I came across a list of ten fixtures of evangelical churches that the author finds “harmful”. Here’s the list:

#1 Making Converts
#2 The Sinner’s Prayer
#3 “Do you know Jesus as…”
#4 Tribulationism
#5 Testimonies
#6 The Altar Call
#7 Witnessing
#8 Protestant Prayers
#9 The Church Growth Movement
#10 Chick Tracts

Now you’re waiting for the link right? You’re waiting for a link that will take you over to one of our bad little watchdoggie friends so we can point out that he (or she) is busily gnawing on the shoes of the church, or tearing up the furniture.

Well I can give you the link, but it won’t take you to a watchdoggie. Instead it will take you to Joe Carter writing at the Evangelical Outpost. And I agree with most of his points. Points that are often iterated by the watchdoggies. The difference is that Joe iterates these points with civility and a sense of brotherhood. On the other hand watchdoggies make these points with malice, and vitriol. Perhaps its time the watchdoggies out there enrolled in obedience school and learned how to adopt a methodology similar to Joe’s.

Oh and one other thing. Check out the final sentence:

But I really do believe that these “fixtures” have become detrimental to the making of disciples. Am I wrong? I’m open to hearing counter-claims.

There’s the final exam for watchdoggie obedience school, the ability to admit the possibility for error and being open to correction and discussion would be grounds for graduation.

  • Share/Bookmark
This entry was posted on Saturday, September 8th, 2007 at 10:12 am and is filed under Linked Articles. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+/- Collapse/Expand All

40 Comments(+Add)

1   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 8th, 2007 at 10:42 am

Anything can become stagnant. I have been in churches where the altar call is a dead formality. I have been in churches where they pride themselves with having no altar call and that atmosphere is absolutely dead.

Witnessing can be become perfunctory and it can also be with passion. All those things he mentioned can be hinderances to gosple life if we are not careful.

But a group can lampoon all those things on the list contending that they stick only to the Bible, and they can be so consumed with self righteousness that they are dead as last year’s birds nest. A humble openess to the Spirit’s correction and life breathing essence is the essential element to retaining an atmosphere of passion.

2   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net/lp_blog/blog.htm
September 8th, 2007 at 12:02 pm

Carter makes good points and a decent case to go along with each. I’d have to agree with him on many of these in some respects.

3   Keith    http://fivepts.blogspot.com
September 8th, 2007 at 1:12 pm

Carter’s post is good.

Let me guess. re: There’s the final exam for watchdoggie obedience school, the ability to admit the possibility for error and being open to correction and discussion would be grounds for graduation. You think you (this site) does a good (or maybe even great) job of this? Having been on both sides of the fence, I say you don’t. This site at times has exhibited just as hateful, pompus, “we’re better than you” of an attitude as some of the “watchdoggies”–as you call them. Many times I thought about changing this site’s label in my bookmarks to “Iggy and Joe Hate Ken” You guys can be JUST as mean. Signing a post “be blessed” or whatever doesn’t make everything better. That’s like gossiping about someone or calling them a horrible name, followed by “bless her heart.” (It’s not like a Diet Coke and a Baby Ruth–they don’t cancel each other out!)

This site is just a watchdog for the watchdogs. I guess for you that’s good…you’ll never run out of material and neither will they.

4   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 8th, 2007 at 1:14 pm

Hey Tim – did you notice that CRN not only posted this article, but get this line:

*Update* General Editor note: I don’t do this often but this is such an important issue. Christian Research Net agrees with Carter’s article and his conclusion:

Ken doesn’t often let it be known he agrees with his posts? I must be missing something?

5   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 8th, 2007 at 1:47 pm

Keith said, (after he took his break from us)

Many times I thought about changing this site’s label in my bookmarks to “Iggy and Joe Hate Ken”

Iggy doesn’t post here, he only comments. I challenge you to go back and find my last post about Ken. Besides Niel, I’m the least active contributor here. Thanks for the love though Keith. By the way, I’m working on a few satire pieces about your blog. Especially the one about how to grow your church. I’ll be posting it on my own blog, not here though.
Now, I’m off to check if IggyNJoehateKen.com is available on GoDaddy.

6   Tim Reed    http://theotstrikesback.com
September 8th, 2007 at 1:56 pm

Keith,
That argument has been made before, and its been answered before, and it just doesn’t hold up.

