That is what happens when you are in the world AND of the world. Whatever happened to turn the other cheek? Whatever happened to not returning evil for evil? Whatever happened to suffer yourselves to be defrauded? Whatever happened to forbearance?

Do not the publicans respond the same way? What separates us when we demand our money be respected just as the world does? Perhaps the rude person was gonig through a painful divorce and it was affecting her. It does not matter, we are supposed to endure trials not attack people back. Overcoming evil with good holds true for us especially in circumstances where we are tested.

This type of attitude comes from a lack of walking in the humility that was the Lord Jesus. And Ingrid would be the first to criticize people who demand their rights in other areas. I’ll bet the grocery store where she shops sees her coming. A sweet, kind, charitable follower of Jesus who always has an uplifting word for those who might need one.

You see, when money is involved your speech doesn’t have to be full of grace. And when He was brought to the slaughter He uttered not a word until they lifted Him upon that cruel cross, at which time He said “Forgive them for they know not what they do”. I do not know which Jesus some people are following.

If that is Christianity I am a Muslim.

Samo,

Actually, the theme of this blog is primarily the defense of Christian brothers and sisters unfairly and unlovingly attacked from within the church. That these attack dogs would include Ingrid, and particularly Ken, should not be surprising, since at least one of them was identified in Christianity Today last week…

But it is much bigger than that, as well, in that we are seeking how to be salt and light in the context implied by Jesus, which requires being in the world, but not of the systems of the world. In the past week, I have written 3 or 4 articles, and I’m not sure I’ve mentioned Ken or Ingrid’s name in any of them, though they were included in the quotes given in a couple of them. It is not the individuals that are important, but the ideas and actions…

I love it. Do you feel sorry for Rick Warren or Rob Bell etc., etc., and etc. when Ingrid not only attacks them for months, but for years. And since you brought it up, Ingrid’s husband should be the one rebuking ordained men, not Ingrid. I take extreme exception to her position and tone.

“If she is wrong and you view her as this obnoxious, shouldn’t she also be the recipient of some of your sweetness and light, just as those obnoxious store clerks are? ”

No, she should be reproved as the Word instructs. The lady in the store may have been lost and even if her attitude was wrong, I do not think she makes a living at attacking others. This is just from me personally, I surely believe your die has been cast.

A pastor friend of mine went for breakfast at a restaurant 25 years ago. The waitress was horrible and rude, she threw the plates on the table, and was short in her responses. The bill came to approximately $8:00.

The pastor left a 5 dollar bill as a tip, and the waitress came over to him as he waited in line to pay his bill. She had supposed he left the money by accident. The pastor said it was a tip and the waitress admitted her bad attitude and service and was confused about such a tip.

The pastor told her he thought she must be hurt and her attitude was a response to something in her life. Long story short, she asked to speak to him later and she became a believer.

Gee, what a difference a response makes.

I cannot believe how different people who follow the same Savior see things. Do you know why we never report a waitress to the management? Because we always feel she may be a single mother with several children at home and has major financial problems. I could never live with myself to think I got her fired.

I guess I’m a soft hearted liberal.

As Christians we do not have the luxury of a secular view, ours must always be “What would Jesus do” no matter how trite that saying has become. We don’t always meet that standard, but that is the standard.

I see Jesus making a difference, surely not playing within the system.

Chris L touched on this, but I can’t let it go. Ingrid (or Sammo) closed down the comments on the other thread so I’ll say it here. You know what I hate in our service industry? Not the servers who say “you guys” like or not that is a cultural thing. I’ve worked for almost 14 years in food service as a server. Low end to High end. Every single place the one customer group hated the most? Wait for it…the church crowd.
They come in, run you like a dog, tip 8% like it’s still 1956 back in the good old days when we kept the black man in line and sang hymns. We didn’t have “loose dress” and “loose morals” b/c of that reprobate Hugh Heffner yet. We just had good ole fashion bigots, who beat their kids at home.
As a Christian who is trying to share the gospel with my co-workers the absolute biggest detriment was the Christians who come in and leave a fake $20 bill that doubles as a tract for a tip. I also love the one’s who come in with their 46inch thick Study Bible and sit at a table for hours, then leave a $5 tip. Most restaurants limit the # of tables you have in a section so if person is sitting at one for hours you can’t “turn it” and make more money off of it.
Every customer service person has a bad day. Every server has a bad day and I imagine every Christian has a bad day, but I can’ tell you how many times Ive (and others like me) have been left to pick up the pieces b/c some Christian has come in with their undies in a bunch and tipped poorly.
One last example, the last restaurant where I worked was a magnet for upper income Christians. Every Saturday night these two “Christian” families would come in about 30 minutes before closing time. They would only order “tappa’s” which were bar item foods. Then they would sit for 2 to 2.5 hours. The whole time they would loudly complain about their Pastor, and other backslidden Christians. Their bill was almost always around $50. In a high end restaurant –which this was—that should have worked out to about an $8 tip. Probably a lot closer to 10 because the server had to sit and wait for them to finish long after the rest of the restaurant was shut down and then do clean up work. These people always left $6 because they “only ate the bar food.”
Then one Saturday they actually had the balls to tell a single mom that she should come to church and find what she was looking for in the eyes of “those men.”
And people wonder why people think that Christians are jerks. That is just one of a hundred stories I could tell.
RRR, this one just irks me.

