This really is getting ridiculous…

So … while posting article after article that really DOES attack people, when someone decides that they should follow wikipedia rules and remove blogs as sources, they are “attacking” the authors of those blogs, as if apprising.org is the only blog removed from being sourced in the entire history of wikipedia.

1. No one here has called for or wishes for Ken’s “demise”.
2. The person who wrote the letter in is obviously still under the impression that “put down” meant something it did not.

Number one is a testament to another outright lie that Ken is propagating on his blog(s). Number two is a result of the fact that Ken/Ingrid have still yet to remove the posts that promote the lie that Chris wishes them physical harm.

At what point will Ken take his “if you can’t take the heat” crap to heart. Practice what you preach, bro. No one is out to get you … but as long as you continue to attack good men, there will be people to defend them. If you take that personally … well … that just means you’ve got problems.

LISTEN, no one wants you dead or hurt. They just want your useless websites and your so called “research” gone from the internet. But as long as you have the time and energy to invest in the fairy-tale factory, then there will be people who will fight to protect good men. Don’t fling mud and expect not to get dirty.

And for goodness sake, quit WHINING! It’s your medicine, so stop complaining when you have to taste it every once in a while.

Now you know a small percentage of what the men you attack have to go through. How does it feel?

Tonight children will sleep in Uganda in fear for their lives; tonight Christian families in Iraq will awaken at sounds thinking they are to be killed; tonight thousands in Africa will draw their last AIDs infected breath and enter eternity; tonight a missionary will lose his life; tonight hundreds of Chinese Christians will freeze in prisons; tonight thousands of missionary children will cry from boarding schools as they miss their parents; tonight may be the last tonight we have on this earth and yet…

We have redefined the word persecution to include being removed from Wikipedia. If the entire Wikipedia would totally disappear from the material universe who should care? Tonight is a night we can worship Chrsist and sacrifice whatever reputation our flesh believes it has.

If your persecution is unjust – rejoice!

If your persecution is from God – repent!

My name isn’t in Wikipedia, I suppose Chris has already rubbed me out. Scoundrel!

There are times when one is feeling frustration in their personal lives, and it can be very easy to vent that frustration on the internet, on people one does not know personally. There may be more behind these “woe is me!” articles than Wikipedia disputes.

merry,

I suspect that, as well. I had to drive up to get my son this evening, after the last of his semester exams, and thought a little about it on the way up. Ken has mentioned in the past that his wiki references have upped his web traffic, and he’s been asking for more money for apprising, as well (needing a car, I believe, I read recently).

I suppose it is possible that a decrease in web traffic (which he also drives up with all of the internal linking and name dropping in every article, upping his Google score) from wikipedia may have a financial impact on him. If this is the case, I would hope that he might receive relief from a legitimate source of income…

what’s up doggie doggers…aka we’re not emergent, we’re not emergent,

Okey dokey…but, since by your own admission you are; re-imaginers, re-makers, re-thinkers, re-formatters, re-directors, re-dressers, re-formers, new regime-rs, new reg-ulators, re-habilitators, re-instaters, relativity creators, non-rehashers, renovators, re-orderers, repairers, replacers, re-setters, re-touchers, re-vivalers, revolutioners, re-unify-ers, etc.

so here’s where it gets brilliant boys…..there’s another ‘re’ to complete the list and everybody goes on their way happy.

That missing ‘re’ would be…….’re-name’.

Yessir-re bob…..just drop the name ‘Christian’ from your nuevo avant guarde religion, come up with a new catchy little moniker, something that will market well of course, and presto, problem solved. Us old-schoolers will keep the name ‘Christian’, and all-ya’ll can git on down the road with out anybody griping at ya, re-doing everything you can git yer hands on.

(you can’t teach an ‘ol dog new tricks don’t cha know)

Brilliant, isn’t it.

Tom M,
With people like you and Ken becoming representative of the word “Christian” its not a bad idea, and its the reason why many have begun calling themselves “Christ followers”.

So congrats, all you “old schoolers” have done something that 2000 years of persecution couldn’t — made the name “christian” unattractive to those who follow the Way.

Tom – I am no emergent, I am “old school” as you say. But what makes a Christian? Comments like yours only exhibit a certain pride about protecting the name but not enhancing His reality. The battle is not over a moniker that was given by man, it is the struggle to humbly surrender to the Father personally in such a way that sinners will know that we have “been with Jesus”.

I have major problems with some who call themselves emergent, but I believe God has some major problems with some who proudly label themselves as anti-emergent. The devil has deceived people to watch the deception while being deceived themselves. The most articulate and insightful systematic theology, communicated in pride, is sounding brass and tinckling cymbals.

Seems to be more slander coming from your blog. How old are you?

Bridget,
Slander is, by nature, a lie. What lies have been told here?

Bridget,

Perhaps you would be so kind as to identify the “slander”. If you would like, I can identify all sorts of this in Apprising “Ministries” (sic) – or I should say that we’ve got a good archive of the tip of the iceberg there…

As for age, we have a number of writers across a wide band of ages. I think I’m somewhere in the middle at 39.9

One liner commenters are not interested in serious discourse, they by nature are cowards who punch in a few words and run into the safety of their own opinions. And of course the “how old are you” epithet reveals more about her than anyone else. Sometimes while trolling for cod you pick up a few indescriminate sea robins that must be tossed back.