First, we allow (with the exception of mistakes and technological issues) every non-spammy comment through. If we screwed up or you disagree with us then you can let us know. That’s not true any, or at least the majority of major watchdoggie sites.

Second, there is no where close to the level of vitriol found here as on watchdoggie sites. In recent memory on C?N.com we’ve had worshipers excoriated for using commonly used practice books, claims that certain types of churches are producing “false christians”, deliberate distortions about what e/e leaders believe, and we haven’t even gotten into the various petty names Ken et al. have come up with (the hollow men of the emerging church, the pope of protestants etc). Where have you seen anything close to that level of malice on CRN.info? That’s not a rhetorical question, that’s a legitimate inquiry. One that you can answer freely and have posted in our comments.

Third, we have never decided who’s in and who’s out of the church. The watchdoggies have done that on an almost daily basis.

Finally, no one here has set up anyone as their enemy. The watchdoggies clearly have done that. Ken at one point recently even referred to one of his allies as his “brother in arms”, as opposed to his “brother in Christ”. You can see that with Chris R. happily joining together with people who explicitly deny baptismal regeneration and infant baptism, and with the acceptance of Rick who is a dirty dirty semi-pelagian Arminian as long as he attacked the right people. This point and point three are connected. The watchdoggies claim that the people they attack are outside of Christ and on their way to hell so they can treat them as the world treats enemies. Again, if you believe CRN.info has done the same thing go ahead and point them out. This isn’t a rhetorical device, its a legitimate challenge/question/discussion/whatever you want to call it.

And finally finally whenever watchdoggies have been so completely wrong that its obvious even to their rabid commenters a correction and apology is never posted. The post just disappears without comment. We’ve had one post accidently deleted and then reposted, and then one post edited and an explanation posted as to why.

Keith, I have about a million times more respect for you than I do for the watchdoggies because you have been willing to discuss the issues, mostly malice-free. But on this issue I think you’re letting your sympathies for the watchdoggies get in the way of clarity. I suppose you could say the same about me, and you might be right, but the only way for either of us to agree or at least stake out clarity on the issue is to discuss it in this way. Am I wrong in my assessments? I don’t think so, but you have the opportunity to show me my error.

7   M.G.    
September 8th, 2007 at 2:15 pm

This is weird stuff from CRN:

“What I’d like to stress for the edification for the new evangelicals who have bought into the repainted social gospel within the new infomercial Christianity is this: Carter is completely within Christian ethics by engaging those with “counter-claims.”

CRN commends our brother for this willingness to have dialogue on these matters. 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. Like Luther knew, so we also know, there comes a time when reform will require action and not mere talk about said reforms.”

Huh? What is he talking about? Since when are talk and action mutually exclusive? And what can Protestants do, other than talk? Is Ken going to ex-communicate people he disagrees with? Does Ken think he’s our generation’s Luther?

And it’s interesting how CRN’s analysis of Joe’s post is so portentous. Joe was just making some observations about how evangelicals sometimes employ tactics that actually backfire. Joe , though, was also open to comments that would argue otherwise. It’s all rather pedestrian, but CRN talks about “Christian ethics?” What? Why is everything at CRN so self-important?

It’s all rather strange, almost worrisome.

8   Keith    http://fivepts.blogspot.com
September 8th, 2007 at 2:34 pm

Tim: Thanks for your response. I probably should have re-thought and/or re-written my comment(s) before clicking “Submit.”

First, I must admit that there are some posts by the ODM’s that I do not agree with or simply don’t understand the “big stink.” My kids watched VeggieTales and they don’t believe God is a tomato (or whatever the cartoon was trying to depict; it’s been a long time since I’ve seen any of the videos).

Second, I do think there are some posts by ODM’s that are legit and do provide a warning of sorts. Take A Little Leaven’s recent post re: Napoleon Dynamite related “Jesus Junk.” That’s just silly and that kind of stuff makes Christianity look really stupid.

Third, re: your statement: there is no where close to the level of vitriol found here Are you at least admitting there may be SOME caustic comments made here?

Fourth, I believe my memory serves me correctly, but since I have neither the time nor the technical expertise to search your site for offending name calling, etc. I’ll back off that one; but in all honestly, I believe I have read some comments that fit that category. Forty lashes with a wet noodle for me for not bookmarking such things if (and I’m giving you benefit of doubt) they exist.

