This post (alternate link) over at Old Truth (motto: where only half of our site’s name makes sense) contains some absolute gems into the mind of the watchdoggies and what they really object to about their targets. This particular post takes the form of a how-to make your own relevant blog. The derision is about as subtle as Ezekiel 23.20 (Now I’m a bit confused, does that make me prurient or Biblical?). Anyway, lets see what we can see inside the mind of a watchdoggie.
For example, check out the first point:
Talk about your wife in gushy glowing terms, like you can’t wait to get home to see her every single day.
So if you want to be all cool with the watchdoggies, make sure you don’t like your wife. Or at least, don’t let anyone suspect you actually like her. You might want to come up with code words for “I love you” so no one catches on (I’d suggest something like “Chicago is wonderful this time of year”), and be sure to forget all anniversaries and birthdays. On the off chance you might actually love your wife I’d suggest sending all cards and gifts via UPS, that way when the guys come over to trade collectible Spurgeon cards they’ll never suspect you would dream of being nice to your wife.
When seekers find out that they don’t have to give up their U2, Bon Jovi, and INXS – they will realize that Christianity is not such a big step after all.
This tells us that in order to be a watchdoggie, time travel is a must. Or, at least time travel at concert venues.
If you have no fear of God whatsoever, you can do what I’ve seen in the seeker blogs, and also refer to the Lord Jesus Christ as “a dude” as well.
Watchdoggies have a strong belief that Jesus was a chick, and anyone implying otherwise will not be tolerated.
Say things like this: “Bon Jovi was cool, but my boys in our worship team Rock!”.
Under no circumstances will watchdoggies allow competent musicians to lead worship in anyway. All watchdoggie musicians must be at least as incompetent as Bon Jovi, and if one does sneak through, their proficiency must never be acknowledged.
Those words are: Doctrine, Theology, Elders and Deacons, Bible Commentaries (oops some of these are two words), Hermeneutics, or any of those kinds of things that pastors have cared about for centuries.
Watchdoggies believe they are hundreds of years old and have trouble counting.
Tell your readers how disappointed you were when certain shows ended differently than you expected. Mention how you watch TV with your wife.
Watchdoggies are always contented with how their favorite shows end (even Seinfeld). Oh, and they never, ever admit to actually being with, or doing things with their wives.
If you bring up scripture on your blog, keep it short and sweet, perhaps give your “life verse” or maybe mention a verse that talks about “vision”, but be sure to quote from The Message. It will often give a completely different meaning than any of the other bible translations, but the important thing is that people will be able to understand what it’s saying.
Watchdoggies believe that no one should be able to understand what scripture is saying (BTW, I had trouble finding any actual scripture on that post).
Stay upbeat! I can’t stress this enough.
Watchdoggies are never, ever happy. I can’t stress this enough.
Talk about those guys a lot in your blog posts, and make it sound like you are best buddies with them by using that familiar “my man” prefix when you refer to them by name.
Watchdoggies have no friends. Or at least none that they’ll publicly admit to (see the entry on wives).
The way to handle these is to cover-up any biblical points that they made, by citing the number of baptisms you had last month.
Watchdoggies don’t baptize anyone. Ever. That’s obviously something the semi-pelagian, purpose driven, emergent cult of neo-liberalism does.
So there you have it. A quick look into the watchdoggie mind.
![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")
37 Comments(+Add)
For some reason I can’t make the link at the top of your page work. Anyway – I found the post anyway: http://www.oldtruth.com/blog.cfm/id.2.pid.314.
Besides much being utterly untrue and an unfair caricature I have to admit that I fiund the hip pastos really annoying as well
Not that I think they are taking the church to hell in a handbasket or anything (the watchdoggies are doing just fine there 
), it is just irritating watching people constantly use happy/aggresive language. It seems that this is the domain of the ’second tier’ ‘hip pastor’ – the ones they seek to emulate seem more thoughtful.
Ho Hum – I think the post does tell us more about the writer (and the sycophantic commentators underneath) than it doesn abotu anything else.
