However, there is a time for every season, not only a time to mourn. After all, this world is a place that God created and called “good”, and it is a place that he will “renew” or “make new” again. Paul even points to the evidence of God in His creation.
I greatly appreciate artists like Laura Story who capture this in song and verse:
From the highest of heights to the depths of the sea
Creation’s revealing Your majesty
From the colors of fall to the fragrance of spring
Every creature unique in the song that it sings
All exclaimingIndescribable, uncontainable,
You placed the stars in the sky and You know them by name.
You are amazing God
All powerful, untameable,
Awestruck we fall to our knees as we humbly proclaim
You are amazing GodWho has told every lightning bolt where it should go
Or seen heavenly storehouses laden with snow
Who imagined the sun and gives source to its light
Yet conceals it to bring us the coolness of night
None can fathom
Ominously, Mr/Mrs “Editor” concludes the Slice 2.0 article with:
Is your church a member of the Willow Creek Association?
Mine is, and the local/state churches I see on their list for Indiana (my state) are the ones who are thriving and making a difference in individual lives and in the community and world around them. If you’re isn’t a member of the WCA, maybe it should be…
![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")
143 Comments(+Add)
[Earth] is a place that he will “renew†or “make new†again.
Uh-huh after he destroys this one…
Of all the things in that article, you pull out that quote and respond to it?
Amazing.
Mark Driscoll talks about the critiscm he received this past week.
http://www.marshillchurch.org/audio/070422_Nehemiah8.mp3
Actually, the Hebrew concept of tikkun olam, which is what both Jesus and Paul refer to in a “new heavens and a new earth” is not the complete eradication/replacement, but a purification (as if by fire) that makes the current earth and the current heavens new again.
But that’s what you get when you only apply modern Western context to scripture – missing the point…
Just hope your not here when it is melted down… I could care less less about your perverted Hebrew Roots movement mangling of Scripture.
“I could care less less about your perverted Hebrew Roots movement mangling of Scripture.”
First of all, poor grammar. It should be “I couldn’t care less…”
Secondly, for one who adores the “Historic Orthodox Christian faith” (which should have commas separating each adjective, by the way) you sure seem to poopoo upon the original intention and understanding the apostles (read church fathers) had of the scriptures.
I think it’s pretty clear that Ken is the mysterious “editor”, although it is very possible that multiple CRN authors use it. Ingrid has many times said on her radio show that Ken is the “editor in chief” of CRN, so it makes sense. Furthermore, I would submit this as further evidence that Ken uses the editor account:
http://christianresearchnetwork.com/?p=1512
Notice the tell-tale Ken fingerprints:
“In this piece at Apprising Ministries I point out this is the vital question…”
Also notice the referral to himself in the first person, yet it was authored by the “editor”.
Something to ponder…
I think it is shared, because there are a number of “Editor” posts which have Ingrid-isms in them, as well…
Here we go again. When you read scripture “literally” that is the conclusion you come to.
Where is the Holy Sprirt here? I know I ask that a lot but no one has ever answered.
Bell and McManus are not fine christian writers, they are post modern writers. There hasbn’t been a real prophet of God speaking out since Tozer died.
Methods, cultures, context, Rabbi Hillel God help us.
The prequisite for being a christian is a degree in knowing alot about nothing.
You worship your alleged intellects.What you are applying is post-modern western context.
I love my church because in the midst of all the flying bs the we are seeing new people coming to Christ every week and from the worst of circumstances. Also we are on the reservation and we are able to keep the majority of claptrap such as this blog promotes out of our church. We are not hirleings.
I tire of the non-omniscient/deist god that is presented here, and by the majority of all that is liberal/emerging/emergent/take your pick or add as you wish.
In actuality this blog is more self-righteous than CRN will ever be. Your claim that we can onkly understand the Bible in the way you claim is evidence of that.
Remember that the world as it exist6s came out of the rebellion of Babel. And Paul said all creation testifies of a creator and men reject Him. Tell Ms.Story to add a couple of stanzas to her song. Only the elect worship Yahweh as creator.
Hey Todd, I allowed the typos to see of you were awake.
When I’m ticked, my hands move quicker than the eye.
“perverted Hebrew Roots movement mangling of Scripture.”
I’ll take the interpretation that uses the original Jewish meaning of Jesus and the apostle’s words over Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, Spurgeon, and Tozer’s any day.
What do you mean by BS?
Please see my post in regards to Tozer. He is more on the emerging side then you think.
http://matbathome.blogspot.com/2007/04/tozer-mystic.html
Amen
Chris P,
Thank you for demonstrating everything wrong with the dying TR movement, and why it is in its death throes…
Chris L,
Thank you for demonstrating everything consistent with the growing new evangelical religion of psuedo-Christianity with its inherent blindness sent by God to spiritual terrorists like Rob Belll and Erwin McManus, and why it will flower into the Global Family of the antichrist…
Ken,
Hogwash.
This is my Father’s world…
Neil
He finally said it. The emerging church will create the one world religion that will give control to the antichrist. Of course, I could counter by saying that the dispensaionist fear-mongering over a one world religion is part of the devil’s plan in resisting the TRUE gospel of Jesus as taught by Rob Bell and Erwin Mcmanus… But that would be ridiculous. No, seriously, it really would be ridiculous, and one of the differences between fundies and people in the EC is people in the EC recognize that.
The stated purpose is: “…express what’s right with the world..” – which is perfectly biblical. That is, nothing in Scripture says everything about the world is evil, nor does it say we cannot express what is right and beautiful.
The Slice 2.0 interpretation (”decoding” – though “twisting” is more accurate) is: “…honors the world in all it’s expressed, creative forms.”
How do they get from “express” to “honor”?
How do they get from “what it right” to “all”?
Words have specific meanings (even though Ken took me to task for quibbling over the meaning of words)… even to Postmodern Christians. “Express” does not mean “honor and “what is right” does not mean “all.”