Amy,
Samo would do well to start giving us his or her real name. There was a lot of people that said, eggs were bad for us in the 80’s, they were wrong.
There was a lot of people that said, Hitler was right–they were wrong.
There was a lot of people that said, Enron was a great company to work for, they were wrong.
I wonder how many people have said that they think you have an axe to grind and don’t really care to learn, can they all be wrong?

LOL, Chris P, I realize you and Chris Lyons are friends now that you’ve both met and all, but come on! Did you just compare some service girl to the temple merchants? Does Mrs. Pilgrim shop at the Temple? Is she a practicing jew now? I missed that part of the story

I wonder how many people said Jesus was a fraud? Were they all wrong?

Rick,
I have never reported anyone to a manager, that I recall. I think I would recall it, because it would be a difficult thing to do. I usually try to be kind to rude people. But I do think that sometimes the best way to help people is to see that they are held responsible for their actions.

There’s another side to feeling sorry for “the single widow with several children at home.” If a clerk is really rude to a customer that she doesn’t know, chances are that what is going on at home with the kids is very harmful to them. Such a person needs help, and sometimes help (not just firing) can actually come from a manager or another worker who is in the store and is aware of the situation.

I regularly hear some mothers talking to their children in public as if they were dogs . It’s all I can do sometimes not to say either, “Please, can I help you, this is a “gift from God” you’re screaming at.” Or, “How dare you talk to this child like that! Stop it!” Both responses – even though one seems loving and one seems hateful – come from the same heart that is grieved over the mistreatment of children.

Amy,
Sit down and then continue reading. I agree with your comments to Rick about the mother yelling at their kids and the way they talk to them. So many times I’ve wanted to say something. I haven’t but I’ve wanted to. I have prayed for them numerous times.

Rick,
Bitterness harbored will blind and hurt you.

Samo may be partly “in the flesh” when he’s writing his comments. I don’t know, I’m not God.

What I think is that he’s speaking truth in his 6:58 comment.

When he observes that I am a hypocrite of the highest order I hope it wasn’t in the Spirit.

Joe,
Do you think this particular phenomenon (of mother’s yelling at their kids, saying all kinds of nasty things to them in public) is more of a problem in the South?

Once passing through Kentucky I was astounded at a couple of incidents in a fast food restaurant. One woman was enraged at her child who was about two, for turning around in his seat at a fast-food restaurant looking at us, a normal two-year old thing to do. Another one was talking loudly about “beating the (something) out of her kids” and just carrying on as if she were at home and noone could hear her. I hate to think what kind of problems those kids will have as they grows up.

The opposite of this problem are mothers who let their kids do whatever they want to them in public. I’ve seen a kid beating on his mom with a stick, kids yelling at their moms, slapping their moms, etc. Not just in the south, but overseas.

Regarding tipping and Christians, most Christians I know well are not very well-off. Yet they see tipping and treating the waitresses/waiters nice as something that’s quite important.

Joe,
If you really believe that “we should shut this attack site down” then why do you comment here?

For your own sakes you should shut this site down. Sorry if that sounds like a threat.

Why do I comment here? Because I believe it’s what God wants me to do . . .

Are you implying that if I stop commenting you’ll shut the site down? Promise?

Amy,

I will shut this site down when there is no longer a need to protect my brothers and sisters in Christs from false and evil attacks within the church….

LOL, Amy, I don’t run this site so no I’m not making that promise. Perhaps, we post here because we believe that is what God wants us to do?
Chris L,
We have a writer from Saddleback? Who?

In light of Amy’s comments, I hereby elevate Christ into the highest order.

As a side note – we just left my youngest son at Bible college today, please pray that God will speak to him in the coming years. My oldest son attends also although off campus.

Jonathan and David (get the connection?)

