Ken writes here:

However at the same time, we are also within Christian ethics to stress that in our view the time has arrived where we also need men to arise with the spiritual fortitude to proclaim what God is saying to our gelatinous generation.

This is, of course, a strawman. A huge one. I challenge Ken to either withdraw this statement or show us where anyone on CRN.info or another major blog, ministry, radio program or other outlet has stated that it is outside of Christian ethics for the watchdoggies to express the content of what they’ve stated. In other words, who has said it is wrong for them to express the general positions they’ve put out there. Show us who has said its wrong for what they’ve said, and not how they’ve said it.

Flat out, the implication that there’s a movement to label the content of the posts by watchdoggies as outside the bounds of Christianity does not exist and Ken’s implication of such is the result of either an inability to understand what is being communicated or a deliberate distortion of watchdoggie critics.

  • Share/Bookmark
This entry was posted on Saturday, September 8th, 2007 at 2:02 pm and is filed under Ken Silva, ODM Writers. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+/- Collapse/Expand All

65 Comments(+Add)

1   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 8th, 2007 at 2:24 pm

I am not sure I understand the issue here. What was Ken saying? I am confused…

2   Tim Reed    http://theotstrikesback.com
September 8th, 2007 at 2:29 pm

Ken is writing in such a way as to imply that the critics of watchdoggies are claiming they shouldn’t speak at all. Its similar to a politicians saying something like “I’m for the children!”, implying this distinguishes himself from his opponent who is against children.

3   M.G.    
September 8th, 2007 at 2:31 pm

I’ll defend Ken for a moment.

He contrasts Joe’s thoughtful and honest essay with the kind of bold action taken by Luther prior to the Reformation. So I think he’s saying that talk can be good, but action will sometimes be better, and evangelicals shouldn’t denounce him for acting. If God is using Ken to purge His Church, so be it. Don’t get in the way.

So I don’t think he’s using a strawman. He’s just casting his ministry in literally prophetic terms. That may suffer from its own defects, but a strawman it isn’t.

4   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 8th, 2007 at 2:35 pm

You are correct M. G. – It is a usual ploy, even when agreeing with a perspective from someone who they normally wouldn’t, Ken doesn’t miss the chance for some transparent self promotion including using Luther’s name as his template.

It may not be a strawman, but it sure is grasping at straws!

5   DT    http://dead-theologians.blogspot.com/
September 8th, 2007 at 4:10 pm

huh?

I need an interpreter for this post.

DT

6   DT    http://dead-theologians.blogspot.com/
September 8th, 2007 at 4:17 pm

Tim,

But your comment above (”I’m for the children” implying this distinguishes himself from his opponent who is against children) is called an argumentum a silentio.

DT

7   nathan    http://www.nathanneighbour.com
September 8th, 2007 at 5:26 pm

I agree… this post is a bit hard to follow.

8   Tim Reed    http://theotstrikesback.com
September 8th, 2007 at 5:50 pm

Ah well they can’t all be home runs.

9   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 8th, 2007 at 8:51 pm

Man!

Here is the part that chafes my hide…

“CRN commends our brother for this willingness to have dialogue on these matters.”

CRN is in no way ever interested or willing to have a dialogue… unless you agree with them… otherwise it is just mocking and put downs and condemnation…

So this is just another in the huge piles of bovinian fertilizer spewed by Ken and his followers. There IS NOT DIALOG CUZ THEY DON”T KNOW HOW TO DO THAT!!!! I HAVE TRIED!!! KEN REFUSES!!!

So again, seriously how can anyone take these guys serious… just maybe if Ken did answer a question or showed interest in a real dialog… (Maybe he need look the word up!)

Be Blessed,
iggy (The one Ken has condemned to hell and told to “just get over it”)

10   DT    http://dead-theologians.blogspot.com/
September 8th, 2007 at 9:58 pm

Carlos,

Again, this sounds very personal. Maybe a sermon forgiveness is in order.

You said “CRN is in no way ever interested or willing to have a dialogue… unless you agree with them… otherwise it is just mocking and put downs and condemnation”

Being a part of CRN I want to call your hand. You have to be careful in assuming that just because someone has not had the best dialog with you does not mean that we will not dialog.