Looks like Jim is enjoying his web-foolery. He will redirect certain IP addresses to sites like Pepto-Bismol when the mood hits. He’s probably taking anything referred from CRN.info and redirecting it right back to itself. (Must be nice – I couldn’t go through weblogs constantly tweaking my server setup)
Easiest way to find this article is to go there and search on one of the phrases from the quotes Tim uses in this article.
What is it about 1950’s style worship/church life that is so appealing to this section of Christianity?
I have my problems with some of the modern “techniques” employed to attract members. Of course I also have my problems with the kind of post that is meant to show that you are way above the ones you caricature.
Here are some of the questions this kind of posts makes me ask:
1. Why is there never a call for prayer for these pastors?
2. Why can writers come up with these posts in their own words, but most devotional posts about our Lord are cut and paste from others?
3. Where are the posts that reveal the shortcomings of the orthodox pastors?
4. After identifying the humanistic strategies to simulate power, why is there no pointing out how powerless their crowd is?
5. Why comments on this post? Are you providing a forum so everyone can pile on with a dry eyed effervescence, and adding some personal mocking (sinful humor) of their own?
6. Except for sensual innuendos, why attack the relationship with his wife?
7. And finally, how can you in good conscience identify YOURSELVES with Edwards, Whitefied and Wesley? If you have read any of their personal journals, and seen their daily schedules, and read of their prayer lives, and saw their sacrificial missionary trips, and realized how little they and their families lived on, and then after you have satirically pointed out all the fleshly and shallow methods of many relevant preachers, you list these great men of God as the ones with whom YOU identify.
May I respectfully point out, none of you (or me) could begin to measure up to the Spiritual lives of Edwards, Whitefield, and Wesley. As a matter of fact, if they had the free time that we all do, they could write the same post about you that you wrote about others and be spot on. But then they might have to cut short their prayer time and they would not be willing to do that.
Tim,
You wrote:
Actually, to quote Mark Driscoll, “there are a number of people who seem to think that Jesus was a chick-ified dude. Well, they’re wrong”…
I’d have to say that my “life verse” is 1 Kings 9:15.
Henry
How do you know what anyone’s schedule is like, or what they have sacrificed? Face it the seeker-friendly emergent types are braggarts and show offs. Even the comments about wives are meant to attract attention.
Come see how I live and what my family has given up before you make a judgement. The Lorf made it plain that all who stand in public to show off their “religion” have their reward.
This goes foe Benny Hinn as well as Brian NMcClaren. As far as I am concerned McManus, Bell, Hagee, Meyers whoever, are all the same . Who needs any of it?
Hip pastors are more than annoying, they are worthless. The day of the Lord will reveal more buildings of straw than any other material.
The Book of Revelation (of Jesus Christ) ends with the admonition to let all continue on their merry way. So bew it!
Tim,
Jim Bublitz cannot take any criticism… he can only dish it out and then mock… one way of mocking someone is redirecting their links.. he did it to me as I pointed out inconsistencies in his honesty… and theology… he kept changing his view as I would show him by scirpture he was wrong and then claim that was his original view… that one can/cannot judge someone else’s eternal destiny…
Jim Bublitz also asked me questions, which I answered, yet still made a web page that claimed I did not… these are not nice people… I would bet (if I did that… but it is not poker night… LOL!) that Jim W. will even show up and show his love to you by calling you all sorts of names instead of actually talking on an intellectual manner…
If you look at their “comments” they are 98% yes men/women and the ones that disagree are immediately demonized and mocked… they are a truly childish and sad bunch…
I even bet that if I go there later today, Jim Bublitz will comment on this comment and berate me in his childish and immature manner as he will not take any real critique and is NEVER wrong, even when he contradicts scripture.
Blessed?
iggy
OK – one more comment, which goes to back to my earlier premise of ODM laziness and ingnorance. From the comments section of this article:
I am only guessing here, but I suspect that this comment is based on Bell writing a book called Sex God. Since I’ve listened to every Mars Hill sermon via podcast in the past couple of years, it certainly didn’t come from any of Rob’s sermons.