Amy,
I missed your 7:39 post. I don’t know about the South vs. the North thing. I think it might be everywhere. As for tipping and treating people nice. I’m not sure I understand. If you are saying that they can’t tip b/c they are poor but they treat the server nice I gotta tell you that doesn’t help my kids eat. If you saying they tip in spite of being poor more power to them. One of the things i was taught as a kid was if you can’t afford to leave a nice tip you can’t afford to eat there

My wife and I have had numerous teenagers off the street living short-term with us. During one of these seasons, we ran into some of the elders from our church at a local restaurant, right after church on Sunday.

We accepted their friendly offer to dine at their table with the elders, and our waitress arrived shortly afterwards. We discovered — because my wife & I struck up a conversation with her when she first came to our table — that this was her first part-time job, and this was her second shift.

One of the elders, despite being aware of her newbie status, was absolutely merciless in the demanding, complaining, and insulting way that he treated her. As the meal went on, there were several times where everyone could see the tears in her eyes at the verbal shaming that our elder heaped on her.

In the car, on our way home, we were very quiet, embarrassed by the attitude and actions of the elder. Not surprisingly, the street kid in our rear seat finally piped up with a single question:

“How does an ice-hose (roughly translated) like that get to be an elder in a church?”

Joe,

John D is from Saddleback.

Woe to the man who thinks more highly of himself than he ought. He thinks he is something when he is nothing. When the Amish people had ten of their precious daughters murdered by outsiders, they presented a forgiving attitude that was an example for us all, even to attending the funeral of the murderer.

So while they can endure such a tragedy with grace, would it not seem reasonable that we should provide an attitude which substantiates the title “peculiar people”? In order for us to uncover our light we will have to suffer offense in our daily lives in a way that sets us apart. We must reject the trappings of the common and strive to reflect the uncommon life of the Lord. We cannot think in terms of commerce, but in the Spirit of redemption and grace.

To be fair, the response we have been discussing here is oh so common in Christian circles. The church has been lured into listening to and emulating the tone on conservative radio programs which relentlessly criticize, attack, and generally demean other people in the name of conservative politics. This is not the spirit of Christ.

We have been taught to fight forcefully for our issues and rights and that spirit has found a place in our daily interactions. Of course we can go to the return goods counter, but the principal here is should we ever repond negatively to rudeness and unkindness? Yes, we should respond, but the Scriptures give us a clear guideline concerning our responses. They must emenate from Jesus via the Holy Spirit and not in like kind to others. We must never be reactionary but redemptive.

Salt and light are metaphors that are used to teach us that this world will be dark but we must be bright. In a truer sense, when we are slighted that gives us the greater opportunity to allow the Christ to minister through us His life and not our reaction. This is even more true when the western idol is involved, money.

Should we, like the world, use our money as a leverage? Do not the tax collectors and publicans do the same? Shouldn’t God’s love be our leverage? Did not the Pharisees attempt to use money to leverage our Lord? We are instructed to live a peaceable and quiet life in this present world so as not to distract from our calling which is to preach as well as live the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

This threads has sometimes gotten off track, which again reflects our ignorance to the Spirit filled life, but it is an important topic. If we can remove the original source and speak in the broader sense it becomes painfully clear that we sometimes, sometimes often, live and react within the culture just like the unregenerate act and react. Is it any wonder we do not stand out in our generation?

And the easiest way to draw attention to Christ is to draw attention to yourself by being so different, so peculiar, so gracious and loving in the midst of attack and offense that men will ask you about the hope that lies within you. This life we live is not our own, it is His. If we are to ever break the darkness that enslaves this world we will have to be light years different than the crowd.

And not just the “don’ts” that we sometimes concentrate on, but the fruits of the Spirit. The same person that rejects the movies (me) and is mean and prideful has done no service to the cause of Christ. The world cannot understand external issues of separation, but they can understand love, joy, patience, and other cooresponding acts of compassion and grace which can be used as conduits to attract their fallen hearts to the glorious Person who was Grace Incarnate.

Our pride, our rights, our views, our positions, our wealth, and everything else must be nailed to His cross and left there. The only thing you should take from the cross is Him, and if that be true He will as He promised “draw all men unto Me”. Let us strive to please Him in all things with a sweet smelling savour that is unmistakably Him and Him alone.

Daunting, yes, but a journey of a lifetime!

People should really listen to Greg Boyd’s The New Way of The New Israel

In it he talks about when Jesus sends the 12 out — and that the method is to show people the kingdom of God through our words, actions, etc. and then tell them.

It would seem – bringing this back to the posting – the first person showed the kingdom of God and then told them and second (Mrs. Pilgrim) demanded recognition and an adherence to a set of expectations that had not been communicated.