I suppose you might call me a blog hopper. I just pop in from blog to blog to see what kind of responses I get to my one liners. Seems I’ve stirred up a hornets nest after all. I’ll leave with one last statement. “People don’t mature anymore they just stay jackasses all their lives.” Thought it was appropriate for this blog site. Peace.

Hello re-modelers,

One correction please; that should have been ‘re-reformers’, as no reference was intended to any 16th century events. This partial list is purely in reference to 21st century ‘reformation’ attempts. I’m not really in the reformation/covenant theology camp anyway.

Also, wouldn’t for that matter label myself as ‘anti-emergent’ solely, as that is very limiting. I might label myself as anti-’false’ or anti-’incomplete’ gospel though, and would place the new breed of globally-spiritually inclusive religionists into that class, whatever it’s proponets would like to call themselves. I maintain that the inclusive doctrine espoused is actually, at the very best, an incomplete gospel. Among a number of other changes, it has abandoned the core of the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, which is the offense of the cross. While abandoning the core, it attempts to retain the outer shell, and is therefore actually a deception.

To make it palatable to the natural man is ‘to falsify the data’.

The core abandoned:

“For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.” [1 Cor. 1:17]

*The “effect of the cross” (and all that that involves) is to mean no less than the end of the natural man….

“which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; [1]

[1] here the reason is given, which is nowhere found in the nouveau gopsel (to tell men of their inner corruption, that which cannot be restored, and so then must be done away with)

And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.” [Eph. 4:23b-24]

The “new man, which after God is created “, speaking of the new birth, entails the necessary death of the old man. It is said to be “created after God”, nothing that can ever be accomplished by any “re-stating of the truth” using “wisdom of words”. God is wholly responsible for the new life, it is a mystery, and comes through the actual ’seed’ of Holy Scripture itself. [2]

[2] “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever.” [1 Peter 1:23]

MIA: the ‘hard sayings’…nowhere to be found in this new ‘Jesus’ loves all no matter what brother just say a few simple words….

(as briefly as possible, a much more comprehensive case could be made, but for a few examples:)

1. “Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.”

2. “He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.”

3. “When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?”

4. “Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is a hard saying; who can hear it?”

5. “From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.” [John 6:53,56,60,61,66]

The offense of the cross. Yes they went back, and perhaps they started their own new religion, one that wasn’t quite so messy.

The gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ tells a man to deny himself, and take up his cross. There is only one place to go with a cross, and that is to your own crucifixion. It is to put an end to the ‘natural man’.

This is a hard saying; who can hear it?”

(only a ‘few’ according to the Lord Jesus himself)

All these things are MIA, having been replaced with ‘community’ and ‘restoring the planet’, etc.

*Borrowed the phrase “falsifying the data” from Tozer/Jude here: (good listen)

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=331039716

Okay, too much already, but the basic charge is that the ‘data’ has been changed, in that much has been removed, the hard things made palatable, new things made tolerable, and lastly, that you will not admit to it as being ‘different’ or changed in it’s essence.

Just admit it. I might even go so far as to say that to not admit these things is to ’slander’ the Holy Spirit, and that’s dangerous ground.

Is that too strong a statement. Only if it’s untrue.

I maintain that this movement is doing it’s part in attempting to break down and incrementally draw the ‘christian-world’ into what shall eventually become the global spirituality of the Antichrist system, whether any particular person is aware of it or not.

Too strong? Only if it’s untrue.
————————————————
As to me..in due time, Deo Volente

Actually,

I find then rather immature and boring… if rarely feel “stirred up”…

The only hornet I sense from them is the one in their own bonnet…

iggy

I am still wondering how I am wishing for Ken’s demise in that article. He’s doing a pretty good job of expediting his own demise.

I suppose you might call me a blog hopper. I just pop in from blog to blog to see what kind of responses I get to my one liners. Seems I’ve stirred up a hornets nest after all. I’ll leave with one last statement. “People don’t mature anymore they just stay jackasses all their lives.” Thought it was appropriate for this blog site. Peace.

Wow, there’s so much wrong with this statement. On a basic level its just the opposite of what scripture commands.

I have grown weary of them all…they don’t want honest discourse, debate or discussion. The only thing they care about is what they think…and of course…they are always right…and we are always wrong. (according to them)
Christianity has taken a serious hit because of Christians lack of willingness to show love to one another.
But…of course according to Ken and the rest of his type…they get around that little scripture because they don’t consider those that dare to disagree with them Christians.

Average people don’t need to care about what Ken Silva, Chris Rosebrough. Ingrid, Rob Bell or anyone alse has to say…..they just need to hear the true gospel of Jesus Christ and how it applies to them and how it can save them.

I did kinda get a kick out of Tom’s accusation of their (those whom are labeled) “attempts to retain the outer shell.”

It’s the watch-doggers who are so often enamored with the cultural, traditional, “you-have-to-do-it-our-way’ of the outer shells they have created/inherited.

Neil