Ingrid is railing against a church again:

Belly up to the bar, pardner. They’re serving up a new kind of church in Sidney, Ohio. With the promise of pizza, wings, top regional bands, “rowdy fun”, and a short message, what’s not to like? I was about to remark satirically about mechanical bulls playing a role in the “worship”, but once again was outdone by reality. The article from WTOP News reports that mechanical bulls were the theme of the, uh, sermon which purportedly dealt with the issue of “getting along in life”.

Sounds pretty terrible, right?

Of course, what Ingrid leaves out is that these aren’t Sunday morning services.

You know Ingrid, this is getting ridiculous. If you’re really that desperate to drum up antagonism among the body of Christ I can send you a huge list of churches that get together for Saturday morning breakfasts, Wednesday night dinners, weekend trips to retreats, and other such shenanigans. In fact, I heard there was even one church that didn’t have worship services at all one day and instead spent all day hitting things with hammers.

Merci!

There has been much virtual ink spilled over Eckhart Tolle’s book, A New Earth, as of late, and the majority of it has to do Oprah’s endorsement of the book in her online course which has over two million students. Now I admit that I have made statements to the effect of brushing off Oprah, because I honestly do not see her as a major threat to Christianity. That being said, there are some who are definitely influenced by her brand of feel-good self-help advice meets pop psychology meets spiritual fad of the month entertainment. The frustrating thing to me is that I think it has been hard to find a response to Oprah that didn’t go over the top by spouting off lines to the effect of calling Oprah the anti-Christ and being part of a vast, global conspiracy. So anytime I see a review on the blogosphere that contains real and helpful information, I take note of it.

Greg Boyd, the pastor of Woodland Hills Church in St. Paul, MN has written a review of Tolle’s book, that I believe is a good example of how to approach these sort of things. First, most importantly, Boyd does something that should be common sense, but he actually read the book himself before writing about it. Secondly, Boyd refrains from making an ad hominem attacks on either Oprah or Tolle. Third, he does a thorough review of the points in the book, and points out both good and bad.

In the end, Boyd’s see the book as potentially dangerous and deceiving, and he advises caution should people choose to read it. Here is Boyd’s summary about Oprah and the book:

I am left, then, with deep concerns about this book and with the fact that Oprah (who explicitly identifies herself as Christian) is so enthusiastically supporting it. Again, I’m not denying there are some very good insights in this book. Nor am I joining the rank of those who are castigating Oprah as the new pastor of a new, heretical, internet “mega-church” or “cult.” I believe both Oprah and Tolle mean well and are sincerely trying to help people improve their lives. But I am nonetheless very concerned that the masterful way Tolle identifies and diagnoses the struggles we all wrestle with will make readers more gullible in accepting the strongly anti-Christian religious belief system he’s intentionally or unintentionally slipping in the back door.

To me this is an example of how Christians should approach discernment. If it is done in a reasonable fashion without resorting to hysterics and conspiritorial thinking, it seems like it has a much greater chance of being listened to.

Occasionally while on the internet I get sucked into the proverbial “rabbit hole”; Someone links to someone who links to someone…and on it goes. Before long I’ve looked at a couple dozen pages and I’ve forgotten what I started looking at in the first place. Occasionally (very rarely) do I find things that are intriguing enough to post about but tonight was different…

Per my blog reader I started at ysmarko.com which contained the post entitled Emergents Cohorts and Denom Groups being an R.C.A. (Reformed Church of America) youth pastor I was drawn to this section of the post

Reformergent (Reformed) — this group is somewhat different from the others because it’s “interested in the interaction between Reformed theology and the emerging church movement.” Chris Case is the main man “minding the (occasional) gap.”

Excited to see what Reformed folk were adding to the “conversation” I strolled over to Reformergent to see what they were all about.

Which eventually led me to the post “The Contexualization Condrum” with the opening lines:

Recent posts by Phil Johnson and Andrew Jones, with added statements by John MacArthur, have recently caused a bit of conversation about the topic of Contextualization. Phil has a good exegesis of the text regarding Mars Hill…(emphasis mine)

Not being a gracious reader I assumed that this guy, Chris Case, at Reformergent must have not been reading the same Phil Johnson that I’ve been reading. Deciding that a look at the Pyro blog was in order; I trotted over and the very first post I see catches me off guard. Not for any other reason than Phil seems to take exception to being categorized as a hyper-calvinist or he takes exception to the definition of a hyper-calvinist; I’m not really sure. Uh…Anyway…where was I? Oh yeah…so the guy who says(maybe) Phil is a hyper-calvinist, C. Micheal Patton, runs reclaimingthemind.org. Which is an excellent blog about a lot of things but he had a great article entitled “What do you mean God is sovereign?’ Four Options”. Which in of itself was a great post but what I found most encouraging was the interaction between two commenter’s on that post. Here are their comments in their entirety.

