In Silva’s latest MISS[ive] / HIT [and miss] piece, he says
What we need in the American Christian Church right now are some leaders who really want to fight a Truth War; because at this critical moment, we are witnessing a spiritual version of the Vietnam War.
I don’t think Jesus ever fought a truth war. he didn’t go around proactively defending his theology and opposing everyone else’s. I am not saying that he didn’t see the other religions as false. But I don’t think he would have ever started a Truth War on earth. Jesus actively lived out his truth (since he himself was truth) and had intense conversations about truth on a need-only basis.  And even those were not letters sent all over the countryside — they were one-on-one conversations with the men themselves. People were draw to the truth that Jesus lived out, not because they were defeated in a doctrine battle.
One of the reasons why most of the Ken Silva-esque churches in America are in rapid decline is because they would rather create a Truth War than live out the truth in their communities. If the ODMs spent half as much time living the truth in their oikos (friends, family, neighbors, co-workers), then they might actually understand church growth. Are there moments when you confront untruths? Of course. But the metaphor of a battle being waged is not acceptable. Ironically, the BELT OF TRUTH in the armor of God is not a defense mechanism or weapon. it keeps everything secure. it is the spirit of God that is the sword.
Truth was never supposed to be a WAR, it was supposed to be a lifestyle.
![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")
26 Comments(+Add)
nathan,
Ken is right this is a spiritual Vietnam…
They want to fight a “war” and spray their agent orange, burn the houses of the innocent civilians and rape and pillage those same innocents who are just trying to live their lives.
They claim to be the protectors but because they carry the weight of the Law, they are tired, cranky, and not thinking right… so instead of fighting real fights they fight boogiemen that are not there.
Yes, this is a Vietnam… yet worse, they are not even attacking a real enemy as communism… they are attacking the Body of Christ with their religion and hate and bad theology that justifies and glorifies things like war.
So, Ken is right, but it is that he fights in a war that should not be, perpetuates it, and continues to harm those… he refuses to negotiate and even attacks allies… those who prove they are on the same side.
No, Ken this is not Viet Nam… you and those in their Truth War are actually warring against Truth and attacking the Person of Jesus. You have become mercenaries for Satan.
I believe soon Jesus will say no more to you and end this on His terms…
Be blessed,
iggy
I’m not sure I can agree with your overall assertion, Nathan. Jesus did seem to pretty strongly and publicly oppose the false teachers of his day and in his area. Even beginning with John calling the Pharisees snakes, and Jesus calling them hypocrites and blind guides, we can get the strong impression that Jesus didn’t take too kindly to false teachers.
Many of the questions such groups as the Pharisees and Sadducees asked him to try to get him to stumble were about their own false ideas, and Jesus’ answers showed that to them and to those around who heard those exchanges.
Like I said, there were not moments when Jesus did not oppose false teachers. But, if he were asked if he came to wage a truth war or BE the way, truth and life to a broken people, the former would be the first off the list.
Jazzact,
Jesus didn’t exactly call the Pharisees false teachers, at least not in the way people like Ken Silva use the term. Actually, in Matthew 23, Jesus tells the people they should do what the Pharisees tell them to do, but don’t act in the way they do. So the Pharisees actually had a problem of orthopraxy rather than orthodoxy. They were hypocrites and therefore misrepresenting God by their actions.
i think trouncing out references to VietNam, hitler, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum is inflammatory–designed to rile people up and lead them to anger.
It also trivializes real historic tragedies by putting them on par with some huckster’s dogma tantrums.
Jazz,
This was not a war though… Jesus is the only one that can say He could fight for truth, as He was Truth.
Now, the rest of us need be humble and remember that.
In addition, Jesus did not slander or lie about someone as in the case of many mentioned in the Truth War book itself. These men were out to protect their religion just as Ken, Phil, and many others are… they have left the One who called them by grace and turned to propositional truths and precepts they have lowered the bar of truth from the Person of Jesus to rationalized understanding of Scripture through their “system” of theology…
Note the quote even today that states just this by Ken Silva
By stating
Ken is not talking of revelation from Jesus, but revelation from the reformers and that scripture is “clear” if one reasons through it… what he is stating is that there is no need for the Holy Spirit because we have Luther and Calvin and such. This is anti Christian and blatant heresy.