Fifth, I think we all allow our “sympathies” to cloud our judgment, thinking, etc. I’m being honest here, but whenever I see the names of Brian McLaren or Rob Bell, I immediately make judgments and/or disregard whatever they are saying. I bet the same happens for people when they see the names of John MacArthur or R.C. Sproul.

Joe: OK. I admit yours was the first name I thought of (after Iggy’s). I cannot find (see “Fourth” above) any specific post, but there have been times that you quick wit could have been interpreted differently from your intended meaning. I am guilty of the same. re: my “fix you church” post, satire away if you must, but the sad thing is that most of that post is biographical–I left a church that pretty much followed that model to a “T.”

re: Iggy doesn’t post here, he only comments I think you knew what I meant. Cut me some slack. I’m probably old enough to be your dad.

You have to admit. Iggy seems to keep his BVD’s in a twist over Ken Silva. They seem to feed off each other. What else would we have to do if we couldn’t watch those two go at it?!

OK. I’ve tried to smooth things over. Sorry for the ruffled feathers. I’ll be quiet…for now.

9   Tim Reed    http://theotstrikesback.com
September 8th, 2007 at 4:44 pm

Third, re: your statement: there is no where close to the level of vitriol found here Are you at least admitting there may be SOME caustic comments made here?

Keith,
Sure there’s been some, that’s why Chris L. posted that post awhile back calling for us to raise the tone. But I don’t think its pervasive, or on nearly the same level as the watchdoggies.

10   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 8th, 2007 at 4:48 pm

Keith – You are correct. There is nobody who doesn’t have a caustic moment. Some, though, are practitioners of such. Not you, and Aquarius, we thank you.

11   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 4:30 am

Chris L,

I gave a response to Keith but the spam filter from hell has eaten every comment… use the last one I did if you will.

Thanks,
iggy

12   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 4:43 am

Keith,

“Many times I thought about changing this site’s label in my bookmarks to “Iggy and Joe Hate Ken” You guys can be JUST as mean.”

Ummm, I don’t hate Ken and this to me is a bit of slander… In fact I truly resent you saying this… it is Ken who has stated that I “am his nemesis”, and I have never stated once I hate Ken… I have always referred to him as a brother in Christ.

The other thing is that you seem to think I “are mean“… and I think you miss that I ask a question Ken gives an insult instead of an answer… Ken states a lie, and I call him on it and he insults me. Ken does some double speak and contradicts himself and I call him on it and he speaks hateful things at me… I may respond in a humorous way, but it is never “hateful”.

To prove to you this… notice his post by Ken about me on CRN.

Link 1

Link 2

Now notice what I state about him elsewhere…

Link 3

Here is everything I have written on Ken Silva… I think it shows my concerns and that I am not against HIM but for HIM and that I want God’s best for Ken.

Link 4

So I hope that clears up your thoughts and misrepresentation about me hating Ken… Ken hates me… and hates that I show him he is wrong and hates more to admit he is… Instead of apologies he states, “get over it.” You know like Jesus teaches us to to if we offend another… ; )

Be Blessed,
iggy

13   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 9th, 2007 at 1:37 pm

I find it so ironic that many of the “emergents” that are “so wrong” and so “heretical” also speak out against the very same things this article brings up…

I remember a while ago reading someone in the fundy camp stating that those mega churches are so impersonal.. and them going to a friends blog (emerging) who wrote about a church with no door handles and showed the outside of a local church that they kept the doors locked to keep out the “homeless and such” so the doors could only be opened from the inside to let a “member” in.

Yet, the fundies still hate the emergents… though they agree on more than they even realize! LOL!

be blessed,
iggy

14   keith    http://fivepts.blogspot.com
September 10th, 2007 at 10:31 am

Iggy:
I don’t doubt your sincerity. I don’t doubt your love for Christ. I don’t doubt your salvation.

I read the links you provided and I would say that THOSE posts/comments do project a “kinder/gentler Iggy.” However, sometimes WHAT you say is overshadowed by HOW you say it. (I include myself here as well.) Sometimes…note I said SOMETIMES…your delivery can be such that you say Ken is the one that “hates” you, but the tone seems to be that the feeling is mutual. Just an observation.

There is no doubt that we are all very passionate about our theologies/doctrines (well, except for the Indpendent Christian Church people I know; they don’t discuss doctrine) and sometimes our emotions get the best of us. If I offended you, that was not my goal. My comment was intended to be more tongue-in-cheek.

