There has been a bit of furor this week over Christian blogger, Rev. Scottie, going undercover using an alias in order to prove the lie behind the commenting policy at an ODM site. In fairness, it is similar in methodology as the brouhaha when that same ODM site created an pseudonymous “ECM” site while falsely accusing other sites of hiding behind anonymity.

Very little of the back-and-forth regarding the latest incident has been all that interesting or fruitful: Rev. Scottie proved that water is wet, while creating unnecessarily additional animosity from the already siege-minded ODM site. Yes, I laughed, initially, but then I had a bit of pause when considering all the issues.

However, during this a question arose which I think could be discussed, and I believe is relevant to living in modern society: Can Christians work in jobs in which some level of deception is required? Some examples:

Security: Police and federal investigators often must go undercover to either investigate crimes which have occurred, or – more importantly – to prevent larger crimes from occurring. There have been numerous examples in recent years of terrorist plots foiled by undercover work. Necessarily, those going undercover must live a completely different life, and live it convincingly enough to keep their physical lives intact. Can a Christian work in such a job while maintaining a life of holiness? Can our society maintain law and order – and prevent mass murder and/or chaos – without such jobs?

Journalism: Oft-times in the private and/or public sector, there are crimes or serious injustices occurring which would never see the light of day without some degree of undercover journalism or undercover private detective work. Once again, individuals have to pretend to be someone they are not in a convincing manner. Without this function, as well, our society would be in danger.

War-time: During times of war, sometimes the best intelligence is obtained through HUMINT (human intelligence), a nice word for spying – which, too, requires deception, sometimes to a great degree. Additionally, families may be faced with moral decisions, such as Christian families in Germany who hid Jews from pogroms and concentrations camps. In doing so, they were certainly forced to lie in the service of greater good.

The Stage: Theater, TV, and movie professions all require a level of ‘deception’ (though most people are in on the deception from the get-go). The very word ‘hypocrite’ is derived from a description of an actor on a stage who says one thing, but in real life is something different. Is this ‘deception’, no matter how mild, still deception?

What is the line between sin and service?

If we look at Jesus’ day, there were entire classes of people who professionally were ’sinners’ – in fact, that is what they were called, “sinners”. These were Jews who were, in one way or another, in the employ of Rome, many of whom collected taxes – which meant they would touch money with graven images on it. These “sinners” were considered unclean and, therefore, could not enter the temple grounds. They were still considered to be part of God’s chosen people, the Jews, but they were still disenfranchised. Yet, we know that Jesus singled them out and ate with them, amid protests from the religious authorities of the day.

So, as we look at the complex times of today – which we have made so – and the question still arises, must we have a professional class of “sinners”, or is there another way to view professions of deception?

One of our recent posts was thread-jacked with a completely undrelated discussion on homosexuality and homosexual practice and Mars Hill/Rob Bell’s treatment of the issue. 

I debated whether or not to reward the threadjacking with its own post, since it seemed to come at a time that the previous and unrelated discussion had reached a point where the threadjacker had run out of logic.  However, Julie has kindly suggested a couple of times that the issues being discussed merited their own post, so here is it for you, Jules (can I call you Jules, or does that conjure up something unforgivable?)

Just to note, we’ve discussed this a couple of times previously, so please check these articles/threads for a more thorough discussion up to this point.

Back in February, Bell was asked a question about homosexuality (not homosexual practice), which he said he would not delve into in a public forum.  When pressed, he answered that Jesus never addressed homosexuality. (NOTE: For those of you who do not often work with people struggling with homosexual temptations, ‘homosexuality’ is the term for this set of attractions/temptations, while ‘homosexual practice’ is actively engaging in homosexual sex).  While his answer was rather inelegant and against his normal M.O. of tackling tough questions, his church’s orthopraxy and one-on-one response to this particular issue is both orthodox and loving – something hard to balance in this area which is fumbled by most churches today in one direction or the other.  Bell also made the comment that you should not be speaking publicly on homosexuality if you have not been involved with helping a friend/family member through it.