Be blessed,
iggy
nc,
Ken prides himself on not be a respector of persons… he likes to think he is like God in that way…
The issue though is he is disrespecting the men and women of that war and mocking then also. This actuallys shows Ken’s lack of compassion on people and how selfish he really is.
Be blessed,
iggy
I do not like the term “truth war” because it misrepresents the ministry of reconciliation which necessitates confrontation at times, but our battle is with the devil and our own flesh. It also gives the idea that God’s truth is at stake and for Calvinists especially this should be an offensive concept. We must take a humble and committed stand for God’s truth, all of it.
And the “all of it”includes the issues of mercy, humility, love, patience, and personal Christlikeness. We do not get to choose which truths we stand for and which ones we can dismiss or redefine. The importance of our own part we play in any “truth war” is vastly inflated. The apostles were sent to fulfill the Great Commission not fight a truth war. And they sacrificed more than tapping computer keyboards, they gave their very lives.
And if we ever hope to turn hearts away from error we will have to be refitted in different uniforms. The ones that some are now wearing are useless when filled with themselves. The uniforms that God supplies comes with two pieces of wood and three nails, not the self serving bullhorns that are filled with noise but accomplish little.
Rick,
Amen and Amen!
blessings,
iggy
All this “Truth War” talk reminds me of a something I was reading by Walter Wink (that right there probably qualifies me as a heretic). He quotes James A. Sanders as saying, “no false prophet can ever conceive of God as being a God who loves the enemy.”
Wink says this later in the book (The Powers That Be):
Walter Wink is great.
What a great quote.
–Like I said, there were not moments when Jesus did not oppose false teachers. But, if he were asked if he came to wage a truth war or BE the way, truth and life to a broken people, the former would be the first off the list.–
My concern was with a statement such as this…
–Jesus actively lived out his truth (since he himself was truth) and had intense conversations about truth on a need-only basis. And even those were not letters sent all over the countryside — they were one-on-one conversations with the men themselves. People were draw to the truth that Jesus lived out, not because they were defeated in a doctrine battle.–
…it may not be a big thing, but it does irk a bit. Jesus did, for example, have a doctrinal battle with the Sadducees in regards to their lack of belief in life after death. It may be said that His refuting them didn’t draw them to Him, but at the same time it maybe should have.
Would it have fallen under doctrine as well when some Pharisees tried to say Jesus cast out devils through Satan’s power? It’s possible, I guess, depending on how the Messiah should have been viewed by them.
Perhaps Rick is right in saying that the term ‘truth war’ may not be the most accurate. But at the same time, there does seem to be an element, and even a strong one, of conflict with false teachings and beliefs, and the Bible does use some imagery of conflict in such regards–contending for the faith, for example.
I would also point out that Ken used the phrase “internet war” in his email to me. The use of terms like “war” in reference to intrabody conflict excludes it immediately from being from Christ.
Hell Nathan,
I disagree. It is a war out there. Proof:
32″Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. 33But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.
[MAtthew 10] 34″Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn
” ‘a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her motherinlaw—
36a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’
37″Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; 38and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.
Hence it is a war of..
1) A war for truth, where people such as muslims and buddhists and hindus and all sorts of non-christians say that christians do not have a claim to the truth
in addition, we have Brian Mclaren who distort the truth and discredit/ shame all christians. We must make a stand for the truth. And in doing so, it is as good as declaring war.
Thus it is a war against the
1) flesh
2) the world
3) Satan
All 3 of which who seek to undermine God, (as if they can deceive the elect)..
It would be foolish to say there is no war when the war is very much full blown. And the ‘armor of God’ section is a clear analogy, telling us we ARE IN A WAR. Why are we told tp bring a SWORD of the spirit? The full ARMOR of God? It should be quite plain that we are in a war, and it is about God, Jesus and the Truth. (Jesus is the truth, so hence a War about God is a war about the truth).
Why then we sing hymms like ‘onward christian solder’?
Lance,
I don’t think using warfare language is the best thing for Christians to do. For one thing, the term “truth war” means something completely different for a Christian than a Muslim. Also, I think that it is easy for Christians to take a struggle against “principalities ond powers” and turn it into a battle against flesh and blood.