“huge piles of bovinian fertilizer spewed by Ken and his followers.”

Is this supposed to promote ecumenical love? Is this supposed to show the love of Christ?
Careful Carlos, you’re jumping in the manure with us.

“There IS NOT DIALOG CUZ THEY DON”T KNOW HOW TO DO THAT!!!! I HAVE TRIED!!! KEN REFUSES!!!”

Relax. I think everyone gets your point. I hope this is not your way of showing that you want to dialog and that you do care.

DT

11   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 8th, 2007 at 10:19 pm

DT,
It would seem to me that you are intentionally being a jerk. Why else would you call Iggy Carlos? He goes by Iggy. Your calling him Carlos and being condescending only shows your true heart issue. Perhaps, a sermon on what it means to be a neighbor? Or one on grace?
We all understand that you don’t like Iggy, but there is no need to be rude and childish about it.

12   DT    http://dead-theologians.blogspot.com/
September 8th, 2007 at 10:28 pm

Joe,

I appreciate the name calling.
Its funny that you write me and ask me about seminary the other day and now the slap. Thanks. Real smooth and Christ-like.

Carlos has not asked me to stop calling him that. I happened upon his family’s site the other day and I noticed that that was his name. What’s it to you?

Rude and childish?

I have never said that I did not like Iggy.

I am just encouraging Iggy not to take so much personal and not to say that we cannot be conversed with.

Joe, this surprises me. In your emails to me I thought there was some sincerity.

DT
My true heart issue?
I have never

13   DT    http://dead-theologians.blogspot.com/
September 8th, 2007 at 10:32 pm

Iggy,

Because it has caused one to get angry with me I do not want to be a stumbling block. If I have offended you by calling you Carlos, I apologize. I figured that it was more personal to call you by your name rather than a pen name.

BTW, I liked the pic of the moose. Was it real or fake?

DT

14   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 8th, 2007 at 10:38 pm

LOL, touched a nerve did I? My emails were sincere. It seems apparent to me (no, I’m not going back to the original post) that you don’t like Iggy. I don’t need to have emails with you to understand that. What do my questions about the Seminary have to do with this? I think you were intentionally being a jerk, If you want to call that name-calling have at it. What wording would you have preferred? Iggy’s probably been in a 1000 comments here and he always signs his name Iggy. Not to mention, the whole tone of your comment was just condescending.What it is to me is that I like Iggy, and though I have never met him I consider him a friend. I will defend him when I think he is being pushed unnecessarily.
On the flip side of that, I don’t dislike you, you seem like a nice guy and I really wasn’t trying to get up in your Kool-aid. I’m not sure how else I could have worded it…perhaps, “being intentionally mean..” that might have worked.
Oh well! Either way, thanks for apologizing either way.

15   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 8th, 2007 at 10:38 pm

Rick,
I taped the game if you want to watch it again! :)

16   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 8th, 2007 at 10:49 pm

DT,
I’m about to retire for the night but I have to ask quickly. Your comment seems to imply that because we “got along” for lack of a better term in the emails I cannot call you out here in this forum? Am I reading that right? I’ve been called out here by people who I believe I get along with… isn’t that part of being people. What I mean is, I didn’t call you a jerk, I said you were being a jerk (I realized I could have used mean). I thought you were wrong and I called it out. How is that a slap? Certainly, how is it not Christ-like.
The more I think about it the more I think I really did touch a nerve.

17   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 12:41 am

DT,

Again, as you have not answered this question as I have asked it before…

If someone tells you that you are not saved and serve a different god than them… then tells you to get over it….

And you notice he treats others as lesser than himself… and never once apologizes… how would you take that?

Also, I have forgave Ken… and he mocked me over that… I prayed for Ken and set a day aside for fasting and praying and was even mocked over that…

I am sincere in my believe that Ken has a religious spirit and is not out for any ones good. He has declared me his nemesis… I have never once said he was less than a brother in Christ…

So, tell me for once if a brother offends you and does not admitted nor do anything to bring restoration… and seems to only continue to mock at ones sincere questions… what to you do?