NOW, here’s a question I’ve sincerely been considering: Is it possible to be a Christian and NOT LIKE someone? Speaking honestly here, there are some people I encounter in this ol’ world, I just don’t like. Don’t want to be friends with them. Don’t want to socialize with them. Unless spoken to, don’t want to talk with them. I don’t hate them. I’m not rude to them, I just don’t engage them unless I have to. Your thoughts?

BTW, I don’t “hate the emergents…” I think they are wrong in some areas, but then they think the same of me and my “kind.” In words of that great theologian, Rodney King: Can’t we all jus’ git along!!

15   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2007 at 10:43 am

“Iggy:
I don’t doubt your sincerity. I don’t doubt your love for Christ. I don’t doubt your salvation. ”

Neither do I Iggy, I just doubt your intelligence!

OK, OK, Keith serves up a softball and I swung, sorry!

A good and sincere comment Keith, we should all have more like that.

16   Tim Reed    http://theotstrikesback.com
September 10th, 2007 at 10:50 am

NOW, here’s a question I’ve sincerely been considering: Is it possible to be a Christian and NOT LIKE someone? Speaking honestly here, there are some people I encounter in this ol’ world, I just don’t like. Don’t want to be friends with them. Don’t want to socialize with them. Unless spoken to, don’t want to talk with them. I don’t hate them. I’m not rude to them, I just don’t engage them unless I have to. Your thoughts?

This is a really interesting question. I don’t think that anyone will deny that there are people like that in each of our lives. But maybe that’s just the circumstances for why there are Biblical commands to be gentle with one another, to be graceful with one another etc. Those commands aren’t really all that amazing unless tehy are applied to outcasts, and unlikable people.

I also think this is where a Biblical definition of love comes into play. If we define love as feelings then its impossible to separate love and like. But the Biblical definition of love is based on what we do for others (Greater love has no man than this…). So if we are able to set aside the unlikablity of someone in our minds and serve them then is there a “likablity sin issue”?

17   Ken Silva    http://www.apprising.org
September 10th, 2007 at 11:46 am

iggy whines: “Ken hates me…” Nope. Sorry to rain on the self-pity parade but I hate the false garbage he spews in his obvious ignorance about the genuine Christian faith.

Better toughen up the skin boyz the battle’s only going to intensify. Know the times you live in:

The Pharisees and Sadducees came up [today's new evangelicals amd Emergents], and testing Jesus, they asked Him to show them a sign from heaven. But He replied to them, “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.’ “And in the morning, ‘There will be a storm today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ Do you know how to discern the appearance of the sky, but cannot discern the signs of the times?”

If you have trouble handling what I preach fellas you’re going to urinate in your trousers when you face the men of God who are yet to come. You should see how dark the sky is over the man-loving American Christian Church… cheers.

18   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2007 at 11:52 am

Keith,

To like someone is about conditions… true love of God and from us is unconditional… one cannot earn God’s love and we cannot (having been loved of God) while giving away God’s love not do so unconditionally.

Now, do I like Ken (for example) Truthfully I have no idea… at times he seems likeable, at other times he seems such an arrogant prig that I can’t see his own mother liking him… but then that is from my perspective… ; )

The truth is Ken has written me off without a thought to me as a person… while I ache tried to contact him and get to know him… he just does not want that.

So it seems Ken “hates” me and at times I really do not like him… I admit it! LOL! (Wow I feel sooo much better and I think I can go on with my life now! LOL!)

I don’t really care about what Ken Silva thinks on much… even less about what he thinks about me, I do care that he is hurting those in the Body of Christ and seems to relish spreading hate around instead of actually being discerning and trying to bring reconciliation out of all of this.

Walter Martin is Ken’s idol and Walter always left the door open for anyone to change their mind… be it Mormon, JW, or any other cultist…Walter took heat on his acceptance of the Seventh Day Adventists and even that he accepted that some in the RCC could be saved! A close friend of his stated Walter referred to himself as a Cal-Minian…

Now, if Ken was to be honest he would have to distance himself from Walter the Cultist loving – apostate- man loving semi pelagian- compromising -papist… or whatever Ken would call someone like Walter….

So, to me it is not that I hate Ken, but that I love him and care enough to stay in his face and show him things like above where he condemns others and idolizes some who are just like them.

