Influencing the Influencers
This was recently submitted by Dave Marriott
I saw this via a link at www.sliceoflaodicea.com
As far as I am concerned, the case is closed on Doug Pagitt and Rob Bell…
I am schocked you folks haven’t said anything about this yet…
Thanks for the submission, Dave. You know, If I was invited to join a conversation on spirituality with arguably one of the most influential figures in the world, I would be ecstatic at the opportunity. Imagine the influence that Bell is being given here! He is literally going to have influence over some of the most influential spiritual figures in the history of humanity.
You see, there are two very different responses that one could have to an invitation like this
A. We see this as a vile, universalism event. We reject the invitation in the name of Christianity and the One True God. This obviously would send a crystal clear message to them, and set us apart as having a “one-road to heaven” theology. Understand that I hold strongly to all those theological issues… one god, one way, no other way to heaven. However, by doing this, we must realize that we are bowing out of the global conversation on youth spirituality, and will have little to no influence in this process. The world will move forward in their agenda to convert the young people of the nations, leaving us whining and complaining about how bad the world is years later. I liken this choice to not voting for the president and then complaining about all of the bad decisions later. If you do not put your two cents in at the beginning, you have no right to criticize the global movement that will happen later.
B. We accept the invitation and have influence on the influencers of the world. Bell of Pagitt have not been asked to change their theology, tone down their beliefs or sign a global statement of faith. They have a free platform to shape the spirituality of young people on a huge level. Now, Bell might not convert the Dali Lama that day. However, this is a foot in the door to begin to have discussions with some of the most powerful religious leaders of the world. Imagine if Bell became one of the spiritual advisers for the Buddhist world… imagine the impact he could have with changing their view of Christ.
I pick B. Why is it that the ODMs believe that if we even enter into a conversation with non-beleivers, suddenly we are denying our faith and calling for a one-world-religion. Here is a classic example of Christian isolationism…
20-30 years ago, Disney calls together evangelical leaders to help with the growing number of homosexuals that were joining their organization. They knew that they needed some help if they were going to have an impact on the gay community. After a long debate, the SBC came back to Disney and said that they were against homosexuality and were unwilling to help. It was not their place to do so.
So, the issue grows and grows until Disney is finally forced to give homosexual partners health insurance and benefits. And how does the SBC respond? With a national boycott on Disney for being a “gay-friendly” company, filling our young minds with homosexual perversion. Is there something wrong with this picture?
If you aren’t willing to at least try to solve the problem, don’t complain about the massive movement of problems later on!
![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")
175 Comments(+Add)
If there was still a wisp of doubt this coming conference should remove any and all doubt. The “Seeds of Compassion†conference is a paradigm shift in both ecumenical transparency and heretical velocity. It lifts the veil and openly displays what many have surmised was going on before. The “opportunity” excuse continues to be applied universally about any and all cooperative ventures including supporting the teachings of idol worshipers to the “sheep” and hoping nothing wears off.
And the fissures and mercurial, manipulative definitions inherrant in the English language lend themselves to an unending labrynth which seem to insulate any discussion from an agreeable conclusion. In fact, the modern expertise in using the English language reveals that any perspective can be verbally defended and be just as convincing as any other in that forum.
Anyone who wishes to be even slightly informed should sit up and take note of this conference, it promises to be the Woodstock of Biblical compromise. As usual, supposed good intentions legitimizes the entire affair and blinds the eyes from seeing an incredible new level of universalism. The only thing we can be thankful about is that this one event can be used so substantively as an expose about the depth of apostacy some in the emergent church have unashamedly fallen into.
I continue to go from shock to sadness because it was never God’s will to get to this point. Pray for all of them, the end is upon us…
I don’t understand what the hub-bub is about. It seems like it’s mainly an event that’s a panel discussion. I don’t see how participating in such a thing means one denies that exclusivity of Christ at all. I’ve seen alll sorts of these panels. How does participating in one make one an apostate?
Phil – this conference is about showing compassion to people, so why do we need false religions to help us learn about compassion? What could they possibly share that would have any value to the church. We seem to admit we are deficient without them. The Dali has led millions to hell and is headed there himself and yet he is honored as some spiritual leader.
I still am learning the length and breadth and width and height of the power of deception. Has it ever occurred to you that this is actually what some like me say they are? It grieves me when it is this open and still people do not see it. If my own mother was hosting it I would denounce it.
Rick, are you being sarcastic? I hope so.
Why do we judge people for speaking somewhere when we haven’t heard what they are going to say (or have said)?
“Did you hear about Paul of Tarsus?”
“No, what about him?”
“He’s forsaken the truth of the Gospel!”
“Oh, how so?”
“He’s bringing about the end of the world with his compromised theology because he agreed to speak at the Areopagus, the largest gathering of unbelievers and pagans meeting in the most idolatrous city in the Roman world.”
Rick, to say what others are teaching is wrong is fine. To say you disagree with what they teach is fine. To say what they teach does not lead to God is fine. (Assuming all those things are true.) But shouldn’t that be all the more reason to bring Christ to those people? Because of their lostness?
What could they possibly share? Christians don’t have the market cornered on compassion, and I’d argue that they may not even be on the market, when considered as a whole by much of the population.
I mean, seriously, pick a Christian leader out of a bag and put him/her against the Dalai Lama, then ask a bystander which one is more compassionate toward humanity.
My bank account says the bystander picks the Dalai Lama 9 out of 10 times.
Again, you miss the point. Did Paul hold a conference in Jerusalem and invite pagan leaders to speak and advertsie them as spiritual leaders that were going to teach the church about compassion? If the Church of Satan held a conference and invited MacArthur to speak without any restrictions he should go. But he should not invite them to a shepherd’s conference and advertsie them as productive participants.
That is the difference in what you outlined, CP.
Evan – your vioew does not come from a Scriptural perspective and therefore is you opinion based upon the manipulation of the English language which I addressed previously. Only Scripture has authority and it commands us not to be unequally yoked and “simple concerning that which is evil”.
The Dali Lama is demonic.
I’m sorry, did I miss something completely? Is the church hosting this event?
That’s fine Rick, but the “only scripture has authority” line only works with a PORTION of the Christian population, and then no one else in the world.
Do you want to share the love of God with people, or don’t you?
No, no, I didn’t miss anything. Rick, if the church did it, I would agree with you. Both this is another organization inviting Christians IN.