Ironically, its Slice 2.0 who takes the negative tactic of postmodernism – redefining things as they see fit – and employs it to their own end.
Wasn’t is the Cheshire Cat (and Bill Clinton) who said “Words mean exactly what I say they mean”? I guess we can add the editor of that post to that list as well.
Neil
“Words mean exactly what I say they meanâ€
No, I think you have them confused with Emergent Church leaders and you here at CRN.Info.
“No, I think you have them confused with Emergent Church leaders and you here at CRN.Info.”
Decoding: I know you are, but what am I?
Ken, do you recognize the distortion of “express” and “honor”?
Todd, do you recognize you have no idea what you are talking about? Maybe when you’re older.
“perverted Hebrew Roots movement mangling of Scripture.â€
hahahahah!I laughed out loud when I read this! Perverted Hebrew roots? What culture did Silva think Jesus, Paul, John, Peter, etc. were a part of? The Chinese?
“Maybe when you’re older.”
You must hate the perverted Hebrew roots of 1 Tim. 4:12.
I also like that you accuse me of not knowing what I’m talking about without actually addressing the question.
No Nathan, they were Westerners like us, Duh!
of course… he sat in pews, spoke english and sang German translated songs. That is the paradigm the scriptures should be read through.
Nathan, and Todd,
Again my young friends seems your ignorance is showing. The Hebrew Roots movement is not proper Hebrew scholarship. From theologian Ben Witherington: “Jesus’ approach to the Torah is not like later rabbis in various ways, not the least of which is that he does not cite (indeed he often contrasts his teaching with) the oral traditions of the elders, such as Hillel or Shammai and the like. Jesus spoke on his own independent authority.”
HRM reads teachings from later Jewish sources back into the Gospel accounts. This would be, as Witherington also says, “folks like Ray Vanderlaan, a local teacher in the Grand Rapids area who doesn’t really much understand the differences between medieval Jewish rabbis and the context and ethos of teachers in early Judaism of Jesus’ day.” Ask Chris L., I’m sure he’ll be glad to write one of his loooooong posts about it. You and Todd should spend more time repsecting your elders. Maybe you’ll get me next time though, I’m sure you’ll keep trying.
When logic fails, attacking the youth is the next best thing!
I wasn’t talking about the Hebrew Roots Movement, I was talking about the distortion of “express” to “honor.” You still haven’t addressed that.
But I’m not surprised. I may be young, but I’m wise to your methods Ken.
Tood,
You’re the one not showing respect to someone older than you, remember.
Ben W. still would emphasize the Jewishness of Jesus and Paul, like his friend N.T. Wright does. Different scholars have different opinions, and just because Ben W. says it, does not make it gospel. It’s also funny you’d cite Ben as a credible source when he’s a fan Rob Bell. I’d be curious to see your reaction to his mostly favorable reviews of Rob’s work. How come you’re so quick to agree with Ben on his opinion of the HRM, but would most likely wholly reject the acclaim he gives Rob?
Also, the HRM recognizes that the rabbis that existed post 70 AD are not the same as the rabbis in Jesus’ day. But, I’m sure Chris L will have more on that.
And in respect to you; I say inadvertantly misspelled your name Todd.
How come you’re so quick to agree with Ben on his opinion of the HRM, but would most likely wholly reject the acclaim he gives Rob?
I believe he’s right re. HRM, and I believe he’s wrong re. Rob.
Chris O-
I’ve already explained to Silva that Tozer was a mystic, came to faith through mysticism, and encourages all Christians to read the mystics. I don’t think he is going to be persuaded when another one of his scources (Ben W) doesn’t agree with him.
Ken,
Though your first response was to deflect with a “Not us but you” retort. I’ll resubmit…
vs.
How is it legitimate to equate the two?
Neil
But my overall point remains. Ben would emphasize reading Jesus and the apostles in the context of 1st century Judaism. Ben’s issue is that he believes the HRM project a post 70 AD Rabbinical Judaism onto Jesus that was different than the Judaism that existed in Jesus’ day.
This discussion started with Chris’ use of the concept “tikkun olam.” I’m not sure Ken has shown this concept wasn’t what Jesus or the apostles believed. Nor am I sure that Ben would have any disagreements.
Do not sharply rebuke an older man, but rather appeal to him as a father, to the younger men as brothers, – 1 Tim. 5:1. I will agree with Ken regarding the issue of respecting your elders but this works both ways. My father is living with a woman who is not his wife. I gently have told him that I can support this but I still give him the respect of being my Father. So we can disagree with one another but just being older or holding the title of pastor does not prevent one from suggesting they need correction. When Paul rebuked Peter, who was older? Who was considered the spiritual authority? Confrontation with respect is the proper way. Name calling and snide remarks on both sides are disrespectful.
Yes, I am guilty of doing this and will remember this verse next time.
Theologians Ken Doesn’t Like:
Luther: Drank, Swore, Infant Baptism, Anti-Jewish, the Eucharist
Tozer: Mystic
Calvin: Calvinism
Spurgeon: Friends with James Hudson Taylor, smoked, drank
Theologians Ken Likes:
Himself
MacArthur
“Name calling and snide remarks on both sides are disrespectful.”
I have been rebuked. I repent.
Ken, I am sorry.
Ken,
In Genesis God “destroyed” this world did He not?
This very earth and all it’s people… except the eight…
Then God promises.. that the perishable will be “clothed” with the imperishable… in that the old of this earth which is perishable will be gone… its systems of power and such… yet as we too will be resurrected in our very own bodies… only clothed in the imperishable…so the earth and all though “destroyed” just like in the days of Noah… will be made New Creation…
Blessings,
iggy
Chris O,
Rob, David Pryor and RVL and others in the HRM (whom I would also include Ben W) recognize the difference between pre- and post-70 AD rabbinical teaching/study.