Also, Keith, you might find this interesting as I don’t really take much from you as offensive… I was a bit hurt as it seems a few people are stating I hate Ken… It may be I come across that way… it is not intentional and I just want to make it clear I do not… I get frustrated with some who demand precise answers from others but dodge questions themselves or call names in instead of an answer.

I find for some reason I understand you…. LOL! I also don’t see any false pretenses about you.

Be Blessed,
iggy

19   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2007 at 12:06 pm

Ken,

Then be big enough to man up to you accusations… am I saved or not?

Also, what about my beliefs a so worthy of your “hate”?

And thank you for FINALLY stating something that is of some clarity.

I have already shown you that I am not a semi pelagian as you accused… I have shown you just about all the statements you have made were not true about me… so again… if you set out an accusation what is it you hold against me?

In fact anyone who has stated that I am in error can be certain I have a biblical reason for my belief in a certain thing… and usually a historical backing as well… I m not saying I am or can’t be wrong… but it is clear that you often cannot separate the person from what YOU perceive them to believe.

Blessings,
iggy

20   Tim Reed    http://theotstrikesback.com
September 10th, 2007 at 12:07 pm

Ken,

Better toughen up the skin boyz the battle’s only going to intensify. Know the times you live in:

Are you really so interested in making enemies of those Christ has saved? Because all of your war metaphors only adds to the impression that you are battling against flesh and blood.

I also find it interesting that you’re so willing to add to scripture in teh way you did. I guess some people see scripture as authoritative, and others see it as something to manipulate.

21   Ken Silva    http://www.apprising.org
September 10th, 2007 at 12:11 pm

Tim,

You are supposely one of Christ’s teachers? And are you really so blind?

22   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2007 at 12:16 pm

Ken,

“The Pharisees and Sadducees came up [today’s new evangelicals amd Emergents], and testing Jesus, they asked Him to show them a sign from heaven. But He replied to them, “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.’ “And in the morning, ‘There will be a storm today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ Do you know how to discern the appearance of the sky, but cannot discern the signs of the times?”

So you do not see that you are adding to the word of God here? I think you have no real clue to the meaning of this verse… in fact you are just proving more that you have lost it and can’t read any verses without your filter of “anti” someone.

The Pharisees thought they were able to persuade God’s hand by their belief… that keeping the Law would force YHWH to act… and free them from Rome

The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection and were in it for the power and money with the support of Rome…

I don’t know too many “emergent’s’ living that well off nor keep the Law to make God do their bidding.

They also cared more for the legalities and not for things like justice and mercy was what this judgment will be about…

So, your warning is also a bit out of date… as this judgment came in 70ad… I do see a future judgment to come… but I fear you will be on the receiving end as you seem to think that what you believe is more important than a relationship with the Living Word… I fear for you as you say, “Lord, Lord didn’t I…” and He replies, “I never knew you.”

Be Blessed,
iggy

Be Blessed,
iggy

23   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2007 at 12:18 pm

Tim,

I find that these people like Ken mouth authoritative, but use it as you stated… manipulative… that was the sin of the Pharisee.

So you nailed it…

blessings,
iggy

24   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net/lp_blog/blog.htm
September 10th, 2007 at 1:54 pm

Why don’t I give each of you a nerf baseball bat, lock you in a room, and let you take care of this disagreement?

That would be fun.

25   M.G.    
September 10th, 2007 at 1:58 pm

Ken,

You write, “if you have trouble handling what I preach.”

No one has an issue with *what* you preach. All of your targets are human and therefore imperfect. We each can use criticism and correction from our brothers and sisters in the Lord. I agree completely that many of the currents fads of evangelicalism are hurtful to the Church. Would that we all heed the Spirit in our lives and our vocations.

It’s *how* you preach the people largely have a problem with.

It’s just that your ministry is nothing but a series of short-sighted, poorly reasoned, self-important, and self-indulgent ramblings of a man I honestly worry about. Much of what you say I can’t even decipher and the rest often strikes me as blasphemous.

Don’t you get that? It’s not about enemies and it’s not about people getting in the way of your doing the Lord’s work. It’s that nothing you do or say on the internet even approaches “teaching” much less something that actually edifies.