Yes, Evan, I do. But the Dali Lama does not bring the love of God which comes only through Christ.
but he does bring the love of God, and for Christians to have a problem with a Christian participating in an event that includes him just makes Christians look more and more irrelevant.
seriously. this is where it is.
fundamentalists of ALL religions are looking more and more irrelevant to the general population.
this kind of event, on the other hand, encourages understanding between faiths instead of shoving dogma down their throats.
CP – this event is being held by Doug Pagitt, a professing Christian. It is like spreading chicken feed and poison on the ground and hoping the chickens will only eat the good feed.
A sower went to sow some seed…
The seed is the Word of God. We do not need to hear from many of those speakers, go to Pagitt’s website and read the list. Incredible.
I find it amazing that speaking to, with or at the same time as non-Christians is seen as a mark of anti-Christian behavior.
Evan – do you subscribe to the abject exclusivity of Christianity? Do you believe that only Christians, born again, will go to heaven?
This isn’t true. Pagitt was just invited to speak at the event, and he mentioned it on his blog. It’s being hosted by some other organization.
Rick, Phil and I are correct. I’m dissapointed in your lack of research to comprehend what is going on here. Instead you have just reacted like the ODM’s.
nope.
Rick,
Sorry man, you’re wrong. Its right there on the website:
One is a secular charity, the other is “the Dalai Lama’s personal Emissary for Peace”.
the second speaker listed is Desmond Tutu, and we all have much to learn from him.
You are correct, it is an ecumentical gathering to which Bell and Pagitt agreed to speak. I look forward to hear their messages. Here is what the conference is all about in their own words:
Does either Bell or Pagitt see this an opportunity to preach Christ or as a legitimate expression of the divine compassion?
Evan – thank you for your honesty although it is as I guessed.
“Bell of Pagitt ”
sounds like a whiskey
One wonders why the church has to tether to the compassion conferences of false religions and not have one of their own? We have other fish to fry I guess. I feel strongly that we continue to neglect the physical needs and sufferings of children all around the world (some are doing great work though) but I feel just as strongly we must reach them in Jesus’ name.
That is also my point about events like the Shepherd’s Conference and many, many others. There is a crisis at hand and we worry why a Calvinist should be pre-mellenial or how we can amplify our sexual satisfaction while millions suffer and die.
That can-t be Christ and it is certainly not the Jesus in the gospels which so many are fond of.
so the alleviation of suffering around the world isn’t complete unless it comes with a sales pitch for Christ?
I think the reason is outlined in the original article, the church in America for a hundred years has chosen to withdraw from society rather than engage.
Yes. And it isn’t a “pitch”, it is the greatest expression of love from the Father and the only offer of redemption to mankind. It is in fact the single greatest alleviation of suffering for hell bound sinners. I have personal experience.
Tim – in many ways I agree with your assessment.
many people view it as an insult when Christians land in their societies and start helping on the one hand but pressuring the locals to change their religions on the other.
i remember right after the tsunami hit Sri Lanka, and that Christian group…can’t remember what it’s called, but it’s the same group that was trotting out those two blonde girls who were held by the Taliban in Afghanistan…anyway, they’re from Texas. (surprise) but they were doing their “disaster relief” by focusing on their spiritual message and it wasn’t helping the traumatized people one bit.
in fact, they were doing so much harm that the local Christian congregations, Methodists mostly, asked them to leave Sri Lanka.
Nathan, well-written article. The whole thing can be boiled down by one (asinine) example.
A couple years ago, Mark Driscoll spoke at a conference in which one of the other speakers was someone with whom he disagreed significantly on a number of theological issues. (I forget who it was now — let’s call him John Doe for sake of clarity).
I don’t remember if Doe was a frequent target of the ODMs, but let’s give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that Doe makes Anton LeVay look like Jesus.
Having not bashed Driscoll in several days, Steve Camp claimed that — by occupying the same space at a different time as Doe — Driscoll was “partnering in ministry” with Doe.
Rick, I made a point. You made a single disagreement on the basis that they were hosting, not just invited to this. You were shown to be wrong. My point still stands and is still valid and was even conceded to by you in the comment quoted.
so, it should be an embarrassment that a Christian group would be asked to vacate a disaster area because they’re making things worse.
Brendt – was that conference one that promotes unity among all different religions? That is a huge difference. Unless someone would go and preach Christ, which since this is Pagitt’s second invitation it seems unlikely anyone took an offense from his preaching.
The cross, even when preached in love and compassion, is an offense.
CP – that was only one concern. I hope Pagitt and Bell lovingly but clearly preach Christ and his gospel at this conference otherwise it is compromise and false unity.
Why do ODM’s think that in order to preach the Gospel of Christ you have to tell everybody how wrong they are about what they’ve held as beliefs for many years? Why must we actually say to people, “You are wrong!”? The preaching in the New Testament told people who Jesus was and why that mattered to them. The only people in the N.T. who were flat out told they were wrong were those who claimed to be Christians but added other requirements to be in Christ.
Ah, so because some people put undue over-emphasis on the message, the message needs to be abandoned. Makes sense.
CP – who was arguing that?
no, i’m just saying the message should be secondary.
like, really really secondary.
first of all, the message is really kind of unattractive, especially when brought by some white person who’s ignoring who you are and what you’re going through, telling you your religion is false and whatnot.
secondly, i would think the message would be more powerful if you let it speak through your actions – selflessly crossing an ocean just to help the people in what they’re going through. stay with the people long enough, they just might ask “why are you doing this?”
THAT would be an appropriate time to say “well, i’m just trying to follow Christ’s teachings and do what i can for you.”
“Christ? who’s Christ?”
see?
it’s a lot more relevant that way, rather than writing checks to some counterproductive Bibles for China scam.
admittedly, it’s hard to do that on a 2 week feel good “mishun trip.”
you kind of have to frontload on the hellfire and spiritual abuse, lest you not make it back to Amurka in time for the Christian Volleyball Tournament/Rally For Marriage.
Don’t recall. Kinda doubt it. But the point remains the same.