Let’s be clear, first, as this is an easy mistake to make (I did in the first article back in January).  The Bible does not show that homosexuality is a sin. The Bible shows that committing homosexual acts is a sin. We in the church do a pretty good job separating temptation to sin from acting upon that temptation – except for the glaring inconsistency with homosexuality and homosexual practice.

The threadjacker was rather insistent that we must not treat homosexual sin differently than other sins, and I would suggest that we are forced to because we already treat the sinner differently.  We don’t call someone who is tempted to steal a thief. We don’t call a man who is tempted to have oral sex with a woman but does not, a fornicator or an adulterer. However, we do call someone who is tempted with an attraction to the same sex a homosexual, whether or not they ever fall to that temptation.

So, our threadjacker then created a straw man with which to argue:

So, following Bell’s example, we could say,

“You can’t say anything about oral sex before marriage unless you actually know someone who is practicing it, and understand their struggles.”

“Jesus didn’t say anything about oral sex.”

Going back to the point above, homosexuality, itself, is not a sin – it is a temptation.  Oral sex, on the other hand, would be.  Thus, her logic does not wash.

How do I know that Bell understands this distinction?  I look at the practice in his church, as explained by one of his co-pastors, and at the reasons why Mars Hill does not talk about homosexuality from the pulpit – and why some other prominent churches do not – but choose to address it one-on-one.

Mars Hill does not have a “stance” about homosexuality.  However, if someone wishes to become a member and to follow Christ, they are encouraged to become part of a group that specializes in helping people leave sexual addictions, and they are brought to understand that an active homosexual lifestyle is not compatible with following Christ.  Why?  A friend explained it to me this way:

When people ask you about your ’stance’ on homosexuality in a public setting, they’re typically in one of two camps:

1) They are Christians looking to see if you are ‘orthodox’, looking to get a public affirmation, which then can be used as a club of sorts. They already know what the scripture says on the topic, and that practicing homosexuality is a sin – the same as lying, stealing, adultery, speeding and cheating on your taxes. However, many of them hold homosexuality as something higher, more insidious, than these other sins.

2) They are active homosexuals, friends of active homosexuals, or someone struggling with homosexual temptations. Often, these people are either searching for help, or looking for initial reasons to reject Christianity.

My friend says that his response to both of these – in public fora – are the same. He won’t answer. In the first case, he won’t feed the beast. In the second case, he won’t give a person a cause to reject Christ before they have heard the message. However, if they wish to follow Christ, his church has a program, similar to Rob Bell’s and Bob Hyatt’s, which will help individuals struggling with sexual sin (homo-, hereto- and bi-) to leave these sins behind when they accept Christ.

So, Bell was being consistent with this particular philosophy which is both orthodox AND loving.  Meanwhile, we’ve got the beast begging to be fed, so please, by all means, discuss away…

Recently, there was an incident at my church in which signs in each bathroom stall mysteriously appeared which said, “please flush when you are finished, we don’t want to see your deposits”. I immediately tore down each and every one of them before Sunday rolled around. While the intentions of the sign maker were good, the execution was not. Every time a church puts up a sign it is communicating, not just the intended message, but also something about the church. In this case what was being communicated is 1. This church has problems with basic hygiene, and 2. This church expects to be able to tell you what you do in your more private moments. (As an aside, these posters appeared just after VBS, so I suspect the non-flushers were under 4 feet tall).

These posters, produced by Phil Johnson, over at Team Pyro have been described as funny, and clever. The problem is, they’ve also communicated something about the author. They’ve communicated that the author is nasty, and is willing to misrepresent the views of those they don’t agree with (or is just ignorant of their views, or, less charitably, is too stupid to understand those views).

And ultimately that’s the problem. Phil Johnson’s posters communicate to us that he’s clever, and funny. The problem is God doesn’t call for us to be clever and funny. But He does call for us to be free from slander, and to be gentle, and merciful, something completely and totally lacking in these posters.

Editor’s note: In the name of honesty this is a toned down version of the original which appeared for a few minutes. It was edited after deciding the original was communicating more harshly than I intended. Apologies to any offended parties.