******on 18 Apr 2008 at 2:05 am #

Hi,

I believe option two is the only rational, and importantly, the Biblical one. All the rest does not fit in with the picture the Bible paints God to be. In my opinion, option one comes close to the Islamic god. Option three seems to a dis-interested or at best, a moody god. Option four, an impotent god. Since the Bible clearly teaches God to have given us some free will, and is “intimately acquainted” with all our ways, and is very much potent, these options do not hold much water. God of option two is the Biblical God.

**** on 18 Apr 2008 at 2:24 am #

******,

I would be careful for using that term “biblical God”. There are devout Christians who claim to be “biblical” that would fall in all 4 of these categories. Thus, to claim your view to be the “biblical God” borders on narrow-mindedness and arrogance. There are lots of things that are “biblical” that are not orthodox in any case, and I personally wish Christians would completely drop the word from their vocabulary. It’s mainly used as ammunition for claiming that the person who holds to the “biblical view” is right and everybody else is wrong. Also, you could find proof-texts for all 4 views and thus claim to have the “biblical God”. I do believe there is such a thing as a “biblical God”, but that we can capture this in its entirety and have the audacity to think we’re completely right on everything just falls short of the mark. We all bring our own biases and sets of lenses to the text, regardless of how objective or “biblical” we claim to be. Sorry to rant, I’m not trying to be mean or get mad at you, I’m just trying to persuade you to be very cautious in using that term. Thanks

****

******on 18 Apr 2008 at 3:00 am #

****,

Thanks for your comments. This is the first time we both are interacting, and from reading your responses to other posts and comments, I should say that I like the way you interact, balancing sound arguments with humility.

Now, I am sorry that I come out as someone who is “completely right on everything”, but trust me, I never had such a thought anywhere in the recesses of my heart. What I was trying to say was that from studying the Bible in its entirety (not picking verses), we can safely come to the conclusion that option two depicts the God of the Bible more accurately than the other options. As you know, proof-texting don’t help much.

Thanks, brother, for your concern.

Occasionally my “Rabbit Hole” journeys lead me to some buried treasure. Tonight was one of those nights.

I’m sorry, but this over-the-top link at CRN is just ridiculous:

You may not have heard about The Shift yet, but you will – soon! Shifters, like pod people, are in our midst. Some of your friends and acquaintances could be shifters, only you don’t know it yet. Shifters have wormed their way into church leadership (pastors deacons, elders), worship services, Bible studies, Sunday school, seminaries, Christian schools, youth groups, camps. They lecture, write for Christian news sources and they’re all over the Internet. Now they’re touring the country. Many shifters are familiar faces on TV and have become media darlings. Browse through your local Christian bookstore and you’ll find their names lined up on shelves. Brian McLaren, Jim Wallis, Tony Campolo, Marcus Borg, Dallas Willard, Leonard Sweet, Erwin McManus, Phyllis Tickle, Rob Bell, Dan Kimball, Doug Pagitt, Tony Jones, Scot McKnight, Eddie Gibbs, Ryan Bolger, Jeff & Sherry Maddock, Peter Rollins, to name a few. Every one of them are theological liberals!

Today is the opening of the film “Expelled” on Intelligent Design and the uncoordinated effort of atheistic science to blackball scientists (be they Christian or not) who believe in some sort of Intelligent Design.  Because I believe this is a topic that should be in the public eye (rather than arguing over literal 6-24-hour-day creation vs. atheistic evolution in a dualistic manner), I have put up an ad for the movie in our sidebar.

As a number of frequent readers know, none of the writers are in this to make money.   Aside from the Amazon search box, we do not have any commercial ads on this site, nor do we accept donations for numerous reasons – primarily that this is something we believe in strongly, and we don’t want any revenue pressure that might influence the content of the site – in any direction.

The ad that I’ve posted is simply to promote the movie – we do not get ANYTHING for having it up.

Nothing.

If you want to donate money, there are a number of missions which help flesh-and-blood people, and we can direct you to them.

That is all

It’s kind of rare that I find something in the “Christian” music market that I can recommend to people, but one exception throughout the years has been Justin McRoberts.  I don’t even know if it’s completely accurate to say he’s part of the Christian market, since he releases all of his music independently.  But He is a Christian, and he still writes a lot of his songs with a Christian audience in mind.