I don’t necessarily get the vibe that the SoC conference “promotes unity among all different religions” either. But what if it does? The vast majority of the populace are all for this. Have you not noticed that Rodney “can’t we all just get along” King has become the patron saint of this presidential election? (My apologies to non-US readers) Even a large number of professing Christians believe that there are multiple ways to God. (Just to be clear: they’re wrong)
Univeralism, false unity, ill-defined tolerance — whatever you want to call it, is an underlying assumption in the 21st century. To say that this conference “promotes unity among all different religions” is no different than saying that this conference will use sound systems and indoor plumbing.
Are we to abandon an opportunity to set an incorrect thinking right? If so, then we need to stop all evangelizing right now.
Sorry, man. But this has absolutely zero relevance until after April 15. Pagitt and Bell are getting dumped on for accepting the invitation to speak.
Rick, it was just a general observation that came in the midst of this discussion and reading the comments on the post on Pagitt’s site. Sorry, I should have made some kind of note to that end.
And your point would be …?
I’m all for front-loading orthodoxy with orthopraxy, especially when dealing with another culture. And obviously, the people that you cite did not do this. But you can do compassionate work until you’re blue in the face, and the message is still going to be pretty unattractive. So at the time you prescribe, it’s still the same “white person” delivering the same “unattractive” message, “telling you your religion is false and whatnot”.
We either abandon the message entirely or — at some point — it’s gonna get at least a little messy.
Brendt – my point is that since Pagitt was invited again it would seem he said nothing offensive to the organizers of the event.
i’m just saying that if there is any credence to the Christian message at all, you should let God deliver it through your actions, rather than telling people about it.
(From Nathan’s choice “A”)
Do you really and truly believe this? If so, should I get busy making sure one of these conferences happens in my area?
Where does scripture teach that one has to work together with pagans in order to have spiritual influence on youth?
Isn’t it possible that “bowing in” to this conversation further smudges the line between Christianity and other religions? What about the school children who are going to this event (Waldorf school(s) in Seattle, for example)? Are you expecting them to gain some clarity on the significant differences between Buddhism and Christianity at this event that will have a significant impact on their eternal destinies? Rather, how many will (continue) seeing how wonderful it is that different religions can get along together without any assuming that they are “better” than the other? Those Christian parents at Waldorf schools who may have been questioning the previous support of their school for the Dalai Lama can now rest assured that even some Christian ministers apparently aren’t that uncomfortable with who he is and what he is teaching.
This is somehow a “beginning?” Of what? Has there been no compassion among Christians?
By the way it would be interesting to do a comparative study of Bell’s, Pagitt’s, and Buddhism’s beliefs on hell.
“rather than“?
you know, i just saw something tangentially related to this on the mucho crazy CRN.com site.
they have a post where they declare all of Islam to be a culture of death, based on a YouTube video of an Iranian imam at a Friday noon service, and the video recounts a bit of the Iran-Iraq war. (of course, no mention of the fact that the US was arming both sides of that conflict…)
it happened a day after it was reported that American soldiers had desecrated the Q’uran at Gitmo.
of course, the inevitable “Death to America” chants started, but the radical cleric said something that caught my attention right before that started. he said, about Bush and Americans in general, “they claim to be Christians, but they’re lying.”
i went “HUH!”
begging the question, “if these people who march under the banner of Christ acted a little bit more LIKE CHRIST, would these Iranian Muslims have such a huge problem in the first place?”
i’m not saying, obviously, that radical Islam isn’t a problem, but i just found it really interesting to hear a radical cleric, in theocratic Iran (as opposed to the great majority of Muslims, who are much more moderate) differentiate between Christianity and Christianity (TM), which takes up arms, disrespects humanity, and calls other religions “false.”
Evan – how do you discern the difference between feeding the poor by a Hindu and feeding the poor by a Christian?
Jesus said go and preach because actions can be misinterpreted.
you don’t. it’s something that should be done just because it should be done!
Your words, Evan.
yes, and God can speak through Hindus just like He can speak through Christians.
Different Bible.
Wow, I didn’t realize that this would turn into a thread this quickly. I hate to hit and run, but allow me to say this…
2 Corinthians 6:14-15 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
Go and learn what this means…
Sometimes Biblical compromise comes disguised as witnessing opportunity. I must admit this is an abuse of Arminianism, well intentioned perhaps, but ultimately it will water down the message and change how we view the spiritual state of others. Many other issues become theological reconsiderations:
hell, atonement, gospel, Scriptures, etc..
God doesn’t need a Bible in order to speak.
But so has He chosen to so do. Without the written revelation of the Scriptures man makes his subjecxtive impressions and perceptions stand in for God’s Word. We have enough problem with our flesh interpreting the Word without loosing it altogether.
Evan, do you believe Jesus was God in the flesh and that He resurrected from the dead? And what do you believe Jesus’ mission and purpose was upon this earth?
Dave, thank you — by misappropriating those verses, you have made my original point brilliantly.
well, first of all, the Bible actually says that God is revealed in our hearts and that the very mountains and seas proclaim God…so…
i honestly don’t know. i used to take that for granted, but realized i had never actually thought it through. but there are several parts to that question, so…
Jesus as God in flesh: maybe. Jesus wasn’t exactly clear on that, either.
resurrected from the dead: in a figurative sense, yes. literally, not sure.
mission and purpose: if anything, i believe that Jesus was sent to humanity not to “save us” in a literal sense from our “sins,” but to show us how it’s done, to teach us what we’re supposed to be doing here, how we’re to regard each other, care for each other, etc. i think too often people focus on the end of his life rather than everything else he said/did before. but Jesus said “follow,” so that i will.
i do not believe that God was so shortsighted when creating humanity that he had to send a savior to atone for sins against him by those created in his own image, or that God, having been so shortsighted, would solve the problem by saying “okay, here’s the ONLY way,” knowing full well that most of humanity would not respond to that call.
those are a few brief thoughts, but that was a large question, Rick…
Charles Finney once observed that the worst thing that you can do is leave a sinner content with his spiritual state. So when you share the cross we must be careful to provide the Holy Spirit with that which will remove the sinner off from his comfort zone of death.
Most times these panel discussions do little more than give credibility to different lies.
Dave,
This is about going to pagan temples for worship. It is not about not doing things with unbelievers… in fact… by this you condemned anyone who has a secular job! I work for a non christian newspaper… so I am by your definition unequally yoked to the unbelievers who also work there! Even worse you have made myself and many others with secular jobs, communing with darkness and worshiping Belial!
So thanks for twisting another scripture to fit your doctrine so that you can condemn others…
iggy
oh, snap.