This morning, a story I’ve read a number of times came to mind:

On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

“What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

He answered: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”

“You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”

As I thought over this particular story, I remembered what my Jewish Christian friends stress, as well – that “inherit eternal life” is not only a future state, but a state that begins now, in this world, and continues on past death.  As such, there are portions of ‘eternal life’ which apply to this worlds which are then perfected in the next, as part of the kingdom of God.

In this story (and others), we see Jesus affirming the two overriding themes, the greatest commandments, from which all other Torah comes.

Unfortunately, many Christians – of all stripes, be it Reformed, Catholic, Emerging, Evangelical, Emergent, etc. – read these two commands and then supply their own definition of ‘love’ to them.

The new definitions:

Love your God: Determine what it means for you to obey God, based heavily on tradition or your own social mores and – possibly – the Bible (insofar as the Ten Commandments are concerned), and then expect everyone else to “obey God” based on your definition.  If they don’t, they are somewhere between mistaken and apostate.  Additionally, to love God means to know exactly how He works and does not work and to know all the ‘Christianese’ terms which define these workings, along with all the right soteriology, and to then expect everyone else to understand God exactly the way you do.  If they don’t, they are somewhere between mistaken and apostate.

Love your Neighbor: Step 1: If your ‘neighbor’ is somewhere between mistaken and apostate (see “Love your God”), your first and foremost duty is to make them see the error of their ways, and if they do not, to warn everybody else that they are somewhere between mistaken and apostate, and by all means mock them and distort anything/everything that makes them mistaken or apostate in your eyes.  Step 2: If they are still around after Step 1, and if they are in need, it might be a nice thing to do to help them out.

In line with these modern definitions of “love”, we now have an artist who has decided to Photoshop “motivational posters” dealing with emerging Christians.  Unfortunately, whether humorous or not, these posters serve to do nothing but create strawmen out of serious issues for discussion and openly ridicule and mock other Christians, and give a perfect example of one wasting talents given by God for an ungodly purpose. 

(Personally, I think that despair.com, one of my favorite sites for gifts, has a much better sense of art, flair and humor containing a bit more truth, as well.  It appears that the ODM Photoshopper’s “creativity” was also pulled from depair.com.  Compare this to the original.  Also, lest any ‘emerging’ folks’ heads get too big on the part of mockery, let’s not forget the Christian vs. Christ-follower videos…)

I’ve already had someone ask me if I’d thought of doing something similar for the Totally Reformed (TR) crowd, and – to be completely honest – the thought did cross my mind.  Not only that, but I could almost hear some emerging/emergent folks rushing to their keyboards to head to BigHugeLabs or Photoshop to do something similar.

This post is a plea for them – and anyone else considering it – to STOP and step away from the keyboard and remember Jesus’ teaching.

You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

So, in short, let’s not return crassness for those who have already decided to be crass and unloving and un-Christlike and, instead, avoid doing these same sorts of things.  ‘

Instead, let’s find a creative way to accept and affirm that Christ exists in both Reformed and Emerging (and Evangelical) traditions, and that each has enough logs in its own eye to address before mocking those in the other’s.  Instead, let’s find a way to love, even if love is not returned. 

Instead, let’s find a way to say ‘Grace to you’ and actually mean it.

This post has to be the dumbest, most illogical thing I’ve ever read. I mean, maybe the author is on some hallucinogenic? I don’t know, how in the world does that church now represent the emergent movement. Men and women how long will we tolerate this kind of “discernment” and “research?”

This would be like blaming all the fundamentalist for Jim Jones. That wouldn’t make sense and frankly neither does this waste of space called a post.

The Church Report recently gave its annual list of the the top 50 Most Influential Churches in America.  The top two were Willow Creek, followed by Saddleback.  Among the top 15 were North Point (Andy Stanley), Fellowship Church (Ed Young), Mars Hill (Mark Driscoll), The Potter’s house (T.D. Jakes), Mosaic (Erwin McManus) and Mars Hill (Rob Bell).  Of course the list was packed with those the watch doggie blogs absolutely love to hate.

Slice of Laodicea recently received a press release from Willow Creek, letting others know about the good news.  It was also fascinating that 29 of the 50 churches are Willow Creek Association members.  “The WCA is a growing multi-denominational worldwide network of more than 12,000 churches from 90 denominations and 35 countries that equips churches and church leaders with strategic vision, training, and resources.”  It really is pretty impressive, all the work they have done.  But here are a few thoughts one the subject presented by Slice commentors

Well, if they’d included the Catholics, Mormons, and rabbis, Saddleback would’ve won hands-down.