As for the need of this site – Amy – while I struggle NOT to spend a large majority of my time at SoL (2.0), AM, and C?N (as it proves too much of a distraction to my walk). This is a place to actually, truly debate and discuss. None of us are perfect – and to expect perfection is a meeting with disappointment – every single time.

It would appear that some of the ODMs want to present themselves as having it all figured out — as perfect (I don’t know an author on this site that has not asked for forgiveness when something they have written has crossed the line) – can the same be said of the ODMs this site monitors?

I’ve yet to see Ingrid, Ken, et al say they were wrong.

1. Who is Samo, really? It’s funny how Samo always appears on posts directly about Ingrid.

2. Mrs. Pilgrim may not have been wrong to get the manager, but the way she did it was just as snotty and power-grabbing as the employee. Customers like that also help contribute to employees who despise customers. I work/worked retail. I know.

3. And three:

“The self-righteousness on this blog continues to amaze me.”

It would be interesting to count how many commenters have said something like this.

Can they all be wrong?

Yes. They could be. It depends on who they are, why they come here, and what their agenda is. If it were a scientific sampling of people, I’d tend to pay more attention.

4. There is no excuse to treat people poorly. Ever. The worse they are to you, the better you return. Heaps of coals. The Jesus creed. Love others. Even if you feel it’s “their job” and “their duty” and “I’ve shopped here for years and deserve respect.” A clerk need’s the manager to get her set straight? Do it with love, calmly. Mrs. Pilgrim and Ingrid were not exhibiting one iota of love in their comments. None.

People don’t call you Mr./Mrs., don’t give you the service and respect you believe you deserve, treat you shamefully? Where’s that in the Bible? The part about earthly respect that you so deserve from either the unsaved or the saved. Seriously. Where is that — I’d like to know. It’d make my life easier.

Usually these watchdog sites trot out the “you shall be hated because of Me” scriptures in the Bible if anyone says anything against them, so I’d say Mrs. Pilgrim got a little taste of that. She ought to glory in it.

You know what I do when I want respect?

I punch the person right in the face.

It works every time. Plus it’s what God called me to do. It’s one of my spiritual gifts. Well, that and discernment.

Love, Joy, Peace…Boxing.

Julie,

You asked:

Who is Samo, really? It’s funny how Samo always appears on posts directly about Ingrid.

It is interesting that you should ask that question, as “samo” is also posting from the same PC as “Pax On You”, “Valhalla”, and “Tito”. Per your observation, all of these “people” (who, electronically appear to be one in the same) have only commented on articles/comment threads specifically related to Ingrid.

Now, interestingly, if you do a slight bit of research, you will find out that Ingrid has a 19-year-old son named Samuel Guzman.

The IP address of “samo” is 67.53.15.89, if I run a whois on it, I will find out that it is a roadrunner account, and then if I go a little bit more deeply, I will find out that it originates from Wisconsin.

Coincidentally, Ingrid is from Wisconsin and has an IP address in the same general area via the same provider.

Now, the evidence is not, by any means, conclusive, but I would suggest that the most likely answer to your question Who is Samo, really? is that he is Sam Guzman, and that (completely understandably) he is sticking up for his mother…

Wow, Chris, you are a sleuth. I can’t even post a smile face and you have tracked down somebody in Wisconson. Can’t you find Bin Laden? If Ingrid or someone she knows comments with an alias that is pitiful.

The Samo Wrestler.

Joe asked,
“Do you really believe you have no agenda?”

I write comments on a variety of issues here. If you want to look at all of them and say that I have an agenda, go ahead.

What does it mean to say that someone “has an agenda?” It can mean that they have a viewpoint or viewpoints that is/are important to them that you don’t like. Anyone could go through anyone elses comments here or look at the nature of the articles here and say that someone “has an agenda.”

I notice that you never ever mention the missionary stuff, the good sermons, the hymns and encouragement that Slice posts either.

Haha… I am still waiting for Ingrid’s first post about a positive sermon from Bill Hybels or Rob Bell.

Or for he to acknowledge the 95% of a blog that she ignores in order to attack the 5% of the blog that may talk about going to see Styx.

Further… I love that people think that this “attack site” should get shut down but have no problem with Slice and others. I do not want Slice to get shut down. But they do deserve almost every criticism they get.

If you are going to attack, expect to be attacked.

Julie,
I guess by saying that Sam spoke truth I get to claim all of his lines? Joe attributed the “this attack site should be shut down” to me after I said that Sam spoke truth.

In context, Sam said, “If you were serious about what love was and what respect was you would shut this attack site down and stop gossiping about other Christians.”

What Sam is getting at is the hypocrisy in what is going on here. For example if Slice pulled out a comment from this site such as the one by Mrs. Pilgrim, an article would be written here with a title like “Diggin’ Deep.” I could go on . . .