Sorry I forgot my smiley face !
so here!
= )
oh snap can involve smiley faces.
has anyone seen the “Oh, Snap!” flowchart?
i must find it.
The principle of those verses go much deeper than going to pagan temples to worship. Many would consider conferences like Seeds of Compassion as moder day temples of worship. We are not to participate in anything spiritual with unbelievers, and Iggy’s point means he separates the spiritual from the secular as well.
When the city holds an all faiths service we should not particpate but we should hold a service that lifts up Christ because He is to have ALL THE PREEMINENCE, not just a seat on the panel.
Rick,
Sometimes biblical compromise comes in discarding Grace and Mercy and exchanging for the Law and twisting scriptures to fit one’s personal world view… now to me that is what Dave did… yet, as far as scripture,
“He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.”
I think the Dali Lama is part of “creation” and this is an awesome opportunity to preach real “peace” and share it with the “world”…
iggy
here go: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2199/1976942027_8be7ff48bf.jpg?v=0
Iggy – we are to preach TO the Dali Lama, not preach WITH him.
Rick,
No actually I see it as the Bible describes…
in the words of Jesus…
“Behold, I make all things new!” which started at the birth and will continue until it is all fulfilled.
“So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer.” 2 Cor 5:16
There is no secular/sacred in the Kingdom of God… it has all been made “clean”…
iggy
Rick,
And you already know this will not happen? Did the magic 8 ball tell you this? LOL!
= )
iggy
Instead of criticizing we all should be praying for this awesome opportunity… so why not do that instead?
iggy
Iggy – that goes against so much Scripture that I need a concordance. When God says come out from among them why does he say that, they’re all clean according to you. And your “behold I mak all things new” interpretation makes Dave’s interpretation as coming from Paul itself.
I refer you back to my former comment which I observed the manip[ulative nature of the English language upon which no truth can be communicated completely apart from the Spirit. Every perspective from Satanism to universalism and everything in between can be verbally supported by a professional wordsmith.
“enticing words of men’s wisdom”
Rick,
To the Jew, the most ‘unclean’ thing there was the Gentile…
yet, GOd’s own words concerning them ‘before’ one was officially ’saved’…
“Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”
I see that Jesus already cleansed us of sin, but we still need life or else we will die as forgiven dead men… a dead man needs life.
So we can have life and life abundantly… and not walk in some half salvation that is about a dead messiah. I live and believe in a risen Messiah… I believe in the God of the Living… not the dead…
If that is unbiblical, then I need remove Acts, Ephesians, Colossians, Romans, Revelation, and well the rest of the NT…
and even the prophecy of the OT…
Either Jesus was the firstborn of the Resurrection… or God lied… Either the Kingdom is Now and Later in it’s fulness, or Jesus lied…
I do not see that lying is in God’s character… do you?
iggy
Iggy – I am lost in your labyrinth. I fallen and I can’t get up. I can see now, I went to Bible school for nothing, I want my money back. My school was Tozer’s denomination, what a shallow guy!
I just want to make sure I understand correctly. Paul was compromising because he spoke someplace where leaders of other false religions were also speaking or you believe that he was the only one that spoke there and only followers of Christ spoke their around his speaking engagement?
You know, Ravi Zacharias accepts an invitation to speak at the Mormon Tabernacle, sits on multiple panels with people from multiple religious backgrounds, and no one breathes a word.
John Macarthur appears on a panel with a Roman Catholic Priest and an ecumenical minister of the United Methodist Church on Larry King, and has his books published by a company owned by Rupert Murdoch who has been condemned by ODMs as a pornographer in order to condemn Rick Warren who was published in teh same publishing house, and no one breathes a word.
John Piper appears with and endorses Driscoll, and not a word of condemnation.
This is yet again, another example of ODMs being more interested in team politics than truth.
Oh, and we’re supposed to believe that Dave Marriot hadn’t already had his mind made up about Paggitt and Bell before this point? What a joke.
Joe – that is far different than an organized conference where different gods are presented as equals. Not only would Paul not have gone, but I am sure he would not have been invited. I wonder why??
He might have set up a tent across the street, though. I understand, you guys cannot see what is slowly/rapidly taking place.
Tim – I have expressed my difference of opinion about all those you mentioned. I am sure Ravi tiptoes with respect, nothing that would get him carried to the edge of the city. I believe MacArthur’s round tables are not productive. And you know how I feel about Piper’s compromise with Driscoll.
Unless Pagitt or Bell preach Christ as the only Savior at the conference, then their presence there lends a level of credibility to the entire mess. Their light will be the only light their if they remove the basket and let it shine at the expense of next year’s invitation.
You want to see how ODM’s truly act…Go and read the comments on Doug’s blog. Jeeesh! Why would I believe for a second that they truly care about the lost? And I’m a believer!
Actually Tim a few people who knew about the event did have huge issues, unfounded, but issues nonetheless. Richard Mouw (Fuller) was also there. I should send you the email I got from the guy who was the most adament about it. It’s comical at best, pathetic at worst.
well, the more Christians act like this the less they’re GOING to be invited.
Rick, So now you are saying that the RCC worship the ’same’ God and Jesus as us?
hmmm also, Paul appealed to Caesar… who was literally worshiped as a god… so not only did Paul go to things as he was invited… but also directly purposed to go to Rome to see a false god.
btw, I think if you understand Tozer properly he states the same things I am…
First go here…
Then read this chapter…
After you read this maybe we can talk more… but it seems you missed some things Tozer teaches…
iggy
I missed the entire course!
Peace, brother.
Rick,
I ask this with all due respect. Are you aware of your seeming duplicity on most issues? I’m uncertain as to where you stand on most issues.
You argue the sufficience of Christ and the revelation of the spirit but hinge a lot on doctrine and the theology of men. You argue for the soveriegnty of God and then deny that he can work through any means or anyone he chooses. You hold to the Genesis creation story then deny that God in fact is concerned with all of his creation.
Please understand I’m not trying to pin you down I just desire to know where you are coming from. Not that you need to tell me but it is rather confusing when one reads all of your blog and comments around the web.