So, assuming this commenter wasn’t just air-extracting Rob’s name for the point of hyperbole, I suspect that the commenter never read the book, because a) about the only intimate detail of Bell’s sex life we read in the book is that in Jr. High he asked a girl to dance with him, and she ran crying to the women’s restroom; and b) He devotes an entire chapter, “Under the Chuppah”, to the topic of the need to keep intimate detail – beyond sexual matters – only between a man and his wife.
Tim:
This has to be one of the weakest posts you’ve ever written. You’re really fishing on this one.
The Lorf [sic] made it plain that all who stand in public to show off their “religion†have their reward.
Wow… still waiting for you to say the same about the holier-than-thou Ingrid and Ken Silva.
Chris P,
I can’t speak to Hinn, Hagee and Myers, but you might want to drop Bell from your list there.
While he may sound ‘hip’ in his sermons and videos, if you go a little deeper and talk to folks who know him, you wouldn’t write this:
While I don’t think he would characterize it as ’sacrifice’, he sold his house in the suburbs and moved to the inner city, in probably the worst part of Grand Rapids, and he enrolled his kids in the schools there, as well. He also doesn’t go out of his way to market himself or his church (they meet in an abandoned mall with almost no signage and no advertising), and spends vast amounts of his time in prayer and fasting (once again, not advertised, but acknowledged by a staff member at MH), and encourages such in his church’s members.
He may tell stories about his kids for sermon illustration, but is that bragging or using that which you see and intimately understand as part of your teaching. It seems that Jesus did that with his parables…
He may be ‘hip’, but you won’t find the opulance of ‘Word-Fath” or ‘Name-it-and-Claim-it’ teaching in his teaching or his church…
Come on Chris P., have you ever read Wesley or Whitfieds journals? It isn’t even close. Just for openers, read Wesley’s journal on his first missionary trip from England to America which took three months on something less than a Christian cruise ship.
Here, I’ll help you:
http://judahslion.blogspot.com/2007/01/christian-cruise-bout-thirty-years-ago.html
Tim,
This post is spot on and one of the funniest I have read…
Sorry Keith, but if you read over at oldtruth.com, which has banned this sites links, our own Rick brought up John MacArthur and was ridiculed for saying something that was taken as a criticism about John MacArthur… who is far above reproach on these type of people’s blogs.
The “so-called Second Great Awakening”? Finney might have eventually gone off the deep end about the free will of man, but no one held up the judgment of God and His Majesty more than Finney. By the way, if he were alive today he would do more than just comment online about the seeker churches, he would have gone publicly to the services and denounced them. To connect the seeker dots all the way back to Finney removes credibility from your comment. In comparison MacArthur is closer to being a seeker than Finney ever was. Rick Warren and Finney – yea, right.
Posted by: Henry Frueh on Saturday, July 08, 2006
Chuck Finney may have skipped by Rick Warren’s church, but he would have done so on the way to a Billy Graham crusade. Also, I’m pretty sure Johnny Mac would not allow him into his church; I think they have rules against blatant heresy there.
Posted by: Jim from OldTruth.com on Saturday, July 08, 2006
Showing that you know little of Finney removes all ‘credibility from your comment.’ Charles Finney is responsible for making Arminianism as popular as it is today (setting the groundwork so to speak.) He was a heretic and an ungodly man. Read multitude of bios from Phil Johnson’s site and more.
Yeah, Rick Warren and Finney preach the same self-help, easy-believism. It sounds that you get your history from incorrect revisionists.
John MacArthur preaches nothing like the likes of Finney, to compare them would be ridiculous. Yes, he was a blatant heretic as Jim said.
It was in fact a so-called Second Great Awakening for a couple of reasons. Finney was reacting against the hyper-Calvinists that were infiltrating the thoughts of apologetics. He bunched all Calvinists together in one group, called them heretics and attacked them with faulty reasoning. It led the country to a point where many people began using their new will found with Finney’s preaching that they could come to God. This lead to interpretations of the Bible that were blatantly Arminian, leading to further experiential interpretation which resulted in movements like the Pentecostal, Charismatic, and Vineyard. Also, the Church of God was purposely est in the early 1920s for the reason of promoting Arminianism and continuation of the Full-Gospel (aka sign gifts)
So, it was not a great awakening comparable to that of godly men like Jonathan Edwards. It was a beginning that started American Evangelicalism toward where we are today with the self-help, easy-believism, Arminianism of Rick Warren, Jerry Falwell, Billy Graham, LaHaye, C. Stanley, and countless others who have put experience and human rationale over God’s Word.