Where Rob frequently fails in his explanations (and much less often RVL) is in using the term “rabbi” to describe the sages prior to 70 AD. Jesus and other men called “rabbi” prior to 70 A.D. were NOT the same in function as those called “rabbi” post- 70 AD. This is where Ben W has criticized Bell on a few occasions.
The sources RVL uses are primarily contemporaries of the Second Temple (200 BC – 700 AD), whether Essene, “rabbinic” (including Hillel, Choni and other pre-Jesus rabbinical figures), Josephus and others. David Pryor, Brad Young and others from what Ken would call the HRM do not always agree on conclusions from the scholarship available, which is why these sources are secondary, not primary, in nature.
(Also, Paul was probably Peter’s age, and possibly older, taking the training schedule of talmidim into context. Paul seems to have completed his rabbinical training under Gamaliel (using “rabbinical” in a pre-70 meaning), which would put him between 25 and 30 years of age. Peter was under Jesus’ teaching for 3 years, and most likely was in his early 20’s when Jesus was crucified.)
It’s not surprising, though, that Ken would slander these men. It’s par for his course.
As for what I think the Bible has to say about men like Ken (who I have no idea whether he’s older or younger than me…), I’d just look to Ezekiel 34:
Ezekiel says:
“Pastor”, indeed. If you wonder what the “fruit” is of Ken’s labor is, you might wonder what happened between here and now.
Ezekiel 34 seems VERY appropriate.
I would commend this article for you to read…
http://jeremiahsquestion.blogspot.com/2007/05/whats-right-with-world-ishmael-and.html
Or here, where it looks like the church was up to at least 100.
http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=1919
Matt,
“Theologians Ken Doesn’t Like:
Luther: Drank, Swore, Infant Baptism, Anti-Jewish, the Eucharist
Tozer: Mystic
Calvin: Calvinism
Spurgeon: Friends with James Hudson Taylor, smoked, drank
Theologians Ken Likes:
Himself
MacArthur ”
Calvin also taught child baptism (have you read through his Institute?) … and boy Luther out swears Mark Driscoll by a long shot!
It is weird that these men are quoted so often as Godly men, which I see they were, yet there is little regard to these men’s actual beliefs of short comings… What I mean is, it seems that Grace can be given to Luther for using the “s” word and drinking beer… Yet no grace is given to men of God today…
Blessings,
iggy
Jim,
We read enough of Cris P’s warmed-over gnosticism here, thank you very much.
We read enough of Rob Bell’s and Erwin McManus’ warmed-over gnosticism here is more like it.
Ken,
Neither of these men make the mistake the gnostics did, separating spirit from flesh, paralleling good and evil – which you and Chris P do ALL THE TIME.
Your lack of any scholastic understanding (and originality in trying to “score points”) truly knows no bounds.
“Your lack of any scholastic understanding (and originality in trying to “score pointsâ€) truly knows no bounds.”
If so, then possibly matched only by your interminable lack of humility which indeed is itself matched only by your love men’s scholarship. Sad, because it sure won’t help you when you stand before Christ having rejected what I have tried to help you see.
Maybe we can get back to the original issue – CRN’s “decoding” by changing the meaning of words.
How does “express” become “honor”?
How does “what is right” become “all”?
Neil
“My father is living with a woman who is not his wife. I gently have told him that I can support this but I still give him the respect of being my Father.”
I of course meant “cannot support. ” That typo sort of ruined the whole post.
Ken,
I don’t know you, but it seems lately that things really are under your skin. (I don’t say this with glee or anything–it’s just an observation.)
What I mean is the whole comment about global anti-christ, etc. seems a bit overwrought. You clearly believe the EC to be heresy, but do you think the EC is really that influential?
I think that I would actually be interested in your views if you could lay things out in a way that didn’t have jargon, slogans and the such. Seriously, I would.
Also the statements that assert your authority/superiority/being right because of your pastoral position or age/experience just seem to ring hollow. You may be right about your position and age, but I’m sure your familiar with the truism about “having to assert your authority really undermines it.”
I have great close friends, much older than me (and maybe you) who deeply disagree with me on different areas of ecclesiology, doctrine proper, etc. But they are humble, seek to understand what I mean when i say the things I say, and avoid any temptation to “make up their minds” until they really talk it through with me. (So much for “rebellion”.)
I listen to them. I chew over their critiques. I’ve changed accordingly when I’ve seen their point. I listen to them BECAUSE I know they care about me, they want me to grow and be the best servant I can be. They don’t challenge me to prove me wrong…they love me in their rebuke.
I know it can be hard to communicate such a love when you have no real relationship with the very people you attack on your site, but I wonder if people would be more open to you if you genuinely souht relationship with them.
That’s the foundation of any real conversation–relationship. Without it, it isn’t suprising that you are skeptical of “the conversation” because it seems you might have been talking without any real connection. Without the credibility of relationship people aren’t open to you–even if you are an experienced pastor who may be right about some things.
Maybe, just maybe, a lot of things. Maybe not…
But, as genuine friends, maybe you could figure it out with them…
Just some thoughts.
another nathan,
You say: “it seems lately that things really are under your skin.” I can see where it would appear so, but truly they really aren’t. It’s just my particular assignment in the Kingdom to call attention to them. People may wish to consider, maybe Someone is expressing anger through me.
Sincerely though, each of these issues you raise must each be taken in their individual contexts…and after all, it’s what the boys in the EC have wanted as well.
Ken,
I do believe “someone” is expressing anger through you.
As the Church Lady on SNL used to quip – that would be… Satan. He is the Father of Lies, which your work is full of. THAT is why I don’t listen to you.
Ken,
Thanks for your response.
I don’t understand what you meant by the second part of your response.
Chris L.
Assigning Ken’s work to Satan may be a bit over-stated… unless you’re thinking – “All truth is God’s truth” therefore “All lies are Satan’s lies.”
Neil
Maybe we can get back to the original issue – CRN’s “decoding†by changing the meaning of words.