I want to walk away… yet God has laid Ken on my heart… he has lost his way and needs to be restored. By continuing in his behavior he continues in sin… it seems you are fine with that…

My given name is Carlos… one can call me that, but for consistency, I prefer iggy as most know me by that. I personally did not know why you chose to use my real name… I figured it was just a way you were testing me to see how I would react or that you thought it being more respectful… either way I hope you notice that I give straight answers to direct questions… and that to me to return that is more respectful to myself and others then what one decides to call me… even if you called me a fool.

The reason I use iggy goes back to when i used to witness in chatrooms… in chat lingo it means to ignore someone… to do that you push the ignore button and “iggy” them. I am the voice of the ignored… the downtrodden and the hurt… the ones that are cast aside and thought of as lesser… if I sound like it is personal… it is… as to see a brother continue in sin and do nothing to me means I care little for the Lord I serve and care less for the Body I am baptised into… His Body… the Church.

Be Blessed,
iggy

18   DT    http://dead-theologians.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 6:47 am

Joe,

It makes me wonder if you want to “touch a nerve” as you call it. I suppose shock statements at times do get people’s attention. No, you haven’t “touched a nerve.” The normal accepted jousting that goes on on these blogs seemed to be crossed over by you.
My discussions with you have stopped. Name calling is not honorable.

Iggy, I wrote the name Carlos simply because it is simply, your name. No covert meaning despite what some hope for.

If someone such as Ken has said these things to you why do you let it bother you? Does his opinion of you mean that much? Most of the people on this blog have cut him to shreds, including you. Does the idea of someone adamantly disagreeing with you, such as Ken, bother you? Hey, that’s ministry, I know.

I have a hard time believing that your call for prayer and fasting was done out of a spirit of kindness. Don’t let your left hand know what your right hand is doing. Maybe it was a praying for your enemies thing.

If he feels that he is right why should he apologize? When any of us feel we are right we don’t apologize unless the manner of speaking was not Christ-like.

DT

19   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 9th, 2007 at 7:31 am

DT,
You crack me up. Just a few weeks ago when we started talking you said your discussions here were done stating almost the same thing you just did to me. I noticed you didn’t answer the question on how that would work if people can’t call people out at all.
There was no name calling. I was addressing your actions. Now, I’ve been down this road with others from your camp where some believe my actions equal who I am in totality. That doesn’t make sense to me. I believed you were being mean and I said something.

20   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 7:34 am

With the word “enemies” now being used to include brothers and sisters with whom we disagree, we all stand before God naked but not ashamed that we do not fervently pray for our enemies or for that matter for those with whom we disagree.

Even though the blog nation represents a small fragment of the church, its interaction and its pride reflects the overall spirit of the American church. Only a revival will have the power to strip us of ourselves and infuse us with the life of Jesus. Some see Jesus as the One who forgave the adulterous woman, some see Jesus as the Temple cleanser, some see Jesus as feeding the five thousand, some see Jesus as meek, some see Jesus as strong, so if we all see the manifestation of Jesus as something different, there can be only one remedy.

Let us pray that Jesus will manifest Himself in His church and conform it to His will, not ours. How will we know when this happens? When He reveals Himself in such a way that proves us all wrong.

21   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 9th, 2007 at 7:39 am

DT said,

Again, this sounds very personal. Maybe a sermon[sic] forgiveness is in order. (emphasis mine)

Does that sound like someone who really wants to engage in serious conversation? Especially the part in bold?

22   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 8:00 am

For the record, I think Ken’s “defecate” and “urinate” on the reformation to be crass but very creative. In like kind Iggy’s “huge piles of bovinian fertilizer ” elicited a fleshly chuckle. Neither were persoanl assaults and neither attached apostacy to the objects.

I would hope though that those are the outer reaches of physiological mind pictures.

I do think that just like Parlimentary Procedures ther should be an attempt to retain civil decorum in our interaction with some disarming humor when needed. Combative, passionate, assertive, confrontational, but always retaining a lifeline to humility and the love of God. Tough…very tough.