Rick,
I have peace… but if my theology is a labyrinth and confuses you.. you might to look at your own again. I came out of yours and understand it all too well… and I know it’s shortcomings…
Also I am very glad God preserved me from cemetery… err I mean seminary.
iggy
Rick,
I agree with Chris… I am “uncertain” to much of your views… you speak of Grace, then get bent out of shape if something is not exactly in your theological box… I am more confused by you as you seem to switch personalities… one time a friend to me then seemingly against me and all I stand for them a friend…
To me I see you are still tangled in the trappings of legalism… I am also in many ways, but see that you are much more.
I am not condemning you in anyway, but do feel frustrated in never knowing for sure what you stand on.
I mean in all honesty the only consistant thing I have seen is that you do not vote.
iggy
You argue the sufficience of Christ and the revelation of the spirit but hinge a lot on doctrine and the theology of men. You argue for the soveriegnty of God and then deny that he can work through any means or anyone he chooses. You hold to the Genesis creation story then deny that God in fact is concerned with all of his creation.
The seeming duplicity is through the seeming prism of your perspective. Are you suggesting a strict systematic theology, or are you saying I do not subscribe to a strict adherance to any one set of denominational creeds. In that you are correct.
The issues you put forth are not without mystery, and sometimes they can be seen differently while being the same.
What men?
Never claimed he couldn’t (reference my witch of Endor comment and others). I just believe he has outlined His deire in His Word. I do not completely understand the last part though.
In light of mankind God is not nearly as concerned with His material creation which he will one day destroy. Jesus did not die for this earth, but that doesn’t mean environmental anarchy either. But the church is not called to champion causes unrelated to Christ and the objects of His redemption.
Duplicity? Maybe I’ll be a Calvinist so you could then find me intransigent.
BTW – I am a cult.
So was Billy Graham also an apostate like this guy states he was?
I just wonder how far Truth actually prevails and how sovereign some peoples “sovereign” God really is…
iggy
Rick, you said
I would suggest you go back and study up on where he spoke. Maybe when you were skipping the Tozer class you could have hit a World History Class. But, yeah pretty much the guy who went before Paul and the guy who went after would have said their god was God. Of course he wasn’t but they still claimed it.
I love how we operate as Christians…
we will say “how dare anyone speak with those damned religious leaders! What business do we have there!?!”
20 years down the road…
“I can’t understand why all of our young people are turning to Buddhism, Hinduism and other New Aged Spirituality. Where did we go wrong?”
WE are being invited into a conversation that is probably going to influence a movement of young people. Like I said, we can either forfeit our voice in the conversation now and have it ignored later, or we can speak now and have influence in the future.
30 years ago we bowed out of the entertainment and media conversations… now all we hear about is how evil the media is today. When will we learn?
i’m interested in all of your answers to this question, and if you find the question offensive, i don’t care. i ask questions people aren’t “supposed to” ask.
bear i mind, was raised in a very theologically “correct” environment, so i’m conversant in “the language.”
IF God created this earth and saw that it was good…
BUT he plans to destroy it…
IF God created man in His own image…
BUT none of them are good enough to actually commune with Him without redemption…
IF God is omniscient, knowing the end from the beginning…
BUT still creates beings in His image, most of whom will never live up to His standards, even with his limited offer of redemption, and thus is creating souls in His image only to destroy them, send them to hell, whatever…
THEN how is it that anyone can, with a straight face, call God “love”? AND how is God in this scenario anything more than a sadistic child in a science lab without adult supervision?
Evan,
That challenge is a sturdy challenge to a Calvinist theology.
However, if you believe that love requires a free choice to be made in order for it to truly be love, the answer to your questions is that love requires the ability to choose something other than God.
Also, your understanding of the image of God probably needs to be hashed out a bit, as it seems to play a big role in the premises.
remove all the “image” references, then. the questions still stand.
it seems that it challenges Arminian theology, as well, since we all know that innumerable people have died without believing in Christ.
and is it really valid to make a free choice a requirement of love from God to his creation?
Joe – you missed the nuance of the point (chronic). No one I gues says men of God should not witness and engage people from other faiths, but we will see if Jesus gets a fair gospel representation at this conference. It doesn’t appear as though they invite guys who will not fit in.
To see Paul’s missionary journeys as congruent with Pagitt and Bell at this conference is theologically myopic and actually placing a square peg in a round hole.
Nathan – from my reading of the intentions of the conference it is not a round table discussion of different religions, it is how to best have compassion of people and especially children. If indeed Bell and Pagitt take that opportunity to clearly, lovingly present Christ and His gospel then great. I will listen to their talks, I hope it is more clear than usual.
AND how is that possibly a “free choice” if the endgame is “you can choose to love me or not, but just so you know, if you choose incorrectly, i will roast your hide for all eternity?”
AND if he’s really God of all everything, then what does he have to be jealous of in the first place?
I will go out on a limb and prophesy that whatever Bell and Pagitt say will be recieved and rejected similarly by the usual suspects of either side. The English language is sooo like Playdough, the very same words and sentences can be made into any shape the handler desires.
Evan, those are not questions, they are toss ups for arguments. Usually they do not suggest an honest seeking but a rehashment of things about which the questioner has already arrived at conclusively.
no, they ARE questions, and i don’t think many people consider them.
as i said, some might be offended by the questions, due to their general irreverence.
I will answer those questions if you answer me this:
The baptism of John, was it from man or God?
i don’t know. relevance?
i’m just curious about your (and others’) perspective on these questions.
whether i’ve made my mind up is another discussion.
what’s so bad about respecting each others’ right to believe how they want? the alternative being what? settling it with war?
isn’t that really all theologians do? and have always done? the interpretations of certain theologians in the past have been responsible for slavery, the oppression of women, and the torture and killing of many “pagans,” just to name a few. and all of this was done, bear in mind, through a supposed commission from God by the “written revelation of the Scriptures.”
Adam – Those are surely examples of Scriptural misuse and abuse, but what Finney was saying that if you leave a lost person comfortable with his lost condition you have done him an eternal disservice. Speak the truth in love but always clearly speak the truth.
If we discard the written revelation of God because of past offenses then we are left with opinions based on canoeing down the serotonin river.
and i agree that what he said was a valid point…not only in apologetics, but in life in general – if you stay in your comfort zone, not much will get accomplished. however, consider if you had been born in the sudan or india or thailand…if you were raised in a devoted muslim or hindu or buddhist household with a sincere reverence for god (your understanding for him), would you really be a heathen? you were raised as a christian and as such, feel your connection to the divine through that medium. do you feel you have the right to believe what you choose? and if so, why don’t they?