How does “express†become “honor�
How does “what is right†become “all�
Neil
I’m trying to imagine becoming as angry as Ken is, then saying it’s really God’s wrath being channeled though me…
No – can’t imagine being nasty in the name of God.
As for considering it… it’s not consistent with the revealed character of God to speak through misrepresentation and nastiness.
Like ChrisL, I don’t think Ken is channeling God. I think he is channeling someone else.
1 Tim. 4:12Don’t let anyone look down on you because you are young, but set an example for the believers in speech, in life, in love, in faith and in purity.
I get so upset with the constant reference of 1 Tim. 4:12. Does anyone ever read what comes after young. There is a big but. Anyway, Timothy was in his mid to late 40’s. Research that.
“can’t imagine being nasty in the name of God.”
Imagine, and if you need help I’m sure Chris can write a book on it for you, you were part of “God’s chosen” and you come down the hill and hear:
“You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Therefore bear fruits in keeping with repentance, and do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham for our father,’ for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham. Indeed the axe is already laid at the root of the trees; so every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.” (Luke 3:7-9)
Not exactly your new evangelical man-love fest was it? And before you play your VERY tired tape loop – “He said that the self-righteous religious leaders” – note carefully: “So he began saying to the crowds who were going out to be baptized by him.” Read it and weep again guys, this would have been considered quite repugnant language to a first century Jew and even ol’ Chris will have to agree…
Ken,
When you have Jesus or John’s authority, feel free to use the above… Until then, however, I think we’ve estabished that you don’t have authority on this topic, and that much of what you write would more likely qualify you as a target, rather than the user, of the above language.
Neil,
All lies are Satan’s – he is the Father of Lies.
Bridget,
Good observation on Timothy – though it is likely that Timothy was in his late teens when this was written to him…
To my knowledge, Ken hasn’t revealed his age to this point. I’m nearly 40, so I don’t know that he is in the generation above me or in my generation…
Ken,
That language was forceful, but it wasn’t a clear misrepresentation of what someone said, or taking something out of context.
In his perfect knowledge he knew the motivation of the crowds…they were just looking to cover their bases, not give their hearts to God. Isn’t that key to understanding this passage?
From what I read here, your critics see your content as being inaccurate and unfair.
I think people are uncomfortable with you, Ken, as a person who they do not know just going to town on people. No one denies Jesus handed some people their rear ends, but I think we all need to be careful jumping on the “Jesus did, so I can too” wagon. No one is Jesus, but Jesus.
Sure, Jesus called those folks a brood of vipers…but was that the distinctive tone and approach of his to the “multitudes” in general?
To Chris
http://www.albatrus.org/english/church-order/elders/how_young_timothy.htm
We have a son who turns 30 soon. He is in the “ministry”. While he was repremanding us one day; we couldn’t get a word in. My husband and I are in our 50’s and we found that very disrespectful in how he spoke to us. Won’t go in to the why of it, but once we tried to get him to listen to us he wouldn’t stop to listen. We tried to bring the Bible into the heated conversation, but he was quick to respond with the 1 Timothy verse; although he didn’t remember the reference (he is a young/immature man). That is what prompted us to research that reference. I hope you find that website helpful.
Chris L.,
“you don’t have authority”
In the Lord I tell you that you have just spoken as a modern Pharisee. I strongly urge you to reprent.
Timothy was in his late teens; right, modern revisionist history.
“you have just spoken as a modern Pharisee”
how ironic is it that Ken is saying this.
According to his replies on Christian Worldview Network, Ken is 51. An example is the link below with the first and last part of a reply he posted.
http://www.worldviewweekend.com/secure/cwnetwork/feedback.php?&ArticleID=1742
Posted On: 04/01/07 03:57:08 PM Age 51, NH
Jonathan, “Let no unwholesome …………………….understanding of Eph. 4:29. Ken Silva, pastor-teacher
Whew, great detective work. But I’ve mentioned my age in a number of places.
To quote Ken, “I do my research.”
I assume that was not personal info since it is out their on the internet anyway.
Let’s all focus less on age and more on “example for the believers in speech, in life, in love, in faith and in purity.”
“Let’s all focus less on age and more on “example for the believers in speech, in life, in love, in faith and in purity.â€
Amen!
Bridget,
I disagree with your source, though, both from the Greek usage Paul uses regarding Timothy, and from the context of the calling and training of Timothy. Additionally, the site you cited tries to take a Judean tradition regarding “elders” and applies it to the early church in Asia Minor, neglecting the first century practice around discipling. It’s not “revisionist history”, as Ken incorrectly states (though he’s a master of revisionist history which ignores the first century context), and has been widely accepted, even prior to the finding of the Dead Sea scrolls in the middle of the last century.
Ken wrote:
Ken, you don’t have the authority. Your lies and slander demean any piece of paper put on your wall by a national denomination. (You’ve still not answered the earlier questions from Matt and myself regarding what happened between 1997 and the present at your own church.)
I have nothing to repent of, because you are a false prophet and a liar.
Chris L.,
You state yet again: “piece of paper put on your wall by a national denomination.” What has this to do with anything? My call is from Christian Himself, and that whether any organization of men, or any man such as yourself in spiritual blindness, recognize it or not.
Question: “what happened between 1997 and the present at your own church.” Answer: Lots of things. I hope this helps you rest easier.
And you said it yourself: “you are a false prophet and a liar.” I wanr you again, you will have to account for your words unless you repent. It’s out of my hands…
Another Nathan:
“Sure, Jesus called those folks a brood of vipers…but was that the distinctive tone and approach of his to the “multitudes†in general?”
Check the KJV Bible. Luke 3:7 It wasn’t Jesus who said it, but John the Baptist.
John the Baptist spoke the truth and was executed for it. Jesus spoke the truth and was crucified for it. He overturned the tables in the temple. He shamed the Pharisees every time they opened their mouth. Paul spoke against the heretical teachings of his day and was stoned and then executed. Peter was crucified. John was boiled in oil . Check out the apostles and how they died. They died violent deaths except for John. They were “martyrs.” (witnesses for the sake of Christ). Our Lord was not a wimp.
