Slice and others are making an issue about Shane Claiborne speaking at Cederville. They miss the mark when it comes to their own research.

First, Slice/Lighthouse says “Claiborne’s book has a foreword by liberal political activist, Jim Wallis. While Cedarville’s Dean of Student Life (Purple) told Lighthouse Trails that Cedarville is “very conservative,” pointing students to a book that is partially written by Wallis seems to give a different message.

A foreward in a book doesn’t mean that the book is partially written by Wallis. I could write a forward of a new translation of the Bible being published. That wouldn’t make me a partial writer of the Bible.

Secondly, Slice says this: “Cedarville University continues to market itself as a “conservative” Baptist institution. In light of their apparent acceptance of emerging and contemplative spirituality (the university president’s book list includes Leonard Sweet’s Soul Tsunami) and the promotion of these leaders to impressionable young students, the real issue is whether they are biblical. Parents beware.”

If you look at the presidents list, he gives a major disclaimer: “Here some books I think every thinking Christian should read and think through. Admittedly, most are not “Christian” books, but they are nonetheless an approach to life, reality, and God (the ultimate questions) that help to inform our own worldview.”

I think it’s pretty clear that he isn’t endorsing these authors. About McLaren: “Brian McLaren (A New Kind of Christian – [I disagree with many of McLaren's assumptions but his book helps us to understand current postmodern Christians])”

If the gatekeepers can’t do their own research, who can? This took me all of two minutes to look into.

I’d like to challenge our commentors to keep their comments on topic – which means commenting on misinformation presented by the ODMs.

  • Share/Bookmark
This entry was posted on Thursday, January 24th, 2008 at 12:09 pm and is filed under Commentary, Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+/- Collapse/Expand All

21 Comments(+Add)

1   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
January 24th, 2008 at 12:17 pm

So I read the post over at SLICE…??????

What is wrong with Shane Claiborne?

Slice and I do agree on one thing Cedarville is wacky. But for different reasons.

2   Phil Miller    http://veritasfellowship.blogspot.com
January 24th, 2008 at 12:32 pm

What is wrong with Shane Claiborne?

He wears a bandana and has long-ish hair. That alone gets him on the watch list. I’m pretty sure Leviticus says something about bandanas…

3   Ken Silva    http://www.apprising.org
January 24th, 2008 at 1:14 pm

No Phil, I believe that was bananas.

4   nathan    http://www.nathanneighbour.com
January 24th, 2008 at 1:33 pm

yeah! Ken is back!

5   Darren Sapp    http://www.vaporministries.blogspot.com/
January 24th, 2008 at 1:34 pm

Lighthouse Trails Research is a common user of guilt by association. They have many lists that try to tie things together and forwards in books are a major player. They suggest that anyone using the term “spiritual formation” is teaching contemplative spirituality. I have tried to correct the owners of this website on some things but their kind replies (from Debra Dombrowski) decline to make revisions. Following is one example:

They have said Dallas Theological Seminary teaches contemplative because they have classes called Spiritual Formation. Actually, that is what DTS calls their small group sessions required of students. It is about discipleship and has nothing to do with contemplative. Debra replied to this by saying that Darrell Bock, a DTS professor sits on some board that has some contemplative connections. Not only is that a stretch, but Bock teachers New Testament.

So the point is that when Lighthouse Trails Research is a source, you have to research how they “tied things” together.

6   Phil Miller    http://veritasfellowship.blogspot.com
January 24th, 2008 at 1:52 pm

The “research” on sites like Lighthouse Trails and the like reminds me of the newsletter that my parents used to get from the AFA. They had dozens of articles that told you what products to boycott because some associated with a company once said something nice about a homosexual, or a company advertised during a TV show they didn’t like.

After reading that publication, I came to conclusion that the only things a Christian could buy were produced by the AFA, otherwise they were clearly supporting the work of Satan.

7   Neil    
January 24th, 2008 at 4:49 pm

I wonder how a person’s reasoning gets to the point that they believe everyone who uses a word – such as “formation” – must use it in the exact same way… they way they determine.

Is it laziness?
Is it wanting to be right?
Is it self-deception?