For instance, I tried to verify your quotes about Rick Warren at the Aspen Institute. I couldn’t find them. How can you verify your reporting? I did find other quotes by Rick, where he stated flatly that tolerance shouldn’t stand for relativism regarding truth, and that if someone believes everything, he really believes nothing. Out of basic journalistic integrity, shouldn’t you at least have something approaching an accurate picture of the man you gleefully denigrate? If the unsaved do that in their reporting, shouldn’t we as well?
How can a Christian defend his work when he doesn’t abide by the basic journalistic practices found in the work of non-Christians?

This is just one example of how shoddy and amateur your ministry is. The whole thing is a mess. An absolute mess.

26   keith    http://fivepts.blogspot.com
September 10th, 2007 at 1:59 pm

I’ll start selling the T-Shirts!
“I went to the Ken vs. Iggy Nerf Bat Championship…and all I got was this lousy t-shirt.”

27   Ken Silva    http://www.apprising.org
September 10th, 2007 at 2:47 pm

M.G.,

Man or woman, I can’t help it if you can’t find the quotes but I gave the source and the actual link to the online page of Tamara Hartzell’s book.

What was it; were there too many words for you to make the effort to substantiate your criticism of me? Here it is again, quarter of the way down the page (Online source).

And M.G. [whoever you are] please know that I personally couldn’t care less about your particular assessment of how you think I should do ministry.

So, unless you wish to be frustrated, I would advise that you might as well forget trying to instruct me how to do what I’m called to do. Thanks. :-)

28   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2007 at 2:50 pm

Just for the record, Arthur of Camelot was Pelagian.

29   M.G.    
September 10th, 2007 at 3:10 pm

Ken,

You link to another article, similar to yours, that then cites to Lighthouse ministries. The page at Lighthouse ministries, purporting to offer a transcript of the event, DOES NOT WORK.

This is insufficient. I’m interested in transcripts of events, not *hearsay.* That seems simple enough. And, so, again I ask, do you or someone you cite to have an independent verification of the quotes? Again, if non-Christians adequately cite their resources, or, just as importantly, CHECK THEIR OWN CITATIONS, then why can’t you, as a Christian?

I don’t appreciate the sarcasm. I’m not stupid, for what it’s worth.

What you think of my assessments is your business. But I repeat my point, you run a poorly-reasoned, poorly researched, shell of a ministry. You attack people on the flimsiest of evidence and you show an utter lack of regard for the kinds of practices shown by non-Christians. It’s all a joke. And a sad one at that.

30   M.G.    
September 10th, 2007 at 3:15 pm

p.s.

The fact that you regularly mention your calling as a justification for your diatribes is troubling. Though you may think that you are above reproach or correction by your fellow man because you are “called” doesn’t mean that God has no opinion as to you so blithely mentioning Him as an excuse for failing to engage in serious or thoughtful teaching.

May God, truly, have mercy on your soul.

31   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2007 at 3:21 pm

M.G.

“What you think of my assessments is your business. But I repeat my point, you run a poorly-reasoned, poorly researched, shell of a ministry. You attack people on the flimsiest of evidence and you show an utter lack of regard for the kinds of practices shown by non-Christians. It’s all a joke. And a sad one at that.”

I might add that there is little to no way a person seems to be able to be “restored” by Ken’s ministry… when they are wrong they are wrong forever amen… in the name of Ken Silva let us have mercy!

Again, you see the lack of true “credible” sources… you know like you stated… a transcript from the actual event where the person stated these comments Ken is stating… and that Ken is not reinterpreting their statements as he tends to do.

And as far as sarcasm…

To quote Rush Limbah, “When you run out of substanant arguments, you resort to name calling!… Now here is more Femi-Naz news!” ( That is a real quote btw)

Be Blessed,
iggy

32   Ken Silva    http://www.apprising.org
September 10th, 2007 at 3:33 pm

M.G., whoever you may be, say what you want about me but I am right in the open for all to see. I notice you didn’t aologize for saying the info re. the Warren quotes wasn’t there all along. By the way that webpage is chapter 19 of the online version of an entire printed book of nearly 400 pages sitting right here on my desk.

It’s called “In the Name of Purpose” and if your superior knowledge as to how to conduct secular research is so good then why didn’t you know that? Footnote 15 at the aforementioned page, which led you to Lighthouse Trails, gives you “The Aspen Institute, July 6, 2005, ‘Discussion: Religion and Leadership,’ with David Gergen and Rick Warren.”

If you’re so prepared to instruct me in how to do my research then why didn’t you go and download the audio yourself as I did? Listen to it; because an expert on reasearch like you should know that Warren shooting off his own mouth is a primary source, and not heresay.