I know I will be torn to bits for submitting this, but here goes.
Grace and peace.
Speaking of the need for repenting when a wrong was done: should he person who so misrepresented WCA either justify or repent.
How does “express†become “honor�
How does “what is right†become “all�
Neil
Helen,
You will not be torn to bits. People are treated as they treat others. There are those here who disagree, but do so without calling people names, invoking divine prerogative, or being down-tight nasty… and they are engaged with the respect due a fellow believer.
Feel free to join in anytime.
Neil
“Our Lord was not a wimp.”
Here here! But neither was our Lord (or John the Baptist or Paul) hateful, mean-spirited or seemingly gleeful about how wrong others were (how can you type “Well, you can’t say I didn’t warn you. I have done what I can for you, but know this I forgive you.” and then have a
?).
Despite what is reported about us we’re not calling for people to be apathetic about things that matter or to not take a stand on matters of truth. However, we are calling for tolerance and charity in matters of opinion and non-essentials. The major rub comes when we try to discuss what is critical and what isn’t as there are a number of different interpretations. Whereas we would prefer civil, calm discussion about those issues, others (read Ken, Chris P.) choose to make personal, salvation attacks that do little to promote understanding or Christlikeness.
Helen,
Even in the NIV, it was John who called the onlookers from Jerusalem a brood of vipers. John was an inspired prophet, and Jesus was the Son of God. Ken is neither.
Speaking of Ken, he wrote:
Your call might be from “Christian” (last name not given), but Jesus Christ certainly has not called you to further his ends via lying, half-truths and slander. I know him personally, and he just doesn’t work that way.
Your attempts to hide behind that piece of paper, when you’re little more than a glorified home Bible study leader from a decimated local church – all the while attacking persons with much more solidly arguable pastorships speaks volumes about your “calling” and “authority”.
Kind of like being the “president” of a ministry of one.
The questions about your church, beyond “lots of things” kind of goes to the heart of any credibility you’ve got trying to stir up trouble with a handful of folks who left Mosaic. Something about planks and specks comes to mind…
“Wanr” me all you like – it was never in your hands in the first place. Your fruits speak to your lying, half-truths and slander. Each and every one of us will have to account for our words, unless they have been covered by the grace of God. He has saved me, and I have that hope of glory. I sincerely hope you will repent and receive that same hope, as well.
Chris L.
Be careful your (self) righteous Christ-like behavior is liable to cause the whole world to convert. Where would we put all the people?
Here Neil,
Just so you can finally move on. “How does ‘express’ become ‘honor’? How does ‘what is right’ become ‘all’?” When it’s passed through our special CRN Emergent/Fish translator we were able to decode the core of this “outreach.”
Be of the world and in the world because to be separate from it while having to minister in it causes conflict. And all good $new evangelical$ leadership drones know that we can’t put “stumbling blocks” in front of “Unchurched Harry and Mary.”
I didn’t write the post, but I sure do agree wholeheartedly with the anti-seeker sensitive and anti-man-centered $new evangelical$ slant. I commend my fellow CRN contributor for a job well done.
Chris L,
I think you are on to something. Examining Ken’s church should say something about his walk with Christ. He boasts of his church’s small numbers. But, no matter what side of the argument you are on, we are called to multiply by making disciples. I often wonder how many people Ken has actually helped to find God in the last year. If he isn’t doing his biblical mission, then why would God tell him to create a hate blog? Maybe God decided better something than nothing, eh?
Chris P,
(As an aside, I see you’ve linked CRN to your post endorsing modernized gnosticism. Go team Slice 2.0!)
I’ve followed the Matthew 18 steps with Ken, months ago, and I am only taking the latter steps outlined within (making said accusations public), hoping that being given over to his sin, he will repent.
The only righteousness any of us has is given to us via Christ. As for “Where would we put all the people”, I am sure God would have room for the increase in numbers if folks like you & ken stopped shooting the shepherds and the wounded sheep so that we wouldn’t have to protect them from the enemy within…
I knew it.
They are warrenites. Bigger is better.
I have never shot a true shepherd. As for the wounded I dare you to come visit my church one day so that everyone could laugh in your face. I only have problems with pompous “hineys” like you.
“As for the wounded I dare you to come visit my church one day so that everyone could laugh in your face.”
I think I remember Jesus saying something just like that to those He disagreed with!
Modernized gnosticism. LOL!!
I consider you and all your ilk to be gnostic.
You are every bit as good as the rcc dolts whon refuse to go to scripture. But hey, we’ll quote the pope, or Hillel, or whomever.
Ken wrote (while avoiding questions of his own church history):
To quote Mark Driscoll, I believe (but I can’t find the quote): “Yes, the message of the gospel is offensive! By all means! That does not mean we must be offensive in the way we deliver it.”
Todd
I wondered when you would slither in. Welcome!!
Hineys? BS? Only solution for AIDS is death? Are you turning into a cussing pastor?
Chris L.
Driscoll is operating on the premise that you are actually delivering it. No wonder you offend no one.
Why thank you Chris P. I see you’re still emulating the way of Jesus.
Did I cuss?
Must be your subjective assessment. Can’t get off the aids thing can you? Sad, very sad.
Unlike you, I actually have a life, so I must depart and take care of my family. Have fun, Tah Tah!!
Chris P said:
I guess that makes God a “Warrenite” too:
“The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.”
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.”
Q: When do we give the gospel of Christ?
A: When did we stop? The very way we live our lives demonstrates the gospel we live by.
Most, including myself, would consider “BS” a swear. By the way, I don’t swear.
Matt,
I would heartily agree with your assessment. If Amy’s looking for examples of something pagan that we think cannot be redeemed, I would include abbreviations of swear words – even if used by Christians.