23   DT    http://dead-theologians.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 8:00 am

Joe,

Your arrogance is not becoming.
I only came back to defend a brother who was being shredded to bits.

DT

DT

24   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 8:11 am

Rick,
I taped the game if you want to watch it again!

Joe, you are a neo-Bellic apostate that has no ears to hear and no eyes to see. I have spoken to Mary about you and you are in BIG trouble!!

Pray for me, as you can see I’m in purgatory…

25   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 9th, 2007 at 8:15 am

DT,
I’m not even sure where to go there. We all have excuses why we either spoke too soon, or can’t keep our word.

26   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 9th, 2007 at 8:17 am

Rick,
Look at it this way, next week you got Michigan. You gotta figure you’ve got a decent chance there. Maybe the final score will be 3-2? Who knows. However, you are cheering for a Catholic school so that might make you an ecumenical, infomercial spewing, submerging, $neo-evangelical$, apostate—oh whatever it is Ken says.
Smile and Enjoy Life

27   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 8:23 am

Thanks Joe for throwing some crumbs off your table to feed us dogs.

28   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 9th, 2007 at 9:10 am

Rick,
I might actually cheer for you guys next week. Normally, I would but after they stuck it to Ty Willingham, I’m not sure.
Well, I’m off to church. Verse by verse exposition of a chapter for the next few weeks. I wonder what the trolls will have to say about that. :)

29   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 9:13 am

A verse by verse expostion of a chapter of Bell’s book?

Just kidding…worship Jesus,

Bell is nothing, Martino is nothing, Frueh is nothing,

Jesus is all in all!

30   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 10:07 am

Here is something funny that happened to me. In the early days of my blog, about which I’m still a novice, I awoke one morning and as I pulled up my blog I saw there were thirty-something comments. I thought Wow!, my blog has become popular overnight and look, people are coming in droves!

As I started to open the comments I saw they were short and bland. “Good blog” and “Great!” and “I love this blog!” were the general sampling. Of course later I became aware of what we all call spam. So my excitement was dispelled after thinking much too highly of my blog.

I know, you guys might feel I’m a goofball and in response to that I say, “Unless you can convince me by Scripture, I…

Never mind.

31   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 1:13 pm

DT,

You miss the question… or seem to not want to answer…

I am responsible for Ken and Ken is responsible for me.

We are our brothers keepers. Or do you not agree on that?

You seem to think this is ALL about ME… and I do not see it as that at all… I see it is that a brother has fallen into sin and needs restoration. And because he is my brother, I will not leave him there is I can help it.

So, do you not see yourself as your brother’s keeper? Do you not believe in the ministry of reconciliation.

I have offed Ken many olive branches… and he has done nothing but be nasty to me… in fact he has increased his nastiness even more.

I still do not see why you insist it is about me… I am not as some accuse some narcissistic socio/psycho who hates MacArthur/Ken/put your favorite team pyro guy or supporter here guy as i am accused.

This is about a fallen brother and that some people who claim him as a friend seem to not see nor care that Ken is losing it… that he is inconsistent and double minded… they only care that he attacks those they hate.

So, if you care to read a bit more… I have forgiven him many times… I call him a brother… and i asked to even talk to him in private and he has only mocked me every time.

Ken is a divisive man and cares little for those he hurts and less for the Body of Christ. I don’t say this out of hate but as a warning to those who agree with him or are reading his stuff and could be lead astray.

Ken is Fred Phelps lite.

Be Blessed,
iggy

32   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 9th, 2007 at 1:29 pm

I only came back to defend a brother who was being shredded to bits.

Hmmmm! Curious!

Do you not feel Ken is the instigator? Every time that I have ever read Ken he uses a “flame-thrower” to gentle “stoke the flames of debate”. Then when challenged he comes in with his one-liners, innuendos, and mockery. A quick read of any thread would give all a sense of this.

In addition to all of that; most of his arguments are non-sequiter. I won’t call them strawman because a strawman has some semblence of order or cohesion.