But here’s the root of your problem, M.G., whoever you are, “Though you may think that you are above reproach or correction by your fellow man because you are ‘called’ doesn’t mean that God has no opinion as to you so blithely mentioning Him as an excuse for failing to engage in serious or thoughtful teaching.”

I’m not above approach and/or correction. In fact elsewhere, and even here at CRN.(Mis)Info? I have revealed the levels of accountability I willing make myself available for. O, but to ascertain that bit of information might require a little research on your part. peace.

33   M.G.    
September 10th, 2007 at 4:13 pm

p.p.s.

I noticed the piece they just put up about anonymous commenting.

Ken, for what it’s worth, I’m a man. My name isn’t hyperlinked because I don’t have a blog. I think there are enough blogs as it is.

If you want my e-mail address, I’ll give it you, happily. Just let me know.

Final thing about everything I’ve said. It’s not personal. None of it is. I just want the best for your ministry, this blog, and every person I come across who also calls himself or herself a Christian. You made things personal by insinuating that I’m stupid. I’m not, and I don’t appreciate the insult. I won’t dare to insult you, but, yes, I have been quite frank in my assessment of your ministry. But none of it is personal and it’s all been in a spirit of, well, concern.

And so, in the end, all I can do is wish you my very best. No sarcasm, just brotherly love.

34   M.G.    
September 10th, 2007 at 4:45 pm

Ken,

I still can’t get the audio file on the Lighthouse webpage to work, though you claim to have listened to it. Perhaps it is all my fault somehow. (Can others get it to work?) If it is my fault, then I would indeed owe you a sincere apology.

I know what you’ve written about accountability. I was addressing the use of “calling” as a defense to criticisms. It’s not a valid one. You address criticism with either acceptance of responsibility or justifications for behavior. You don’t simply say that one’s behavior is a “calling” as if that excuses whatever one may do under such a banner.

Whatever you, or anyone else, wishes to know about me, I’m an open book. Really. Although, I suspect, such a discussion about me would be fruitless. Why do things have to be so personal, and filled with such enmity? I have no enmity towards you. Again, I wish you only the best.

Grace and peace,
M.G.

35   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2007 at 4:50 pm

Ken takes everything personal thus the insults he hurls… it is a sign he is very insecure…

Here come the stones!

Be Blessed,
iggy

36   Ken Silva    http://www.apprising.org
September 10th, 2007 at 5:06 pm

Whatever you say. No stones dude. *extending a rose to iggy*

37   M.G.    
September 10th, 2007 at 5:20 pm

Ken,

That’s very nice of you. Seriously, wouldn’t it be better if things didn’t get so heated and everyone worked to a place of fruitful discussion, biblical correction, and speaking the truth in love?

38   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2007 at 5:25 pm

Ken,

How thoughtful… the Rose of Sharon?

I hope you understand that was not a put down about the insecurity… it is only an observation… I find that those that must resort to name calling have some great insecurities…

Also, did you get your t shirt? i have yet to receive mine.

Be Blessed,
iggy

39   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2007 at 6:22 pm

Ken,

I have read portions of Tamara Hartzells E-Book and it is an expose only in the fact that it exposes…well nothing really. Most of the bibliography is littered with members of the “choir” if you well. The rest is blatant proof-texting. She raises issue with the use of the “Message”, she raises issue with Arminianism, she raises issue with ties to the Catholic Church. One thing that she gets right though is her letter to the reader which states:

The whole book can be found here

In addition, we are called to speak the truth in love, not to help people feel good in their error or worry about what people will think of us when we go against the tide. Warning people in the path of a destructive tidal wave is done by urgently proclaiming the truth, not by offering sugar-coated affirmations. Yet the pseudo-battle between “positive” and “negative” has people covering their ears to warnings about the departure from the faith.
Our battle is not against flesh and blood. It is “against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places” (Ephesians 6:12). We need to fight the battle for souls, not the battles our Adversary would have us fight to distract us.

Ken, maybe your “sounding the alarm”shouldn’t sound like a clanging cymbal. You might get more people to listen to you.

40   Scotty    http://scottysplace-scotty.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2007 at 8:03 pm

Julie said, “Why don’t I give each of you a nerf baseball bat, lock you in a room, and let you take care of this disagreement?

That would be fun. ”

I believe I would pay good money for a seat! ;-)