Highway to the dangerzone!
Adam, that would be my suggestion as well, but Jesus said,
After a quick assessment between my view and His…I’m goin with His.
In this context it would do us well to remember that on at least two occasions the entire wourld knew the Lord God. Adam and Eve and Noah’s house. So those Muslims et. al. you refer to are a result of bad parenting not God’s will.
true, true. but nowhere in any interpretation of the bible does it say to force it upon others. this doesn’t come down to my book’s word against your book’s word. this is about method. you can still witness subtly (through actions and the like). i mean, you drop HINTS when you want gifts, right? you can witness to those with a desire to hear, and those who don’t, you can subtly lay the foundation for them to hear later. if the foundation doesn’t hold, it doesn’t mean that their soul is on you…you sincerely tried (but tried in a realistic way). to throw your belief system in another’s face without a certain level of discretion and respect (as in the aforementioned case of witnessing first and helping second after a traumatic disaster) is nothing more than counterproductive to the evangelical goal of winning souls for christ.
but…
wait.
the Adam and Eve story, in my opinion, and many others, is allegorical.
also, the Noah’s Ark story appears in many forms in many religions. they all tried to explain that flood, which scientists seem to believe happened as well.
which brings us yet again to one of my saucy irreverent questions: So you’re telling me that God’s original plan went so off-script that, though He be omniscient, He had to etch-a-sketch it away and start over?
oh, and my “true, true” was in reference to your previous comment…not the whole “bad parenting” comment. that’s just ridiculous.
Adam – there is nothing about which I disagree with in your last comment.
so, with that in mind, back to the original topic: what’s so wrong about a christian sitting in on a roundtable discussion about religion all the while maintaining respect for other belief systems and looking for common ground. that’s the foundation i speak of. simply refusing to enter the conversation not only sends the wrong message, it prevents you from sending any message at all. god never said, “fight or flight.” common ground isn’t so bad, is it?
Rick,
It was of God of course… and I can answer that without the fear of other religious people taking my job away…
iggy
Adam – the scenario you present would be acceptable, after all even MacArthur does that. However this conference is not about that, it presents religious views as a collage and collaborating on a form of compassion. Christ must be presented as He is, however with love, but this conference does not seem to be conformed like that.
We will see, I encouraged Pagitt on his blog to share Christ.
i’m wondering if maybe Christians are looking at this type of event from the wrong perspective.
it’s the old “pick your battles” axiom, i think. is it possible that these sorts interfaith events should not be viewed in the context of presenting one’s religion for debate, but rather in the context in which they actually exist, viz. attempting to raise up a new generation that doesn’t fight senseless wars in the name of this or that god.
collaborating on compassion and collaborating on salvation are two different things. i think the message the former sends is acceptable in god’s eyes.
I think showing compassion is fairly easy – do it. I do not see where we who belong to Christ need insight from unbelievers. James spells it out pretty succinctly and we as the church need obedience not collaboration.
The gospel should not be placed among the Dagons of this world, they must all bow.
Rick,
I do not see this as placing the Gospel “among” but in contrast to the Dagons or this world. In fact we should place our faith among the other faiths of this world so that truth faith may shine to the Glory of God and reveal itself among those in the darkness of other religions.
Yet, the very statement misses that Christ is already above all other “things” and is not passively sitting in heaven waiting and doing nothing… He is active here and now and amongst the “others” just as He was when it was revealed to Peter in Acts.
To imply that even to place the Gospel among the Dagons idea, misses that there are no real “Dagons” or “other gods” for as Paul stated, “We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one.” (1 Corinthians
iggy
Remember Iggy, I am duplicitous and at any moment I might change my view! And when you and Chris acknowledge a difficult time discerning my position on some subject it does not indicate duplicity, it reveals my erudite status among the theological serfs. I will, however, continue to show mercy by humble condescending to explain.
I can do no less, and it makes me feel good.
Rick
You can be a real jerk that looks very little like Jesus.
Brian – you may be correct, however Iggy and Chris know humor when they see it. See, I have humbly condescended to explain it to the proletariat!
(This was meant in good humor – see “Humor Day”)
===)))
Hey Iggy, how can I print a smiley face like that? I am Gomer Pyle of the computer world.
All I do is : )
Someone else must have added or gave it personality…
iggy
Rick,
I don’t think you’re a jerk. A bit of a protaganist but not a jerk!
: )
Thanks, Chris, but Brian was correct, I do not look anything like Jesus. I have blue eyes, I’m clean shaven, I wear pants, and I live in Florida. See, I’m not Jesus. Iggy looks more like Jesus than I do!
Chris – I am the only one with somewhat fundamentalist credentials who engages here. You will get a drive by comment once in a while from others, but I will stay and engage. I will post a correction piece about the emergents as well as the orthodox, the Calvinists as well as the Arminians, and I attempt to expose my own sin from time to time (I have quite a reservoir still untapped).
I feel stongly about many things but I try and stay balanced. It is sometimes difficult because not many blogs engage substantly over issues without rancor and name calling, and I realize that I am many times in the minority view. Although I get my feelings hurt sometimes, I still believe discourse is possible without personal attacks.
With God all things are possible.
Rick,
I am not sure Jesus was around 300 lbs and wore funny hats… but I will take that as a compliment.
= )
igs
tumbleweeds.
*sssshhhhhhh*
there they go.
Rick,
The “Spiritual Directors International” is part of the event: simply coordinators, working alongside, or ones who initiated the event, . . . I’m not sure:
http://www.sdiworld.org/his-holiness-the-dalai-lama.html
(Liz Bud Ellman is the Executive director of Spiritual Directors International.)
Just thought you might be interested in checking out this organization, if you haven’t already.
Amy – Yes, I totally embrace opportunities to witness for Christ in a spiritually hostile event, but this event is not an opportunity for that. It is a meshing of religions over commonality concerning some form of compassion.
Amy, you are a good researcher, can you provide a link to Pagitt’s talk at that Seeds conference last yaer?
what about what Adam said?
makes sense to me.
Rick,
Searching for things on the internet is a skill that I unfortunately don’t have. There are some really basic things I don’t know. Finding out how to look things up more efficiently is something on my list of things to do.
I came across the SDI website accidentally.
But if I somehow, in spite of my inferior skills, find a link to Pagitt’s talk I’ll let you know.