Many, many, many people have asked to dialogue and discuss their views, opionions, and thoughts but Ken refuses and shouts innane accusations. Even those who have been allowed to dialogue with him, to clear up his misconceptions about their ministries, are surprised at why Ken continues to characterize them as “apostate”. When pushed for evidence of apostasy Ken uses assanine statements like “Just saying what the Lord has given me to say.” With no real evidence.

Which leads me to conclude that Ken cares little for truth and more about the internet feifdom he believes he has.

33   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 1:49 pm

Not just Ken but all the discernment people can fall prey to envisioning themselves as truth knights. So instead of systematically presenting (for instance) the reasons for your disagreements with Rick Warren complete with some of his quotes and your Biblical understandings why there may be problems, you call him names (Protestant Pope, etc.) and use caustic verbiage that plays to the house but doesn’t create a calm forum for prayerful contemplation.

You forget, it is not YOUR truth it’s God’s, and the only reason you know anything is by His grace. Humility isn’t weakness it is a command of God. Your agressiveness does not substantiate truth, as a matter of fact flesh sometimes obscures truth. What would a “watchman” look like who was clothed in humility, scholarly in his research, and communicated in a spirit of brotherhood without compromising what he believes the Bible teaches?

He might look like…Jesus?

34   DT    http://dead-theologians.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 2:42 pm

Iggy,

If you will send your last post to me at my email I will answer every question one by one. I am tired of dodging bullets here. The lost are bad enough but dealing with the brethren is too much.

Kindest Regards,
Todd Upchurch

35   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 9th, 2007 at 2:49 pm

I am tired of dodging bullets here.

IMHO dodging bullets is better than shouting into an echo chamber.

DT I commend you for wanting to dialogue. It is certainly more than most ODM’s allow.

Peace

36   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 3:07 pm

DT,

First off I am not sure what bullets you are dodging… that we ask for answer to a question and you say, “why is that so important to you?” as an answer?

I do agree with chris about you wanting to do dialog…

You can cut and paste the comment and go to my blog and find my contact info there…

I would prefer you to give answer here… as I find going to email with Ken supporters does nothing but let them get more twisted and argumentative and then blame me for it all… I prefer a public place to engage in discussion as it holds me and the other more accountable for our words and one cannot go and say, “iggy got all mean and nasty” when I did not. (This happened to me over at Oldtruth.com with a guy named Kevin who wanted to do as you want then lied about me and what happened at oldtruth.)

So, I will agree but if you want to change the playing field then you do the foot work. Otherwise I hope you understand as to why I do not desire to do so.

And yes this time it is about me… ; )

Be Blessed,
iggy

37   DT    http://dead-theologians.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 3:13 pm

Iggy,

To be very frank I wonder why you need to keep the playing field tilted your way? I volunteered to spar :) on level ground. What’s wrong with that?

So what if people lied about you? He’s got to answer for that. Part of that goes with the calling of following Christ. They hated Him. As long as you know what is right and that you honored God and were truthful, that is what matters.

Dodging bullets here at info is not the place to “work out your salvation with fear and trembling.”

I don’t understand about the footwork but I will email you tonight.

DT

38   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 3:19 pm

DT,

Your comments here lead me to the reason i do not want to go private with you…

You are already showing that it is ALL ABOUT ME AND MY NOT UNDERSTANDING THINGS ABOUT JESUS.. and all I see is that you do not want a real dialog, but to correct me or show me where i am wrong… you are not listening to me and others here… it is not about us… it is about the Kingdom of God and those who choose to divide it.

The verse you are quoting seems a bit out of context to me also.

I will go public with the emails this time just to warn you.

Be blessed,
iggy

39   Ken Silva    http://www.apprising.org
September 9th, 2007 at 3:38 pm

“all I see is that you do not want a real dialog, but to correct me or show me where i am wrong… you are not listening to me and others here”

Couldn’t DT and me say the exact same thing of you here at this site?

40   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 9th, 2007 at 3:41 pm

Well, yes Ken probably except that Iggy and others here have never said, “That’s it! I’m not coming back here no more no more no more.” Only to come back and “threaten” to leave again. Todd hardly had any bullets shot at him in this thread.

41   Ken Silva    http://www.apprising.org
September 9th, 2007 at 3:49 pm

others here have never said, “That’s it! I’m not coming back here no more no more no more.” Only to come back and “threaten” to leave again.