Posted by: Noldorin_Calvinist on Saturday, July 08, 2006
Thanks Jim for that “clartification” in regards to MacArthur and Finney. I would have to say, anyone who would call MacArthur more of a “seeker” (i.e looking for the numbers) than Finney…appraently never listened to or read MacArthur and has never read Finney.
Posted by: Renee on Sunday, July 09, 2006
Henry, I’m sure you don’t understand John MacArther’s convictions or you wouldn’t have made the statement that you did. I don’t think that it is appropriate to tear down a Godly man just to help elevate one you think is. I don’t think even Finney would have approved of doing that. I don’t know who Finney is and I guess I missed the comment that talked about him, but I think you should take the time to check out http://www.gty.org (John MacArther’s site). I think you would find him very edifing and would then change your mind about calling him “seeker”.
Posted by: sarah on Sunday, July 09, 2006
My comments using John MacArthur’s name were supposed to be satirical but obviously misunderstood. I apologize. I believe MacArthur to be a man of God and a great Biblical scholar. I have benefited from his teachings and have read many of his books. I think that “The Gospel According to Jesus” may be one of the ten best books written this century. Again I apologize to anyone who was offended, I hold John MacArthur in high esteem for the Lord’s sake.
Posted by: Henry Frueh on Sunday, July 09, 2006
Sorry if I misread you Henry. Thanks for clearing that up.
Posted by: Jim from OldTruth.com on Sunday, July 09, 2006
I personally like how Noldorin_Calvinist claims that Finney clumped all the Calvinists into one group and how wrong that was… then clumps “Rick Warren, Jerry Falwell, Billy Graham, LaHaye, C. Stanley”
Which Charles Stanely is not… he beleives in Grace much the same as I do… maybe not in the details… but in his teachigns.
So, it is wrong to critiqe Johnny Mac, and clump all Calvinists together… yet they can do that to everyone else…
This is what I meant about the “yes men/women” who seem to go well into the irrational to rationalize their arguments and views….
Blessed?
iggy
Wow, Iggy. How do you save or remember those threads. Your a blog savant! In case anybody compares Charles Finney’s preaching with Rick Warren and calls it seeker friendly, here is one of his “watered down” messages.
http://judahslion.blogspot.com/2006/10/how-to-preach-so-no-one-will-be.html
I’ve never been able to link to Jim’s site. It always jumps back at my own site.
Jim gave me a marketable nickname. Can anyone else say that?
Yeah. Didn’t think so.
(But the URL link craziness drives me…crazy. Bad Netiquette!)
Rick,
The most showing and humorous comment is from Jim himself…
Chuck Finney may have skipped by Rick Warren’s church, but he would have done so on the way to a Billy Graham crusade. Also, I’m pretty sure Johnny Mac would not allow him into his church; I think they have rules against blatant heresy there.
Posted by: Jim from OldTruth.com on Saturday, July 08, 2006
Note these things.
1. It is John MacArthur’s church, not Jesus’
2. John MacArthur decides who gets into “his” church.
3. Anyone that Johnny disagrees with is a”blatant heretic” you know like Billy Graham.
4. Oh, the best thing is that I have been rebuked for calling Johnny Mac, “Johnny Mac” and Jim seems to have not issue in this “derogatory name calling”…. LOL!
5. Finney is the “father of the purpose/seeker driven model”… (yeah right) yet would “skip by Rick Warren’s church”! How’s that for logic?
Blessed?
iggy
Julie,
“(But the URL link craziness drives me…crazy. Bad Netiquette!)”