This is one of several areas I disagree with emerging/emergent church. I was raised in a Christian family and there were words we just didn’t use. I’ve heard all the “Christian” arguments for swearing, I just haven’t seen a convincing one. It just effects yourself and everyone around you when you swear, even in jest.
I tried to find “mudslinging” in my concordance, but was unable to find it. I’m sure there is something in there that describes this nonsense. I’m sorry I ever stumbled on to this blog. It brings to light Matthew 10: 34-39.
Chris L.,
“Christian” earlier was a typo. Should read: Christ. Since you know Him personally He can confirm that to you in your gnostic encounters with Him.
You say of me that you are now: “making said accusations public.” Good you do that, fine by me.
Todd,
You said: “I think I remember Jesus saying something just like that to those He disagreed with!” This is good, then you understand the irony reference in what Jesus said in Psalm 82.
Nathan says:
“we are called to multiply by making disciples. I often wonder how many people Ken has actually helped to find God in the last year.” Yeah, that would be interesting to know. Let me know what you come up with.
Chris L.,
I’m telling you this is just too easy for Chris P. and myself. You quote Chris P. “bigger is better” and then you respond with this?! “He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.”
Um, IS everyone going to come to repentance? No. Has this anything to do at all with numbers or the size of a church? No. Permit me to quote Jesus, Whom you know so personally you can falsely judge one of His pastor-teachers:
Uh-oh, looks like you Willow Creek and Mosaic Church Growth boys are leading all your great numbers of people in the wrong direction. At least if you take the Bible literally.
Modernized gnosticism. LOL!!
I consider you and all your ilk to be gnostic.
You are every bit as good as the rcc dolts whon refuse to go to scripture. But hey, we’ll quote the pope, or Hillel, or whomever. – Chris P.
Are we still talking about using art to express what’s tight with the world? – …’cause that ain’t Gnostic, nor man-loving (whatever that means)…
Neil
Ken,
You wrote:
Well then, Ken, that would make your statement false. Jesus doesn’t further his ends via lying, half-truths, and slander. The “someone” who authors many of your ‘miss-ives’, though, certainly does. It’s his specialty.
Ken, I find it so interesting how you try to ape the words used by folks in critiquing your “integrity” (shoud any exist). I’m afraid the closest you come right now to encountering a ‘gnostic’ is when you look in a mirror – or read articles written by Chris P.
Jesus was both spirit and flesh – neither of which are ontologically evil – and while we only encounter him in spirit now, we will encounter him face to face – in the flesh. I have no “gnostic encounters” with him.
Is this (finally) an admission of guilt?
You wrote to Todd:
And here I thought Asaph wrote Psalm 82. The words of the psalm are appropriate to the discussion, though, because we seek to do the will of God:
“Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless;
maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed.
Rescue the weak and needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”
“This is good, then you understand the irony reference in what Jesus said in Psalm 82.”
Jesus wrote some of the Psalms? Wow. My Emergent Viper, $evangelical$, man-loving pastor failed to mention that.
But seriously, what does that have to do with Chris wanting people to laugh in our faces?
Oh, and can someone fix Ken’s comment? I believe there is an open bold tag somewhere in his comment.
Ken,
You wrote:
Wow – it’s no wonder you’ve decimated your church, and it’s also a complete wonder you could fool anyone long enough to get your paper from the SBC with such awful exegesis of scripture!
Certainly, the way is narrow, and even if every WCA church was 10X the size it currently is, the number of people going to hell in this world would dwarf those who serve Christ, all of the members of these churches.
We’ve been down this road with you before Ken, but you’ve proven yourself to be completely uncorrectable when it comes to your poor understanding of Jesus’ words. You’ve been listning to that “someone” who fathers the lies in your ‘miss-ives’ too long…
Anyone notice that once you point out these critics flaws, they refuse to address them? I mean not one of them have addressed the cussing thing and not one of them has addressed Tozer the mystic, Luther the racist, Spurgeon the drinker/smoker, etc.
boys boys boys. enough already.
Chris L…it’s just not worth the effort man. God will have his way with Kenny and Chrissy and I’m hoping to be near them in line when it happens…(even though i’m sure God will have a few choice things to say to me as well.)
Ken and Chris P…please get over yourselves. You make yourselves sound more and more ridiculous with each post. You are so obsessed with making sure everyone sees things YOUR way that it’s like you…
….can’t….resist….replying.
Please prove me wrong by shutting up.
Helen…there is a huge difference in what goes on here than at SOL (and I do mean SOL). One defends brothers and sisters and will even accept admonishment and apologize. The other is a cesspool of self-righteousness that takes glee in tearing down the body of Christ. (And it always cracks me up how most of the guys they try to tear up could give a you-know-what no matter how much they stomp their angry little feet.) The best way to read both blogs is with a silent smirk and a grain of salt.
Chris L.,
“And here I thought Asaph wrote Psalm 82.” Is that what your lying father told you?
My Father says, “All Scripture was breathed of God.” Psalm 82 is Scripture, therefore God wrote Psalm 82. Jesus is God, therefore Jesus wrote Psalm 82. And you’re a Bible teacher?
btw…I am loving the dog pictures…especially this one.
“I’m afraid the closest you come right now to encountering a ‘gnostic’ is when you look in a mirror – or read articles written by Chris P.
Jesus was both spirit and flesh – neither of which are ontologically evil – and while we only encounter him in spirit now, we will encounter him face to face – in the flesh. I have no “gnostic encounters†with him.”
Please show me anywhere that I have claimed a “gnostic” encounter with Jesus. I claim the Spirit AND the Word. Gnostics do not acknowledge the Word as either in authority or to be taken literally. So if the gnosis fits……….
You are like a little kid. You discovered a new toy,i.e. “Judaism 101″ and you are determined to shove it in everybody’s face.
Todd your argument is also bogus. I did not “cuss”, and my comment about my church fellowship implies that Chris’ and yours false accusations are simply that, false. Those who know me, know better. But hey there’s a couple that recently left our church that you would really get along with.