Joe, this really hasn’t anything to do with the central point in my previous comment. Iggy is essentially saying DT won’t listen to anything he says.

So I attempted to ask those at CRN.(Mis)Info? what’s the difference? Maybe if you gave any impression that you’d actually consider what we might have to say the dialogue would likely take a more hopeful tone.

42   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 9th, 2007 at 3:58 pm

So why come back if we constantly don’t want to dialogue? I mean, if it’s all our fault and we’re just closed minded, infomercial peddling, neo-evangelical apostates, who can’t openly discuss something why come here? Maybe you enjoy the fray? I don’t know I’m guessing.

43   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 3:59 pm

“what’s the difference? ”

One difference might be obvious. The comment section here is open. So the dialogue may not always be productive, but there IS dialogue.

As soon as CRN opens dialogue I will comment there. Still waiting…

44   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 9th, 2007 at 4:09 pm

*tapping foot* still waiting…

45   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 9th, 2007 at 4:14 pm

closed minded, infomercial peddling, neo-evangelical apostates,

You forgot; Hell bound, semi-pelagian, heretic, soft peddling preachers, pied pipers of iniquity. Just to name a few.

46   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 4:16 pm

Semi-pelagian – yes.

Everything else – no.

47   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 9th, 2007 at 4:17 pm

Maybe if you gave any impression that you’d actually consider what we might have to say

Wow!

I’m all ears…Could you actually say something without lobbing “apostate” “heretic” “strawman” or without calling my salvation into question? That might be a good start to dialogue.

48   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 9th, 2007 at 4:19 pm

Semi-pelagian – yes.

Everything else – no.

If I’m assuming correctly; you raise issue with me using terms that Ken hasn’t used.

My apologies… All of the above are not directly attributed to Ken but have been found in the comment section of TeamPyro, CRN (when they had comments), etc…

49   DT    http://dead-theologians.blogspot.com
September 9th, 2007 at 4:20 pm

Iggy,

I simply make comments and ask questions of you and you flip. If you feel that you need the support others seeing our dialog and are not willing to face things out, then that is fine. I wanted to dialog with you privately; you don’t want to.

It is your call.

I have never and would never put your comments to me on an open forum unless you wanted it. Why you would it beyond me.

DT

50   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 4:21 pm

Hey DT – I’m going to sell our e-mails on E-bay!

51   DT    http://dead-theologians.blogspot.com
September 9th, 2007 at 4:22 pm

Iggy,

You said “I will go public with the emails this time just to warn you.”

Was there a first time?

DT

52   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 4:23 pm

No chris, I disavow all the other invectives and I own the semi-pelagian as my own.

Maybe heretic applies in some circles.

53   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 7:54 pm

DT,

“I simply make comments and ask questions of you and you flip. If you feel that you need the support others seeing our dialog and are not willing to face things out, then that is fine. I wanted to dialog with you privately; you don’t want to.”

I don’t remember doing this “flip” nor is it about having support… I comment on your blog without support… in though Rick is there, he is not always in my corner nor do I expect that of him…

As far as “going public” I may have in the past done that, yet most the time I do not. I let it go as even if I do present the emails often the damage is already done by the other party… such as when Ken’s “friend” Phil Perkins (the one who wrote the open letter to Frank Page) stated I was going to sue the school he worked at… I never stated that and went public with my correspondence with Phil Perkins and with the School… funny thing is Phil lost his job and thinks it is becasue he is “standing on truth” and not because he slanders people.

So yes I have gone public but as in the case of Kevin at oldtruth.com I did not as.

1. I was banned because I was accused of saying “nasty” things to Jim Bublitz. (I spoke firmly and with confidence and showed him where he had changed his story and he just got angry)

2. I had so many nasty comments back to me I closed my comments section… (only to be accused I do not like or take negative criticism which you KNOW THAT AINT TRUE… I just stand on what I believe and they don’t like I am not persuaded by arguments where I am called names and have no biblical backing)

Again, DT, I have been through a lot so don’t think I am “dodging” you. I will be glad to even go on your blog and dialog… I just do not see a point to going to private conversation unless you have a reason different from what I can see from you so far. It most likely will be waste of time on both our parts.