It is cowardly and dishonest as he seems ashamed at his own views that he need hide what he actually states! At least from people that disagree with him…
It is interesting that I turned off my comments for a time after dealing with Jim B and his “crew”… then was told I was not being honest or was not willing to back up what I say on my blog because I had them off. Really I turned them off as I got many mean and awful comments which I decided not to let through… After a bit I did turn them on… but I was still the hypocrite in that crowds view no matter what I did…
They miss that all the name calling and mocking drives people away… from them (not all bad) and away from Jesus… They rarely actually lift Jesus up to draw all men as they tend to lift Spurgeon and Johnny Mac up more often… I listened to one sermon and heard Johnny Mac’s name and quotes over 6 times… Je3sus was mentioned maybe twice… and though the scripture was used it was all filtered through Johhny Mac…
It was not a “bad” sermon, but they seem to miss that we worship Jesus no Johnny Mac and Spurgeon did not write the Bible.
Blessings,
iggy
Julie,
I think Jim might be doing you a favor. But if you really want to check his site just go here.
“Punches with a Fist” or “The Prairie Princess”. There is a difference between those who would lovingly call a sister something and those who would mock and disdain. I will never get how followers of Christ are not convicted about some of their tone and rhetoric toward others.
I am now “Finney Frueh” or “The Pelagian Prince”.
I am iggy the “confused-catholic loving-Johnny mac-hating-syergistic-armenian-falser teacher-pelagian-dishnest-liar” And still I think I am still leaving something out… but those are the kind names I was called at oldtruth.com and by Jim B. “friendsâ€.
Blessed?
iggy
I love dogma
Good grief…the date on the Old Truth post appears to be OVER A YEAR OLD!
Iggy: I think my post is funnier! Your post was too long. I’m ADHD and lost interest after the first paragraph. Sorry.
Yeah but the date on the comments are much more recent, as is the date on the link from C?N.com.
Looks more like you just ripped off posts like the one linked here.
I will give you credit though, at least you never blocked critics from actually reading your site.
And mine has pictures…for the reading impaired!
That does tip the scale in your favor.
Get some of that braille up there for the blind and I’ll be really impressed.
Keith,
You post came out on August 18th of 2007…. being that I am in constant need to be “relevant” I deem that as too old to be relevant… unless it was spoken by Bono…
IOW, Your shelf life was too short… you should have gotten me to read it no later than the 20th… and good grief this is the 23rd! If you are ever going to convert me you gotta keep up!
And another thing…. ooooo looky! A shiny thing! bye!
Blessings,
iggy
Ohhh and Keith, your pictures need more facial piercings and spiky hair or shaved… not that out of date Dan Kimball doo.
And I need more references to movies as I get lost in that old timers stuff…
And, on no! I have gone on too much about this and now may be irrelevant soon!
Blessings,
the iggster
A few things…
1) I’ve read and heard J. Mac (sorry I no this doesn’t show reverence to the Reverend) and I find he proof texts a lot! For instance the CNN interview when he said Jesus elevated war to a noble task by using the parables on the cost of discipliship?????
2) Who cares?
3) I want a nickname
That’s all I got. Talk amongst yourselves.
Chris,
With all the Chrises around here we need to give all you guys nicknames.
Hey Tim: How’s this?
Iggy: Stop it!!! I can’t concentrate. OOOhhh…look at the pretty colors.
Sorry about the slowness of my posting. 8^)>
What? Christians having fun and not slamming each other? I feel a hug coming on.
Sorry, Iggy, but Sonny Bono is dead.
I’ve obviously instilled a great deal of nickname envy.
My work here is done.
Wait a minute!… iggy IS my nickname! LOL! Well I’ll be a monkey’s whatchamacalllit…
Oh wait I must add one more thing to the list of “names” I have been called…
Relativist…
Now, back to the monkey… it is a monkey’s relative of some sort…
Oh well i will get back to ya’ll!
blissed,
iggy
So no chance of Char an him getting back together huh?
Well at least Sonny was a “christian” (even though he followed the cult leader Tony Alamo… which sort of sounds like the direction Ken Silva is heading… THE ENDTIME PROPHET… saga continues…
Blussed,
iggy
Ladies and gentleman…Iggy has officially hijacked the thread.
Keep moving nothing to see here. Just keep moving!
Yeah me!
cuz that is what it is all about isn’t it…. ; )
iggy the thread hijacker!