But how many synagogues can Willow Creek boast about? I mean we know for a fact that Rick Warren suggested to unbelieving Jews on how to grow their congregations.

“Churches should be small,” he said (I’m paraphrasing.) “Once they get too big, they can’t look after everyone.”  Preach justification by faith alone and all the other doctrines that depend on that. Keep that up and your church will prosper.

Apparently number counting and notches on the belt exceeds spiritual maturity, any of the fruits of the Spirit, and “pillar and ground of the truth” as vital areas of church life. How sad that they’d rather puff themselves up over their influence than give God glory and follow his command to flee the world. I wish they’d stop counting goats and leave the numbers to God, who “gives the increase”.

Meanwhile, a group of young Christians from S. Korea are being held captive by the Taliban in Afghanistan. The threats of death are with them daily. This kind of garbage from Willow Creek is sickening!

I’m sure that God is terribly impressed. Do you think He is on their e-mail list, or did He have to get this second hand?  Sometimes you wish you could tell these clowns to crawl back into their hole and play with whatever makes them happy.

I wonder what would happen if Grace Community Church was on the list and John MacArthur put out this press release.  Would their numerical growth be “sickening”?  It’s sad that so many people cannot rejoice in what is happening all over the world.  And who ever said that numbers are not a good thing?  I know we should not judge a church solely on numbers, but it does say a lot.  If a church is growing numerically, it means that new people are coming (which normally means they are coming to Christ).  And it doesn’t mean you have to have thousands coming, but steady church growth is usually a sign of health.

I fear for churches that have no numerical growth, but say something like “well, we may not be growing with people, but our members are all well versed and growing in the word.”  If there isn’t growth, then new people are not coming.  And if new people aren’t coming, then the chances that people are finding Christ in that community are slim to none.

From here:

For my regular readers let me explain. I began posting as the Rev Scottie over at the Slice of Laodicea website. It all began pretty quietly. I disagreed that all modern type Pastors were clones of each other. I posted my opinion that most Baptist churches and pastors in the South are as much clones as anything. As is customary on that blog things went on a rapid downward spiral of personal attacks. I made the mistake of trying to post an honest commentary as well as asking the moderator to tone down the personal attacks. The Rev Scottie posting days were then ended! I wasn’t even allowed to defend myself against some pretty stupid accusations.

In order to prove the bias and agenda of these folks I created the Dr Louis extreme fundamentalist profile. My goal was to see how much out of context scripture, poor spelling, and personal attacks would be allowed. The answer I found is anything goes as long as you attack someone they disagree with. I searched Google and popped in scripture references that would appear to support my position but were used way out of context. I was able to attack my friends Dave Anderson (movie pastor) and Gary Lamb without any rebuke or restraint. I finally created a Dr Louis Blog and linked it here in hopes that some Laodicea readers and posters would consider how wrong it is for brothers and sisters in Christ (By the way that includes dudes and chicks as well) to run each other down in a public forum.

Hattip: MMI

Knowing that Chris L doesn’t like my fighten’ fundie label, I’ve coined a new phrase called ODM, which stands for Online Discernment Ministries. You can read the value of ODM’s in my own life here. Men and women let me tell you this has been a busy day for these purveyors of news they call discernment. One site deleted a post that at best was in poor taste and at its worst was a blatant twisting of the facts to suit one’s own purposes. Having being called out by many in the usual “Amen” corner, a comment was posted stating that the author had been attacked there in the comment section even though no attacks were apparent to this reader. Now, mysteriously and without explanation, the post is missing. Who knows why? It does bring up credibility issues though with the site. We all make mistakes, I make many, but if we can just pull a post down where is the accountability so many ODM’s are screaming about for Godly men like Bill Hybles, Dan Kimball, Rick Warren, or Erwin McManus. It kind of reminds me of my 4 year old daughter who one time said something she should not have said. When I asked her about it, she looked at me and said, “I’m just joking.” If you would like more information about the now missing article you can read about it here.