Love is talked about but there are nasty underhanded comments. I could go on . . .

Chris – if indeed samo is Ingrid’s son I am grieved. In the same way I always think that MacLaren or Bell or Warren’s children may wander onto SOL or CRN and see their father viciously attacked, I hope that Ingrid would advise her children to avoid blogs that reprove her.

Although the vitriolic posts must be confronted, and the unloving attacks must be reproved, I will personally read my comments with a sharper eye toward personal invectives rather than an impartial dealing with interaction within the body of Christ. If any of my children had read that I was a hypocrite of the highest order they would surely be hurt and probably mad. The Frueh’s have a sense of humor which deflects taking offense, but it is still not in the Spirit of Christ to reprimand someone’s mother or father in fron of their children.

I would hope Ingrid would not only prevent that, she would take into consideration the children of many whom she verbally demeans. Take notice of the thread dealing with going to a concert etc., isn’t that how a dialogue in which people have substantive disagreements should be conducted?

If what you say is true, Amy, do you condone a 19 yr. old calling an ordained preacher a “hypocrite of the highest order”? I thought Ingrid’s post was about respect, was it not? Wow, the journey continues to get stranger every day.

Amy,

You wrote:
It’s much more than “grace versus legalism” for which you are responsible. There is truth versus error.

I agree, and I believe that all writers here have spoken the truth in Christ, to the best of their ability, and that, when error has been identified (whether from within or without), we’ve not been ashamed to admit it.

I have had a number of pastors who have asked my “Chris, I have become familiar with this thing called ‘the emerging church’. What can you tell me about it, and what can you recommend as a response?” I have typically recommended books by Kimball and Driscoll and Bell. I have talked about the spectrum between conservative and liberal thought in the movement. I have warned about loose orthodoxy (using some of Burke’s writing as an example), and praised the churches which emphasize relevance and missionality without sacrificing the message of Christ. I have talked about folks like Kimball and Bell who do a great job of separating tradition from scripture, without slipping out of orthodoxy. I talk about theological drift (as with the church of Ephesus in Rev. 2) within all movements of the church, and the need to keep some pressure pushing towards balance.

I take this very seriously, and I would strenuously disagree that we have supported anything unorthodox or heretical on this site. You have not seen us supporting Word-Faith or Health-and-Wealth-Gospel beliefs. You have not seen us supporting overt fundamental legalism. These movements have drifted theologically over time and still hurt the church far more than anything I’ve seen from the ECM holistically.

I agree, Chris. But if you wrote a post demanding you be referred to with respect, and then Phoenix called a preacher a hypocrite of the highest order, would you not see a major disconnect?

Rick said,
“If what you say is true, Amy, do you condone a 19 yr. old calling an ordained preacher a “hypocrite of the highest order”?”

No, I don’t condone it, and I almost said something about it (you’ll have to take my word for it.) I immediately reacted negatively to that statement. Saying something about it would have been giving away Sam’s identity which was not something I was willing to do.

But honestly, I think I should have said something about it, regardless.

I don’t condone it because of the age factor. As far as the “ordained preacher” having something to do with it – I don’t know, Rick. I have had issues with Ken Silva using that as an argument.

There are ordained preachers who I think are apostates and hypocrites. Would I tell them that to their face – in certain circumstance, probably yes – and believe me I would be shaking and weeping when I did it.

Even with the age factor, there are circumstances in which I would tell a person much older than myself something that they didn’t want to hear. In light of my saying this last statement and in light of my feelings about what Sam said my position on what is appropriate for a person to say to an elder is inconsistent.

Another thing to consider. There are things I’ve thought of saying to you that I’ve hesitated on, because I thought that you would be immediately defensive because I am a woman.

Maybe it boils down to this: Should a person’s position/gender/age place them above being confronted with the truth?

If Sam has said the same thing in a different manner – for example, giving some examples of how you support some people’s ugliness towards Ken and Inrid while continually putting down their ugliness towards others- I would not have had a problem with it.

Amy – my point was that samo is a teenager and Ingrid is outspoken about respect. Remove the preacher label, I would NEVER let my 19 myr. old. (I have one) tell an older man that he was a hypocrite. It is massively incongruous with what Ingrid says about teenagers showing respect nowadays.

Oh well, add it to the list. I just think it is really irresponsible to be training them this young to be throwing around the careless invectives.

Rick,

You wrote:

I agree, Chris. But if you wrote a post demanding you be referred to with respect, and then Phoenix called a preacher a hypocrite of the highest order, would you not see a major disconnect?