Neil

8   Darren Sapp    http://www.vaporministries.blogspot.com/
January 24th, 2008 at 5:04 pm

Another example, and one in which I gave data to them for revision, that was declined, is the Walk to Emmaus, of which I have had much experience. According to this: http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/walktoemmaus.htm the Walk to Emmaus teaches contemplative because it is under Upper Room Ministries which has another program called Alive Now that uses the word mantra somewhere on their website that is not defined but Lighthouse gives us the definition. Therefore, Walk to Emmaus teachers contemplative according to Lighthouse Trails Research.

This would be like me saying that since I saw R.C. Sproul speak at Pantego Bible Church (http://www.pantego.org/) and they have a spiritual formation institute, R.C. Sproul promotes contemplative.

9   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
January 24th, 2008 at 5:16 pm

How many more steps till we get to Kevin Bacon?

10   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
January 24th, 2008 at 5:27 pm

Ingrid has so much misinformation on that post alone… if there was an award… she wins…

Let’s see… the worst article on the worst research with additional lies and slander that are not footnoted by a ministry that claims discernment of God but acts like the Accuser of the Brethren award goes to….

I think it should be in the form of a golden ass calf…

iggy

11   Neil    
January 24th, 2008 at 5:31 pm

Darren,

Maybe that’s how they put the “trail” in Lighthouse Trails…

Neil

12   Keith    http://fivepts.blogspot.com
January 24th, 2008 at 5:37 pm

Alright, Chris!!! A “Six Degrees…” convert! 8^)>

“Thou shalt not make for thyself a bandana to cover thine head; nor shall you make a bandana covering for thy manservant or thy maidservant. A bandana covering thou shalt not make, for I am the Lord. Thou shalt also not wear thine hair in a longish fashion. I will not tolerate a man who weareth his hair in a longish fashion. I am the Lord.” — Hesitations 3:24-25

13   Brendt    http://csaproductions.com/blog/
January 24th, 2008 at 6:23 pm

Now, now, Nathan. I think you’re missing an important point here. Although sometimes it’s easy to confuse the two, this came from Slice, not from CR?N. I’m not aware that Slice ever claimed to do research.

So let’s be fair — no real foul committed by Slice.

Well, other than defecating on a Christian brother.

14   Virgil    http://unfinishedchristianity.com
January 24th, 2008 at 7:58 pm

I attended Cedarville, so I am at a loss as to how encouraging students to read a book prefaced by Wallis is a bad thing. I’ve had teachers at Cedarville encouraging me to read books by Nietzsche. So what?

15   merry    
January 24th, 2008 at 8:23 pm

I doubt it’s the bandana that bothers them. It’s probably the earring. And the fact that he wears his facial hair in the same gotee/moustache style that many emergent pastors have.

16   pastorboy    http://www.thedowngrade2007.blogspot.com
January 24th, 2008 at 8:40 pm

If the goatee makes one emergent, I guess I am there

17   Keith    http://fivepts.blogspot.com
January 24th, 2008 at 9:48 pm

If Shane Claiborne looked like this, maybe no one would gripe. Just a thought.

Does this mean that me and pastorboy have to get rid of our goatees?

18   Keith    http://fivepts.blogspot.com
January 24th, 2008 at 9:51 pm

Link should have been: http://members.cox.net/kwhitfield/blog/churchpic.jpg

19   F Whittenburg    http://www.christiannewbirth.com
January 24th, 2008 at 10:11 pm

Keith quoted: “Thou shalt not make for thyself a bandana to cover thine head; nor shall you make a bandana covering for thy manservant or thy maidservant. A bandana covering thou shalt not make, for I am the Lord. Thou shalt also not wear thine hair in a longish fashion. I will not tolerate a man who weareth his hair in a longish fashion. I am the Lord.” — Hesitations 3:24-25

Actually Keith, the scripture that refers to head coverings in the New Testament is:

Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head (1 Corinthians 11:4 KJV).

I think Paul was addressing the use of a prayer shawl by men and not a bandana though.

F Whittenburg
http://www.christiannewbirth.com

20   merry    
January 25th, 2008 at 12:44 am

Get rid of your goatees? No. That would be unbiblical. Somewhere in Leviticus outlaws men trimming their beards. I think it’s the verse right above the one that outlaws tattoos and markings.

21   Brendt    http://csaproductions.com/blog/
January 25th, 2008 at 8:38 am

Get rid of your goatees? No. That would be unbiblical. Somewhere in Leviticus outlaws men trimming their beards.

Which is all the more reason they should join us more spiritual-types and grow a full beard. ;-)