Speaking of jokes and credibility, I assume the author of this ODM post was kidding when he put this missive up.

I’m going to ignore the petty renaming of Willow Creek’s efforts to help people effectively share the gospel with their neighbor. We’ll just let his issues with that event speak on their own.

He is trying to make a comparison between our own Nathan Neighbor and the Apostle Paul. The author is attempting to make a false anti-thesis between the two in an effort I suppose to be mean and attack. The thing is, the two statements (The Apostle Paul’s and Nathan’s) seem to be in agreement with each other. After careful examination of the ODM in question one can only conclude that the author was calling for all to wake up and realize that Nathan is doing what God has called him to do and like the Apostle Paul there are those who oppose him for reasons only they and God can truly know.

If this author was truly attacking Nathan, which we may assume he was based on his statement

self-professed “leader”

what does that say about the author? What does his actions tell us about his heart? I know we believe that our enemy is not flesh and blood but I believe that there are people who are being used by our enemy to work against the bride of Christ.

Mr. Silva, who is listed as the author of the post, quoted the Apostle Paul who wrote two letters to a young man named Timothy. In those letters he says,

But mark this: 1There will be terrible times in the last days. 2People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.

6They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth. 8Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these men oppose the truth—men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. 9But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone.

10You, however, know all about my teaching, my way of life, my purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance, 11persecutions, sufferings—what kinds of things happened to me in Antioch, Iconium and Lystra, the persecutions I endured. Yet the Lord rescued me from all of them. 12In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13while evil men and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.

Simply put, both of these examples show what is one of the greatest dangers in the ODM movement. Men and women, how long will we offer our minds to senseless acts of meanness? I’ve been telling you for years you need to stand up and stand against these senseless, illogical attacks on the body of Christ, which only bring glory to the enemy. However, if you have the courage to take that stand I implore you to understand what the Apostle Paul said,

2In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted,

You will be persecuted. Many times by people who claim to be on the same team.

So tonight Nathan, we who have come to know you, salute you. Ignore, this silly attempt at persecution and soldier on for the cause of the cross.

I am sorry, but I am really tired of articles like this.  First, as an emerging leader, I am accused all over the internet of being shallow, doctrinally weak and too focused on insignificant elements in church.  However, there has been an increasing trend among watchdoggie blogs to write articles on nothing but someone’s appearance.

Keith from Watwasithinkin? had this to say about Dan Kimball

One of the people below is Dan Kimball, who is from what I’ve been able to put together, an author of several books related to the emerging church (and no I haven’t read any of them)… I had never heard of Dan Kimball before now.

I didn’t watch all of the video. I couldn’t. I could not get past the hairdo!!! …How in the world does an ADULT walk out of the house looking like this and think: “Man, my ‘do’ is looking goooooood today!”…To the people that will see this and be offended, may I offer the following: If you REALLY want to be taken just a little bit serious…DO NOT WALK OUT OUT OF YOUR HOUSE LOOKING LIKE THIS!

Here’s a guy who doesn’t even know Dan, but feels it necessary to critique his HAIR!?!  I have come to believe (in the hundreds of conversations I have had with people visiting Mosaic) that the main beef with watchdoggie blogs is style, not substance.  Most articles have to do with music, traditions, “the way things used to be” and how the good ‘ol days need to come back.  My grandfather, Ralph W Neighbour Jr., wrote a book in 1979 before The Survival Kit called The Seven Last Words of the Church.  You know what he said that the last words of the church there were going to be over 25 years ago? “We’ve never done it that way before.”  Man was he right.  I just hoped it would all have a little more depth to it than hair-dos and clothing. 

And so the story goes: Rob Bell is being shown around heaven by Peter. Pointing to a large group of people, Peter says: “That’s the Baptists. Over there are the Catholics. Next to them are the Pentecostals. And around the corner, you’ll find the Non-denominationalists.”

Rob scratches his head and asks, “But who is that tiny little group tucked away in the corner over there?”

Peter replies: “Shhhh! That’s Pope Benedict, Ingrid and Ken. . .they think they’re the only ones up here.”