I am not against being rebuked… I take criticism and weigh what is said… against scirpture. I take counsel from godly friends… be that online and offline… but one has to have a really good argument based on scripture before i will move my position.

Be Blessed,
iggy

54   Jimmy@RelevantChristian    http://www.relevantchristian.com
September 9th, 2007 at 8:04 pm

Iggy,

Kudos to you…I am of the same mind. I am open to hearing what others have to say…if you think I am wrong…show me scripturaly where I am off…but don’t resort to calling me names as I will instantly tune you out.

Peace

55   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 8:05 pm

“only to be accused I do not like or take negative criticism”

I will openly admit I do not like personal criticism. A personal problem. Theological, doctrinal, perspective, Biblical view, and other criticisms are not a problem.

Personal criticisms from people who do not even know whether these words are coming from an eight year old girl.
I ask for God’s grace. There, I feel better!

56   Jimmy@RelevantChristian    http://www.relevantchristian.com
September 9th, 2007 at 8:11 pm

Rick….my wife bought a t-shirt for me that I love…

“I am open to suggestions…as long as they are mine”

57   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 8:14 pm

Nobody’s perfect, everybody makes mistakes.

I made a mistake once – I thought I was wrong and I wasn’t!

58   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 9th, 2007 at 8:41 pm

This whole thing is surreal. He has to dodge bullets? This is what prompted my involvement in the whole thing

Again, this sounds very personal. Maybe a sermon[sic] forgiveness is in order

. (emphasis mine)

I’ll ask again, “Does that sound like someone interested in honest discussion?”

59   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 8:48 pm

Joe,

I too see this pattern where it seems no matter what I state, an agenda/motive/lack of understanding about a bible thingy or whatever is attached to my statements… they cannot just be answered without some sort of, “Why does that matter so much to you?” while the point is that a brother is in sin and that does not matter to DT… (at least from what I see here)

As I have seen this coming down the road before… quite a few times, I think that one might notice i am willing to dialog… even in hostile territory… but from what I can see if one cannot state to me publicly then really I don’t care to hear it privately… what is the reason for it?

Now, if one is trying to silently defect to the other side and wants my input on how to do it… just email me without all the cloak and dagger junk… I don’t hide my email address like many on the other side do…

Be Blessed, (especially Keith!)
iggy

60   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 8:50 pm

Spam catcher striketh again… so Amy it is not just you…

61   Jimmy@RelevantChristian    http://www.relevantchristian.com
September 9th, 2007 at 8:54 pm

Should we expect anything other than the normal behavior?

62   Keith    http://fivepts.blogspot.com
September 9th, 2007 at 9:11 pm

Rick and Jimmy:
(Another T-shirt idea)
TEAMWORK: Everybody doing what I say.

Just my small contribution this Sunday.

63   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 9th, 2007 at 9:15 pm

Now Keith, That’s Funny!

64   Jimmy@RelevantChristian    http://www.relevantchristian.com
September 9th, 2007 at 9:19 pm

Keith…that is funny…I want one.

65   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 10:16 pm

DT,

BTW if I did not already do it, I do accept your apology… though I am still not sure why you choose to go the Carlos direction…

I thank that I have made a few friends here… not because we all come here for a Ken roasting… but that each of us have come to respect the others opinions and even differences… aside from those who come to solely defend Ingrid or Ken or whoever else…

Notice that Keith who I know we seem to be on the far sides of the spectrum still comes across with respect (though he slips a bit at times) but at least I do not see any real malice toward me… only that he perceives I hate Ken, and that he likes to see us butt heads… (butt heads as in two mountain rams hitting heads… not like Beavis and Butthead though some many see that more than the other!) LOL!

I hope that you can move past the need to attach your own perceptions and agendas to me and my statements and understand that I am what I am… and I stand on Christ and stand against those who abuse others… for Christ was against injustice… and died on a cross to bring justice… so also i view justice treatment of others and very important.

be blessed, (again, for my brother Keith)

iggy