Another indicator.
of?
Evan – you have openly and honesty admitted you do not believe in the exclusivity of Christ’s salvation, and you are undecided about His divinity, resurrection, and many other absolutes of the Christian faith. So your view on this subject, when it aligns with others here, can be viewed as somewhat less than a confirmation.
To someone like me, that is another indicator of a problem concerning this conference.
So let me make sure I have this straight:
I, like many others in this country, have done a lot of reconsidering as to where I stand on faith. In fact, a report came out recently that suggested that a plurality of Americans now leave the faith of their upbringing. I would suggest that many of us are driven away from the church by this exclusivity, this utter lack of compassion, this hypocrisy.
So, you’re saying that Christians should not participate in anything productive where this world is concerned, unless they have an adequate platform to shove their dogma down peoples’ throats, even when other equal participants are not asking for such a platform; that Christians should not be involved in helping to advance the discussion and actually bearing fruit in any substantive way in addressing the problems of THIS world, unless they also are given an adequate platform to change the subject and try to save peoples’ souls, even when other equal participants are not asking for such a platform.
This is exactly what drives me and so many others away from orthodox Christianity.
Yes, that is what I’m saying. Sorry.
Just wanted to make sure.
So I guess the question then becomes:
Should Christians be more worried about:
A. Heeding the great commission by whatever means, working to live out the Beatitudes, and following the 2000+ verses in the Bible about caring for the “least of these” or…
B. Being right.
Thank you for pointing out my Chronic errors. I am humbled by your knowledge and passion for souls.
“Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him.” (John 3:36 NIV)
Arrogant? From a human viewpoint, yes . . . but only because we can’t understand the cost to God to have provided salvation for us in the way that He did.
How much easier it would have been for Him to simply present “many paths to Spirituality.” To have avoided the Cross entirely. How much easier for Him, how much easier for us, with our limited human reasoning, to accept.
But instead He chose the way that cost Him more than we can ever began to understand. We can never know what the sacrifice of God’s Son meant. Never.
Christ provided a way for the “least of these” to come to Him – through the sacrifice of the Lamb. Any Christian who has true godly compassion for children, who in any way presents a different or confusing message to “the least of these” regarding truth about God, is not demonstrating true compassion no matter how many hungry children he may feed.
He is instead presenting a feast of lies.
What is Compassion to a Buddhist? How does one go about getting it? Here’s one way:http://www.buddhanet.net/kalini.htm
“Kalachakra Initiation:”
This practice involves invoking spirits, seeing oneself as a diety . . . .
So the alternative is…staying out of situations where an alternate viewpoint might be represented, and thus ENSURING that the Christian viewpoint is not heard…
seems QUITE counterproductive to me.
stupid analogy, but i’m in sales, and it doesn’t matter how well i know my product, how convincing i am, how reassuring i am that your decision to buy my product is sound, if i can’t even get in your door.
Christians should be excited to participate in these interfaith things. it’s really, really good PR, too. for a non-Christian to be able to say “i was at this interfaith event, and the Christian representatives were really neat – i think i’d like to give them a call…maybe they’re not as heinous as i thought!”…because that’s the impression, especially among those who have been driven away from the church for whatever reason.
Amy – they will say that they of course disagree with those things as well and that why should we not present Christ in the midst of error. In that context I would agree, however, I do not believe this conference is about presenting different religions.
I remember President Carter speaking to congress after the Camp David accords. He said that “as a Christian” I quote the words of Jesus “Blessed are the peacemakers…”. What could be wrong with that? Being a brand new Christian I thought what good did those words do anyone? Paul did not go around promoting peace and it was not for that he was martyred.
And to respect Begin (Jew) and Sadat’s (muslim) religions as equal with Christianity dilutes and removes the truth. Begin and Sadat are probably both in hell today and I sometimes wonder had they ever heard an exclusive presentation of the gospel of Jesus Christ or was it tempored by presenting it within a religious montage?
That is the risk about which we must have wisdom and not just good intentions. However if you believe Christ can be found in other religions then you need not turn down any opportunity to present your perspective so as to add something to move the conversation forward.
Evan, it pains me that you and many in our country have left much of if not all of your faith in Christ because of the arrogant, prideful, self-righteous attitudes of many who claim to be in Christ. Thank you for sharing with us. Help us to learn to love others.
To the rest of us. It pains me that we are so quick to judge and slow to listen. It pains me that we have such a hard time understanding how the people we interact with everyday see us. It pains me that they despise and reject us not for believing in and proclaiming Christ, but for adding requirements to salvation and not living like Christ.
Might I recommend that you join me in reading the book Unchristian by David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons.
tempored? that doesn’t speak too highly of something if the mere presence of alternatives weakens it. shouldn’t truth be more evident when abreast with falsehood? after all, without darkness, we couldn’t know light. and on the topic of respect, would it be asking too much to let others have a favorite flavor of ice cream that differs from your own? not everything tastes the same to every person, and i’m cool with that. respect doesn’t mean you have to declare chocolate, vanilla, & strawberry separate but equal. giving respect is about allowing those around you to make their own decisions. after all, i’ve got my own plank to deal with.
i would add that i’m not a “hater.” there is no hatorade.
i guess my perspective is this: i have my journey, as does everyone else. my spirituality is evolving, and i wouldn’t say my faith is lost, but it’s just geared a different way.
but i know many more, close friends, who will openly say that they “hate Christians.” and that makes me feel sad. it makes me feel sad to have to clarify to people when i tell them i’m posting here that “these people aren’t all bad.” it makes me feel sad the same way my Muslim friends feel when people automatically assume they’re a certain way because of where they were born or how they were raised.
so i guess i’m just trying to communicate here for that reason. i have written off the Ingrids of the world. it’s not a human thing — if she was on fire, well, you know the adage. but as to dialogue, no. but i do believe there is a vast swath of humanity where there CAN be dialogue. and without dialogue, you all can’t share your experience with God effectively, and others like i mentioned can’t possibly begin to open their eyes to your perspective.