They belive in the Star Trek theology that there are parallel universes of existence and our poor God is waiting to see which possibile existence we will choose. You call me gnostic?
“I love my church because in the midst of all the flying bs the we are seeing new people coming to Christ every week and from the worst of circumstances.”
That is cussing.
Tozer if he were here today would reject what has been done with the whole mystic. He at least stuck to the Scripture, unlike any of the modern day mystics.
Matt prove your right by shuttting up.
“Helen…there is a huge difference in what goes on here than at SOL (and I do mean SOL). One defends brothers and sisters and will even accept admonishment and apologize. The other is a cesspool of self-righteousness that takes glee in tearing down the body of Christ.”
Don’t be so hard on yourselves. You can’t all be like us.
Post-modernists and liberals are throughly humorless.
I like having fun with you guys.
helen,
I don’t understand what you are getting at in your response to my last comment.
Or were you just chiming in with your own thoughts?
btw, my questions arise from using that passage as a justification for that kind of tone being the baseline, general standard of communication. I don’t think that is the default setting that it seems to be for a lot of people.
anyway.
Interested in your thoughts…
God breathed ≠written Ken.
“Todd your argument is also bogus.”
Which one? You left to take care of your family and I commented several times in betwixt your post and your leaving.
Oh, and your Star Trek argument is also bogus.
BTW if you want to see where Hillel, Shammai, and all talmudic, Kabbalic rabbbinicalism comes from, check out this site.
This man’s theology is off but his historical perspective is right on.
http://www.thedyinggod.com/
Just to clarify…”Matt” is a different person. Wasn’t paying attention when I decided to use my own first name. I post here maybe once a month.
matt (lowercase) I like your church website. Are you on staff or are you a member?
On staff. Technical Resouces Coordinator is my fancy schmancy title. I prefer AV Czar.
This whole conversation makes me want to cry. I have to wonder what Christ would think about it all. We have turned His sacrifice into something to bash each other with. I do believe that obedience is something that the Lord requires. I don’t believe that you say a little prayer and live like you want to. I do believe that we are to show fruit and by fruit I mean what the Bible lists as fruit. And love is the most important. Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and your neighbor as yourself. I read at CRN every day and find alot of good things to share. But I would be ashamed to share what I have just read. Ashamed of the whole lot of you. So much wasted energy. Pride is an ugly thing in the eyes of God. And that is what I hear. Sorry, but I think you are all wrong. Attitude says so much about your walk with the Lord. Forgive me if I am wrong. But I could just cry.
Ken, You should not refer to God that way. He does not lie. We’ve already established that.
Ken,
Surely you understand the difference between “breathed” (ruach/phneuma) and written? One is inspired, the other is the physical act of recording. Your torture of the English, Greek and Hebrew languages is almost as sad as your writing and your credentials.
Chris P – Your most recent post – weighting the spiritual (good) vs. the physical (evil) is a gnostic teaching.
“BS” – is an acronym for swear words, which is just the same as using it. I hold no gnostic teachings, ancient or otherwise.
Your writing is such a sad representation of why the church in many places is dying – legalism mixed with ignorance is a dangerous combination…
Todd,
“God breathed ≠written Ken.” Now, young man that is absolutely false and not to mention blasphemous, which is precisely why you ahouldn’t try and instruct me.
Chris L.,
And you’re not a gnostic?! Ok, then perhaps in your great erudition you can explain to all of us which Scripture was written by God and which was written by men.
Chris P.
Jesus:
Chris P.
Jesus:
I think we see clearly, Chris…
Ken (prooftexting):
Jesus (giving explanation to why Ken sees the way as narrow as he sees it):
Ken,
No “erudition” needed. From my Jr. High Sunday School class:
Scripture was inspired (breathed) by God, and physically recorded (written) by men. Without God’s breath, scripture would be meaningless. Without the physical act of writing it down, we would not know what He said – this is why the Jewish people were his “chosen” people, so that the world would know that He (YHWH) is the one and only God of all Creation by their faithful preservation of His Word.
I just read this entire exchange.
I am very sad.
another nathan,
You should be sad.
Chris L.,
Your obvious condescension adise, you have just strained the tiniest of gnats with your quibbling about words. Go ask a Jew and they will tell you as well that God wrote at least the OT, men merely recorded it. Yikes, are you actually this spiritually blind that you have to argue issues we should actually agree on?
Scripture = God’s Word, regardless; God spoke Psalm 82, I don’t care who wrote it down. Jesus is God, therefore Jesus spoke Psalm 82 regardless of what human instrument recorded it. Was this really so hard?
Ken,
So should everyone.
Christy,
“We have turned His sacrifice into something to bash each other with.”
“I read at CRN every day and find alot of good things to share.”
don’t these statements stand in contrast with each other?
Ken,
If it was so insignificant, then why go through the tortured logic of correcting your error? Nobody says “Well, the Holy Spirit wrote in Leviticus…” – they give the name of the person who physically WROTE it – not who inspired it. Doing otherwise is a meme that attempts to create a separation of the scripture from the context in which it was written (which is why I made the correction of your error).
Jesus is God, indeed, but none of his apostles refer to Him as the physical writer of the OT. Even though he claimed to be God, he never said “I wrote in Proverbs…”. In fact, he quotes the prophets and Moses (as the writers of scripture). If it was good enough for him, I’d say it’s good enough for me…
another nathan. My apologies – I am trying to work through at what point to allow Ken & Chris’ to just be given over to their nature and to give up responding to their moronic/legalistic/gnostic ramblings…
If I ban them, I am no better than they were at Slice 1.0, and I would do what I criticize them for. If I allow their sulfurous lies to stand, then I give up defending what is good and right and from God…
“If I allow their sulfurous lies to stand, then I give up defending what is good and right and from God…”
Absolutely. Now you know what Chris P. and I are doing with the lies of this new evangelical religion.
Ken, “Your obvious condescension adise,” I didn’t blaspheme. Your accusation of such is slander. I “ahouldn’t” try to instruct you because you are too deceived to hear or read the truth.