Personally, I hate the song “Onward Christian Soldiers”. There is a warfare aspect to our faith, but our weapons are not like the world’s. As Christians we should fight in the opposite spirit as the Enemy, and like Jesus, be willing to lay down our lives for those who we would consider enemies – yes, even Buddhists, Muslims, and Hindus. God loves them even if they are wrong, and Christ is their only hope.
Truth does not prevail because it is a more “correct” concept, or can be empiracally proven. It prevails because it was embodied by Christ. It prevails because Christ shed His blood to conquer the Powers and set the captives free.
Phil good stuff, but I have a question…
You don’t think that you can have something that is ‘more true’ than another ‘truth’, do you? It’s either true, or it isn’t, when it comes to God, right? The Truth prevails (over falsehood, I presume), because it is ultimately True, always true, and God cannot lie, and yes, Christ IS the Truth. And His Blood conquers all.
The muslim is false because he denies THE Truth. I’m not very Mathematical, but God is, increddibly so, and I remember something from geometry. In geometric proofs, you can have 1,000,000 true points, but if one part is false, it is ALL false, absolutely. But if something is true, it’s completely and totally true, always. Just something I was thinking of, since God reveals Himself in Creation too. And no one is saying here that God is not absolute, right??
In the by the way department, I happen to like that hymm!!! How dare you decry it. You’re probably a heretic huh? You must hate the reformation. lol haha.
But yeah, it’s a war, but our weapons are not of this world. But it IS a war. I think Lance made some good points.
“Truth War” isn’t the WORST way to put it. The world is false, God is True. It’s a “war” in that sense. In the sense that we bring the truth in to the false-ness, and fight that way. But using that to galvinize christians to ATTACK others…? The sword of the Spirit, The Word, is not an attack sword in the Greek, it’s a defensive close combat weapon, a one on one weapon, if you will. A boot knife. Was Jesus, in His incarnation (not His second coming, which inherently IS violent, thank God), since in the incarnation He was our example of how to live, was he violent and ‘warring’, and ‘galvanizing people to fight wars’? No, they wanted that, but He refused. Jesus is our example, let us “walk as He did” (1John2:6)
Love,
Joe
Joe – using the war metaphor seems to me more appropriate in the context in which you placed it. But many times it is used by some to attack brothers, even men who are drifting into deception, and the assumption seems to be that some believe they have ended their journey because they have all the truth.
I like Jude’s “contending” better than war. Of course Paul uses the soldier metaphor but there again as in most Scriptural contexts the war is with this world and the devil. Our ministry to fallen brethren is not war, it is correction, restoration, and a general atmosphere that the father of the prodigal son exemplified. If you read many of the ODMs sites you may see an imbalance in their writings.
Not much humility, not many calls for prayer for the men they site, a demonstrative lack of agape love, and just an open atmosphere of exclusivity revealed in many ways. They need prayer also, they have gone astray as well as others.
Joe,
I think the Incarnation was an act of war, in the spiritual sense. The Church is in a war against spiritual forces, but in that war we fight with spiritual weapons, not natural ones.
I guess my issue with the term (and the book title) “truth war” is that it turns Christianity into an abstraction, an idea. It becomes a debate similar to something like economic policy then. We lay out our ideas, our proofs, and we say, “this is why you should become a Christian”, or “this is why our wolrdview is correct.” There’s nothing inherently wrong in that. It’s just that Christianity is not just a philosophical abstraction. One doesn’t choose to become a Christian based on these types of arguments. A person only becomes a Christian because of the work of the Holy Spirit. The apologetics aspect has some place, but I think it is crutch the Church has put too much trust in, overall.
I don’t quite understand what you’re getting at with your mathematics metaphor. I think we need to be careful speaking in absolute terms when referring to what we believe, as in one religion is absolutely correct and another is absolutely wrong. I believe Muslims, Buddhists, etc. are misquided, but there are some areas where they may have some truth. There are some things that Christians are in agreement with Muslims on, actually. I’m not saying that Islam leads to salvation. I’m also not supporting relativism and saying that there are multiple “truths”. I’m just saying we need to be careful to remain humble, and realize that as humans we will always be limited in our capacity to fully grasp the truth.
Right right Phil.