WORD.
and to me, that’s what makes this whole crazy experiment beautiful. the ups, the downs, the ins, the outs, the similarities, the differences, the experience…call me a total hippie if you like.
and i have a new question to pose, one which has probably been hashed out on these threads more than a handful of times – for you who consider the bible to be the ultimate authority and inerrant word of god…what say you to the fact that the word has been passed down through so many people’s hands over such a long period of time, through so many different political and social atmospheres, translated in so many languages, many times behind closed doors?
like a deluxe game of telephone that includes societal norms and political agendas…
i find this question especially interesting, especially when you can place modern Bibles (as in, past century) next to KJV’s and see clear agendas at work.
Evan stated: “… for a non-Christian to be able to say “i was at this interfaith event, and the Christian representatives were really neat…”
My drive-by comment: I don’t know what color the sky is in your world, but I’ve never heard a single non-Christian where I work say anything remotely like that. The few Christians around here are treated as second-class citizens, complete idiots. My boss actually said to me once (re: my faith): “I thought you were smarter than that.”
Didn’t someone say: “The world will hate you because of me?” Having some kind of forum or discussion isn’t going to change that.
The “Woodstock of Biblical compromise” pretty much says it. Pretty sad.
Keith – what if a non-Christians comes back and says “The Christian speakers were OK, but man that Dali Lama was mesmerizing!”.
Or worse yet, the Christians become enamored with the spiritualists. Oh yea, too late.
Christians are seen as stupid and the solution is to continue the withdrawal from society that began a century ago? What’s that definition of insanity again? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
I’m sure that Fred Phelps has used that same line to explain how people view his church.
the trouble is Jesus didn’t say “so take that as your license to be as ignorant and self-involved as you possibly can.”
Christians ALWAYS like to grab that verse out of the bag to absolve themselves from any responsibility for creating the “hate” people feel for them.
um, no. Christians have done it to themselves, which is why i think that verse is probably completely unrelated.
well, i live in the Bible Belt, but i live in a large city, and here it’s not “Christians” in general that people can’t stand; it’s “Christians” from certain churches.
one is a Baptist mega-church that wears its hypocrisy on its sleeve, i mean, on the side of the interstate, with their three giant crosses financed with money that could have fed the poor. it rhymes with Smellevue Smaptist. it’s a well-known church. there are a couple of large Calvinist Presbyterian churches that are equally disdained, but in a different way, by everybody but their members.
but no, it’s not “Christians” in general.
but see, the Dalai Lama is already there. the other religions are already represented. so do they hear from the Christians at all, or are the Christians off somewhere being a pain in peoples’ backside?
OK, Evan, let us hear what the Christian leaders say. If their presence there is for the purpose you suggest, then they must share the gospel clearly, agreed?
no, they just must be present.
the other leaders aren’t asking to shill for their personal opinions on salvation.
that’s not even the subject of the conference.
Christians have got to get over this idea that they’re somehow special on this horizontal level, and somehow deserve a greater platform.
this is basic PR, and it’s something that many Christians seem to have NO concept of.
I listened to the Dali Lama and he certainly does. I am willing to guess the other spiritualists do as well. I guess the Christians will be of the mannequin variety.
then they will probably speak from their perspective, too.
but they probably won’t do it in an exclusive way that makes people want to throw up in their mouths.
If only the martyrs had known!
Tim stated: “I’m sure that Fred Phelps…” Tim, you’re probably right.
Evan stated: “Christians ALWAYS like to grab that verse out of the bag to absolve themselves from any responsibility…” I understand you point. My point was more–try as hard as we might, sometimes it just doesn’t make any difference. I’m not advocating that we ALWAYS throw in the towel, or attempt to absolve ourselves of bad behavior. Sometimes the outcome (other’s response to us) is pretty obvious, at least it seems to be to me. In light of Joe Martino’s recent post, I’ll leave it at that.
well, and the truth is that there will always be people who disagree with Christianity, who find more fulfillment in other forms of spirituality.
i just think that, on balance, it would be more desirable for everyone if people were able to say “well, i don’t agree with the Christians, but they sure do walk their talk.”
– Rick
OK – I know this was about 155 comments ago, but I got this far in reading the the 160 and I had to add one of my own…
Who says “we” are trying to learn anything from them. Check out the conference website and see that Bell and Pagit are Presenters… that is, they will be representing Christianity, they will be teaching, they will be influencing.
I suppose this has all been plowed already, but geesh…
Neil
We’ll see. Some of us don’t believe they do that well anyway.
I’m no fan of Pagitt, but really that’s a moot point. In fact, if you think they cannot represent Christianity, then what’s you beef with them being there anyway?
Neil
Many don’t believe you do that all that well either, Rick. Just saying…
OK – let’s not get personal… leave that to the ODM’s.
Neil
Neil,
With all due respect, Rick is talking personally about people I happen to know. Although I have no idea who Brian is, I respect his right to turn what Rick is saying around on him for what it is. If that can’t be done here, than what is the point? Did not Rick already make it personal with his statement?
i think it’s sad that there’s a giant gulf between:
1. representing Christianity
and
2. representing Christ.
that’s why many of us don’t refer to ourselves as “Christians” anymore.
nasty connotations.
Joe,
You are correct, my comment was directed at the whole direction of the conversation, but given the placement it does appear to be directed at Brian – that was not my intent.
Neil
Further clarification: the point of this post and subsequent comments is the issue of Bell and Pagitt appearing at a conference and being on a panel discussion with non-Chirstians.
Neil
Yea, Joe, tit for tat. I used to punish my kids for that. My observation is based upon my view of theology, what is Brain’s view of me based upon? And like you say about Bell, he doesn’t know me unless he’s read my books..
Juvenile commenting, it’s so refreshing.
Thanks Joe
Rick,
This isn’t about you and I. I imagine, that Brian’s view is based on your words and actions on the this wonderful thing called the internet. I don’t know, ask him. It seems interesting to me you can say whatever you want but you get mad when it’s reflected back to you. Rick, the truth is I find you tiresome. Your writing is verbose and borders on slander. You promise an expose’ and then change your mind. When problems in your logic are presented you respond with “I don’t care.” Now, I get it, you don’t really like me all that much. That’s OK, I get it and I don’t care. You do your thing, I’ll do mine, but don’t berate me for what someone else said.
Joe – you can be a real jerk sometimes who doesn’t resemble anything like Jesus.*
* Ibid. Brian
I base my statement on observing you. More hypocrisy saying I am wrong or that Joe is for taking your own words and using them against you.
Rick,
You have no idea…
Grace and Peace to you Rick.
Brian,
You’re welcome. Keep shining the light on those who would oppress.