Not only would I see a disconnect, but you wouldn’t want to hear the phone call behind the scenes to Phoenix

Julie,
I said, “Why do I comment here? Because I believe it’s what God wants me to do .”

You’ve really added a whole different attitude to that by saying this:

You said, “Which leads me to the futility of entering a fray and claiming you are doing it for noble purposes, because God told you to, but that somehow you aren’t part of the fray.

Everyone, being part of their own “higher ground” end up actually at the same level. That’s the great challenge/problem: in order to critique the critics, you must enter the fray.

You enter, you’re part of it.

I’ve never sold myself the lie that I wasn’t, that I was noble and opening eyes of the confused for God in a purely uni-directional way of help (i.e. me to them).”

You do realize that Joe asked me the question about why I wrote here based on something that someone else said?

And that instead of nitpicking about that, or ignoring his question, I answered it.

In the only way I know how. Honestly. I do believe that God wants me to write here.

Did I ever say “that I was opening eyes of the confused for God in a purely uni-directional way of help (i.e. me to them)?” I hope not.

Do I feel that my opinions are sometimes more biblical than the ones I’m arguing against? Yes. Why else would I choose to share them? Why would anyone choose to share any opinions if they don’t feel they have a biblical basis for them?

Do I ever wish I could take back something I’ve said? Realize that my understanding was wrong? Commented when I should have been doing something else? Yes, yes, yes.

Do I believe that I’m opening someone’s eyes? Yes. My own eyes. Maybe someone elses, but noone who comments here on any regular basis.

Back to what I said: “Why do I comment here? Because I believe it’s what God wants me to do .”

You could ask me, “Why did you volunteer for that job?” ” Or, why did you go talk to that old lady?” or, “why did you take that course.” or, “Why did you spend the afternoon shopping with your daughter?” or “Why did you spend the afternoon doing “nothing.” And I could often give the same answer. I think God is involved in every part of my life, big or small. Why the need to mock that?

” Everyone, being part of their own “higher ground” end up actually at the same level.” I strongly disagree.

Julie,

Also, to make blockquoting easier, the little “>>” symbol just above the comment box opens a menu of tags which you can use to add bold, underline, links, blockquotes, etc. to your posts…

Have I mentioned that I punch people in the face.

Sorry just want to bring some levity. Perhaps though; this blog/thread is of the most serious order and doesn’t need levity. My apologies.

Punching: open hand or closed fist?

The latter is unbiblical.

Tim,
I took the time to write out the conversation on the video for you. I don’t see how you can continue to say that he was talking about “obvious sinners,” not unrepentant Christians.

Nor do I see how there is any biblical justification for a pastor speaking at a church that makes God’s grace a license to continue sinning. That goes way beyond “being nice to obvious sinners.”

Amy – huh?? Wow, it’s like comment Risk. I will attack comment 12:32 with comment 5:16.

Go to Julie’s blog, Amy, and you will understand her a little better. She has a great but obtuse sense of humor, and she is wonderfully philosophical. I love to banter with her and as you can see she sees things differently than you who are more direct. And she cares about missions as do you.

So without continuing to exchange about styles, what are you guys desiring to say about responses to rudeness in the marketplace? I say “Punches With a Fist” knows how to deal with them!

Rick,
If Julie’s comment had been directed to you it wouldn’t have been “huh?” It would have been you trying to sort out what she was saying and trying to correct misperceptions . . .

as well as telling her that she had no right to speak so rudely to an ordained pastor.

Conversations and attitudes look quite different when you’re not the brunt of the criticism.

Tim,
Your responses seemed to be ignoring the context of what Mclaren said and did. I didn’t see how to respond other than to repeat what I’d already said.

It’s like if I heard someone say, “Dogs are canines.” And someone kept saying, “but he didn’t say “dogs are canines,” he said “cats are canines.”" I wouldn’t know how to keep responding to that.

I don’t know that much about the Mormon Temple thing. Whatever I would think about it has no relevance to what I think about Brian Mclaren’s speaking at the church where he spoke.

It would be interesting to know just what all you are wanting to defend regarding Brian Mclaren.

*morale*

Rick,
It was complicated. I didn’t know how to make it less so.

Back to Sam’s comment: I really would like to see him apologize to you.

But please consider what he’s said about this site.

It seems that there is something at the root of your struggle with Ingrid and Ken that goes deeper than what is happening on this site.

Maybe it’s something ya’ll need to deal with. (The ya’ll was to show you that no, I’m not from New York.)

Not me, I entrust my kids to the ooze!

Chris,

I do have some serious issues with MacLaren, but to put them in perspective: Were I on the verge of death with a choice between entrusting the raising of my children to MacLaren or MacArthur, Brian MacLaren would win every time, without a second thought.