McRobert’s new album is entitled Deconstruction, and though the word has gotten a lot press recently, I find the lyrics to be quite poignant and challenging.  I find that God has gifted certain people to express things I would like to say better than I possibly could.

Deconstruction
© Justin McRoberts 2008 Five Foot Six and a Half Music (ASCAP)

I am comfortable with deconstruction
I am comfortable with doubt
It’s the assurance that I’m right about the mystery
The assurance that you’re wrong that I can do without

So everything I knew about you
Everything I thought I knew
I’d tear it down and I would leave it all in pieces
If finally what it means is that I’m left with only you

They say it’s not about religion
But then they tell you how to think
They say it’s all about the way you understand it
Then they tell you what it means that you’ve experienced these things

They say it’s not about performance
They say it’s all about the heart
But every critic with his pen or his computer
Talks about effectiveness and not about the art

If you’d like to hear the song, it should come up on the embedded player on McRobert’s website.  I highly recommend that you check him out if you haven’t before.

Todd Friel of Way of the Master surprised just about everyone and endorsed Mark Driscoll.

Now if God is truly speaking to these “discerners”, why they can’t be consistent in their pronouncements for or against someone? Just to update everyone’s score card:

Steve Camp – thinks Driscoll’s apostate
Ken Silva – thinks Driscoll’s apostate
Ingrid – thinks Driscoll’s apostate
Mike Corely – did something ODMs don’t typically do and visited Mark Driscoll. He no longer thinks Driscoll’s apostate
Todd Friel/WOTM – now endorses Driscoll

To speak in modernist terms, either Driscoll’s apostate or he isn’t. There is no grey area. How are we to tell which ODM truly has the gift of discernment?

Since the ODMs pride themselves on certainty, I’m certainly getting confused by their mixed messages.

*On a side note, Driscoll preached a sermon on Creation this past Sunday. He argues that the Bible is not a comprehensive scientific textbook and instead tells the who and what was involved with Creation. He personally believes in “historic creationism”, however, leaves room for other believers to hold other views (even allowing for theistic evolution). The only view he argues against is Atheistic Evolution.

Of the crazy, whacked-out cults out there, Scientology often makes Momonism (even the goofy Texas-polygamist-sex-cult flavor) look tame. What has kept much of its wackiness out of the spotlight, though, is its willingness and capability to use legal force and withering lawsuits to stifle criticism/exposure of their beliefs (see South Park video for a peek at some of the weirdness that is Scientology).

It seems that some the CoS’ tactics have now backfired.  Wikileaks, a site that specializes in Freedom of Information, obtained a boatload of Scientology documents from an ex-cult member.  The CoS threatened a lawsuit against Wikileaks, and in response, WL decided to push ahead of schedule and release thousands of pages of CoS documents in the coming weeks.

For discernment folks looking for a good place to discern, this trove of documents (which may not be available long if a lawsuit were to prevail) would likely be a wealth of information for helping de-brainwash folks coming out of the CoS, and to help stop people from entering in the first place…

Several months ago, I chronicled my learning experience on the workings of the Wikipedia and the small-minded ways in which some Christians were trying to make this their new digital battlefield for Truth^TM (which should never be confused for truth). Now a grizzled veteran in the ways of Wiki and the Truth^TM wars within its pages, more stories have accumulated along the way…

A few will I share today, though I am sure some are not yet complete, and yet others will meet me on the road ahead.

Thin-Skinned-Ninnies

Amazingly, along the road, I’ve met some Christian brothers whose capacity for disagreement sits somewhere below ‘E’ on most reasonable scales.

Read the rest of this entry »

Rorschach inkblot test:

The theory behind the test, created by Hermann Rorschach, is that the test taker’s spontaneous or unrehearsed responses reveal deep secrets or significant information about the taker’s personality or innermost thoughts.

One application of this pseudo-science test is that the Rorschach test reveals the common biases of the subject taking the test. Today, one can witness this particular phenomena in the response to Rob Bell’s approximately 2 minutes of speaking time at the Seeds of Compassion event in Seattle, WA.

The Setup

The context of the event is that 15 representatives of different religions were invited to a panel discussion (which is different than being given a lecture with free reign of topics) on Sprituality & Youth, along with the Dali Lama and Desmond Tutu. Rob Bell, the teaching pastor at Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, MI, was one of the invited panelists. During the 3-4 hour session, he was (according to the A Little Leaven) given two questions, for which he had approximately 2-3 minutes of mic-time.

Read the rest of this entry »