I know that grammar doesn’t really matter, but the fact that you don’t even read your comments before clicking submit merely highlights the amount of thought you put into them.
The only “lies” are the ones you tell. There is no “new” religion “lying”. There are only God-fearing, believers in Christ who do not kowtow to your man-made desires of what you WISH God said. In slandering them, you do nothing for the Kingdom of God, but tear it down.
Chris,
I think a forum has to exist to discuss things since it’s not allowed at CRN and AM, etc.
People may think their opponents are jerks, hypocrites, etc., etc. etc. blah, blah, blah…
BUT
sharp disagreement over the actual issues could actually be fruitful if unnecessary, emotional ammo wasn’t used. (i.e. implications about people’s intelligence, condescending name calling, labeling like pharisee OR ECoD (for example). I’ve been guilty of it too, but it just doesn’t help anyone be a better Christ follower.
I think Christy’s recent comment really says a lot about these “internet wars” and how it seems that some people really relish going after each other.
It’s better to address the substance of what people find to be incorrect at CRN, et. al. and to hold a hard line on no snarky comments, attacks on motives, etc. and refuse to “pick up the rope” when snarky comments come from others–whoever they may be and of whatever theological stripe.
I do think it is disengenuous when people go both barrels at people, comport themselves as angry and just generally mean–even if that is not their heart–get nasty about people’s motives, etc. and then when someone says:
Hey. That’s not right. That’s not a fair thing to say. ETC.,
then complain that people are being mean to them!
I’ve said it before, but it’s like telling a wife that SHE ruined a marriage because she took the kids and left because she didn’t want to take her daily beating from her abusive husband anymore. When I say that I don’t get that…I just get snide remarks about “Yes, you don’t get it.”
Again…no attempt to stay on the issues and really help me see.
And then…to add insult to injury…if the wife said on the way out of the door:
You are a bad man for beating me. I hate you. You’re a jerk. I wish you would die and burn in hell.
Then THAT gets to be the mark of confirmation on how bad the wife really is.
Her comments, while hateful, have to be seen within the larger context of the beatings.
When I’ve heard critique of traditionalist churches from the EC and others, I hear the real concern of people who have seen people get hurt by the attitudes and approaches of people who should be proclaiming God’s loving sacrifice because of our sin, not beating the crap out of hurting sinners.
This is long already, but I’ll give you some real life stories of what I mean in my next comment….
My grandmother was married to a man who was an abusive alcoholic in a small town during the depression.
She had three young children and he was drinking their money away. They were without food at times.
My grandmother, in a traditional small town in the 30’s divorced her abusive husband. That was a huge cultural no-no then.
The women who ran the government office that gave assistance were his sisters. They froze her out of any help.
She had to take in laundry, work as a seamstress, clean houses and cook for multiple families to eke out a living for herself and her kids.
The kicker was that the local churches looked down on her. She got a divorce. SHE was the person at fault. It so twisted her understanding of God’s love for her, God’s grace, etc. that she had a hard time believing for the rest of her life that God could love her even though she loved God and had placed her trust in Jesus.
On her death bed she prayed AGAIN, as she did many times, casting herself on the mercy of God because of how damaged she had been by Christians who needed her to know that her divorce was sin and wrong and she was evil and there was nothing good in her.
She knew that! But the message was always pounding the negative home on a wounded, bruised reed…
it was not until later that she found a church that could love her and show her God’s grace. (This church has a 100 plus year history of unashamed gospel proclamation. Their reading lists would read like a Who’s Who of approved CRN writers, theologians, etc.)
Anyway…seeing the burden my grandma carried because of the warped emphasis of Christians around her really has influenced me in ministry to try to be very careful I don’t beat down people even when I disagree…
I don’t always do a great job always, but I try. Christy is right–our attitude says much about our walk.
2nd story:
My dad’s step dad was also an abusive alcoholic. They prayed for him and prayed for him. When my dad was in High School, his stepdad finally walked the aisle during an altar call.
He got to the front and the pastor said:
“John, if you’re going to do this you have to stop smoking and drinking.”
The man didn’t understand. He carried mail in chicago. He didn’t get why he couldn’t enjoy a cold beer after carrying mail on a hot day.
The pastor got into a fight with him at the altar about the evils of drinking! The man turned around and walked out, never came back to church and drank himself to death.
That well-intentioned pastor put the cart before the horse by making those the issues. (And I don’t want a redux of the alcohol use debate, just shelve it for now cuz that’s not the point.)
My step-grandfather needed to be welcomed to the table, embraced by God’s grace and discipled toward deep, lasting, comprehensive change by a loving community of Christ-followers, Christians, or whatever you label you want to quibble over.
The point is that kind of attitude and tone got a pastor to berate a lost soul over a secondary issue…
It’s just too easy to hurt people when we get so confident in “our rightness” that we lose sight of the very people we all (CRN, AM, this site, etc.) claim to want to serve and reach with the life of Jesus.
All I can say is that those of you who aren’t able to take this kind of dialogue had best seek the Lord that He open your eyes to the time in which you now live. Because if you don’t, you will never be able to hear the preachers who will be coming “soon” in the Name of the Lord…
Huh?
Ken,
Praise Him, we have, which is how you were revealed for what you are – and why your “ministry” is a black eye to true discernment ministry.
I get what you mean, Ken.
But I’m just baffled that that is your response.
Chris L.,
You’re making your stand…Isaiah 6:8-10
Ken,
You’ve tried this before, and it’s getting tired. God doesn’t send people to do His will in a sinful manner. I’m opposing YOU and your lies – not God.
I’m glad you noted that I tried.
Yes, you have tried in the same way that the prophets of Baal tried with Elijah. Your calling is more similar to Alistair Crowley’s than Isaiah’s…
How much longer will this “I know you are but what am I?” kind of ‘dialogue’ go on?
Sorry, Robby… It will end now…