I just read “A New Kind of Christian.”

If you would entrust your kids to Mclaren, we are walking in opposite directions. I say this very strongly, because one of my kids could have been affected very much by Mclaren.

I believe with all my heart that Mclaren is a ________, one who will be used to lead many young people away from God.

I’m leaving that blank because I don’t quite know how to fill it in yet.

How do we always end up back at McLaren? HOW, HOW, HOW????
Go Yankees!

I think it is being somewhat disingenuous to say that MacLaren hasn’t said some things that when understood in the plain meaning are departures from orthodox teachings. And to discern what the Scriptures teach about the existance of eternity, the nature of eternity, and the eternal destinity of a sinner is both important and actually paramount.

Isn’t that the basis for two thousand years of witness and missionary work? If indeed everyone ends up together eternally regardless of their belief or unbelief in Christ, then our witness of Christ is purely a benign sharing without any eternal value. It changes the entire foundation and character of Christianity.

So if Jesus redeemed everyone (Burke) then it would render our witness and missionary work as conversation rather than conversion. But if Jesus provided redemption for everyone but it only becomes a personal reality upon conversion, and if conversion can only take place through hearing and believing the gospel before one’s death, then any hint of teaching otherwise is not only heresy, it is damnable heresy since it undermines the very fabric of our faith.

You can talk of a victory view of Calvary, but if that changes the eternal condition of unregenerate sinners by assigning them a blancket salvation apart from personal faith, it has done a spectacular disservice to Biblical faith. This is not doctrinal quibbling, this rises much higher than the hair splitting homosexuality question. This is the faith.

Throw out all of MacLaren’s musings about all kinds of things, granted, he is a dreamer. But when he erects a thought provoking possibility about a kind of universalism, he has just stepped from mud to quicksand. When he and others talk about the nature of Scripture that is extremely problematic especially for any future understandings of truth, but when he suggests salvation for any without hearing and believing the gospel, that is an unmovable mountain in the present.

So you may be right in defending Kinball and Driscoll and others as orthodox believers with a post modern flavor, but to deny that the open teachings of MacLaren on their face depart from previous understandings must be volitional probably due to a defensive reaction to the unscrupulous attack dogs.

Let the emrgents have some jingle-jangle in their approach and in their teachings about a variety of things, but let them come forth and openly declare what they believe about redemption and the plight of the lost. That is the core question about which some are either being unclear due to their own uncertainty, or in reality they do not believe as Wesley (for instance) did. MacLaren is unclear at best.

Don’t want to get completely off track here, but I found this article the other day that relates to a lot of the things we talk about here. It is actually from Christianity Today in 1990, which is amazing because it sounds like it could have been written last week.

It does kind of relate to the whole idea of how we treat others, though. If we see God as a judge primarily concerned with making righteous judgments, we will almost think it our place to pass rightous judgments on others. If we see him as a loving Father, we will treat others in a living way.

Julie,
Personally, I think McClaren is valuable as a springboard for clarifying one’s thoughts on different things at least. My wife and I have an extra copy of A Generous Orthodoxy that you could have for free if you want. And no, I’m not some sort of McClaren evangelist, I just had an extra copy from a book discussion group we had a few summers ago.

chris – You do not want to pull my chain concerning Calvin. In a broad sense I believe he was a heretic, albeit saved, but his view of limited atonement and unconditional election has hindered any passion for souls and soothed people’s conscience using God’s sovereignty as a convenient salve.

You are correct in equating this with a kind of limited universalism, if that makes sense. It is fatalism and presents God as playing solitaire and purposely being the puppet master who knowingly creates people who He doesn’t desire to be saved, so we must assume when he gives birth to a non-elect baby he IS WILLING that he perishes in hell.

God creates His own enemies, makes no provision for their redemption, and like a real estate broker prepares a place in hell for them which is His will anyway. The truth be told if I had to choose between Calvinism and universalism I would lean toward universalism.

Thankfully I can choose what the Scripture teaches, that God love the world and tasted death for every man. Praise His Name!

HTML help please. How do you quote someone

Julie,
If your criticisms about becoming part of the fray and your A/B hypothetical example had actually included some of the direct quotes from CRN.Info about their motives for having this site, I could have looked at it as a general summary. The person whose quote you keep misrepresenting is mine.The last time we had a conversation you emphatically told me not to use you as an object lesson, yet you feel free to use my a parody of what my words really meant as an object lesson.

It’s not my problem, it’s yours.