I was more on the aspect of God being absolutely True, and what He says is True absolutely. Not really going for the human aspect of the equation. My point was I feel in Scripture God deals in absolutes. And the bottom line of a Muslim for instance is that they’re false, even if they know or have true things in their faith, the bottom line is falsehood because of a lack of the blood of Christ. You see what I’m saying now. I agree you with you brother.
Joe
Joe, Rick,
John MacArthur confuses “contend” with “defend” as there is a difference.
A prizefighter will fight to defend his title… but a contender is striving toward the goal to be the titleholder.
Jude is not advocating war… or that we defend “truth”… in fact if we believe the bibles teaching that Jesus is the Truth, how do we defend Jesus… is He not our defender? To me then I do not defend truth, it defends me! To say I defend truth then makes “contending” more man based than Christ based.
Now, we are called to defend the gospel, yet, defending the gospel is done by using Truth… it is again that truth defends us and the very gospel we believe.
Contending is this striving and seek after the Kingdom of our faith… and after Jesus Christ the King of that Kingdom and as we do He will direct our path and will defend us. Interestingly Jesus taught to not prepare to defend ourselves…
Luke 12:11 “When you are brought before synagogues, rulers and authorities, do not worry about how you will defend yourselves or what you will say,
Luke 12:12 for the Holy Spirit will teach you at that time what you should say.â€
I think this further proves that Lordship Salvation is man based as one must decide to become a disciple before one is even regenerate… and one must defend Jesus who is our defender!
Be blessed,
iggy
Yes iggy and amen. Jesus defends us if we stand in His truth.
A critical question we have to ask constantly (myself too) is: is what we believe the truth? Could we be somehow wrong somewhere?We have to be on the alert and test assumptions in the light of scripture and its context (only).
One fear that i have is that what i may hold to is wrong. I fear one day that because of human pride, we may choose to prefer the wrong but old concept instead of the biblical right.
I guess its a kind of a war in itself? Lol.
[what we believe the truth? Could we be somehow wrong somewhere?] – i qualify the statement and affirm that scripture is complete and not lacking in anything and perfect and flawless.
Phil,
You said that muslims and buddhist etc have some truth in them. Well, if you take their teachings out of their context, yes.
If you include the context their teachings, which must assume the denial of Christ or monotheism or certain key parts of the gospel truth, then the muslims and buddhists are totally wrong even if the sentence/verse when taken out its context, is correct.
Letme give you a buddhist example
Buddhists believe in karma. They believe that when one does something wrong, it results in cause and effect. Biblically the concept of cause and effect per se squares in with scripture – e.g. at the point where we are to receieve the wages of sin, which is death, when we deny Christ.
So taking the idea out of context, the idea of ’cause and effect’ seems biblical.
However, key to their teachings in ’cause and effect’, is the idea that a person can be reincarnated and the sins of his past life will be paid for using sufferings in his present life, which orthodox christiainity denies vehemently.
So when we see the idea ’cause and effect’ in buddhist circles, the context comes in and hence, there is really, no truth in it at all. I hope you understand that like scripture, we cannot take the words of muslims’ quran or buddhist sutras out of their context. Same for scientific papers and literature anyway.
Jesus Christ is the savior. He is also the Lord of all who are saved. That sums up Lordship salvation for me. I didn’t think ‘defending Jesus’ was part of Him being my Lord AND Savior. He gives us the Truth, in the Word, and His Person, which we learn about from The Word, and it defends itself, we just give it out. That’s how we refute error. You confused me iggy.
Joe
Lance,
I am not saying that we should look to other religions for good. I’m only saying that it is possible to use some concept from them as a starting point to introducing their adherents to Christ. Beginning a conversation by telling someone there is some agreement between yourself and the other person usually is more fruitful then coming with the attitude of, “let me tell you why I’m right and you’re wrong.”
Lance,
Can we be wrong somewhere? Yes… even now I really do give a lot of Grace to others… and I extend it to the ODM’s also… it may not seem like it to some, but I have been where they are and know how they think and i truly do hurt for them… That is why I often tell people to pray for them (not against them to as one of their defenders stated to me to punish them) In fact I ask specifically for people to pray a prayer of blessing for these people.
I do though see that to preach any law, rule or whatever as an addition to Grace is as Paul stated, preaching “another gospel which is not gospel at all” and though I am a bit weaker than Paul I do not hope for their curse but that they repent and return to the One that called them by Grace.
be blessed,
iggy