I went to your site once and read your guidelines for commenters. I remembered that someone, maybe you or Deborah, has made references to Ingrid’s musical snobbery several times. I thought of that when I read your guidelines. Your guidelines are a different type of snobbery. The “tone and attitude” are all wrong. You bring some of those guidelines here and dump them on me in the middle of conversations of which you have not been a part.

I have little doubt that you could offer some good suggestions if you went about it differently. It’s difficult to want to listen to someone when they begin by placing you on the defensive. You begin by prejudging the situation: case in point – my long quotes of other people. You don’t know how many times I have addressed something without making clear what I was addressing, and how much trouble that causes. I quote people in more detail than I want to to try to avoid all kinds of things, including having people who are not being addressed reading a partial quote and reacting to that part without taking the time to look back at the whole. Also, many times when I am in a discussion I will be out of that discussion for awhile, sometimes for days. Then I have to go back and try to sort everything out. To not recap things is like coming to a meeting after having been gone for a few days and sitting down and giving an answer to the question that was on the table before you left.

It’s easy for you to say that I don’t have to address everything. If I don’t I’m reminded again and again that I have left something unaddressed.

It’s a no-win situation. Answer the question fully, and there’s too much detail and nitpicking. Answer the question partially and have someone address all the things you chose not to address, and accuse you of believing something that you don’t. Don’t answer the question, get accused of dodging.

Amy, I have never made a reference to any music snobbery by anyone.

deborah

Deborah,
Sorry for the mistake. I shouldn’t have used your name. I apologize.

Wow, that’s all I can say after reading this thread. Wow.

It’s that kind of caustic comment, Joe, that leads me to believe I can no longer conservse with you on a Spiritual basis. Your use of the benign “Wow” indicates a demeaning of my comments, and the “all I can say” will undoubtedly prove a lie in the future. And with the punctuated repetitve “Wow” you again scorn me. I hereby slap you with an electronic glove and challenge you to a duel to save my honor.

OK, a little parady to maybe lighten up some of the more combative comments that I believe you allude to. Peace.

Rick:
You said: his view of limited atonement and unconditional election has hindered any passion for souls and soothed people’s conscience using God’s sovereignty as a convenient salve.

I attend a “reformed Baptist church”, i.e. we hold to the docrtines of grace, TULIP, etc. however you want to phrase it, and yet, we are one of the most evangelistic churches I’ve ever seen. We have visitation/outreach twice a month and it is not uncommon for there to be 75 to 100 people participating…in a church that averages approx 250-300 on Sunday morning. Not all Calvinists are HYPER Calvinists.

I think it is being somewhat disingenuous to say that MacLaren hasn’t said some things that when understood in the plain meaning are departures from orthodox teachings.

Just to chime in… departure from orthodoxy does not necessarily equate with heresy.

And Joe, the Yankees suck! (and I allowed to say suck around here?)

Great, Keith! Your church may be five point but they behave like the early apostolic Arminians like Paul!

Matt B., a great testimony of deliverance! Watch out for relapses though!

Just kidding.

Wow I wonder if we’ll get to 200 comments?

I actually went to one service at a KJV 1611 church. It wasn’t all that bad. It was small; 7 congregants but you really got to know everyone.

LOL that’s funny Rick!

Well Julie, there was one time I posted a comment on your blog and you didn’t respond. That actually kind of hurt. I’m sorry, some days I just can’t help myself.

(Julie, you asked in another post if I had a blog. No, I wouldn’t even know where to start.)

Henry: The first liar doesn’t stand a chance!

OUR church has a rough draft of Romans SIGNED by the Apostle Paul. Look for it on eBay right next to the toast with burn marks resembling Mary.

Chris L: I’m a jerk, plain and simple.

To know me is to throw names at me.

Thank you, Henry (Rick). I was feeling kind of sore inside. So thank you.

Regarding Ravi Z, like I said I’m not all that familiar with the situation there.

The main problem in Tim’s bringing it up as a parallel to the Mclaren/speaking at a gay church issue is this:

The pastors at the Open Door church fit into the I Cor 5 category. That passage’s teaching applies to someone who calls himself a brother but is living in immorality. The Mormon teachers don’t claim to be “Christian brothers” and I Cor 5 doesn’t apply to them. I’m sure there are other passages that do apply to the Ravi/Mormon situation; I haven’t thought through all of them.

Even if the Ravi Z situation were parallel to the Mclaren situation, my judgement of whether what he did was biblical or not should not affect the “rightness” or the “wrongness” of the Mclaren situation. That is, God’s Word is God’s Word, no matter how consistently or inconsistently Christians apply it.

Tim have you heard the talk at the tabernacle? I would gladly forward you my c.d.’s of the entire session if you would like.