Friends,

I’ll apologize at the outset for the offensive title to this blog post, but it is really the only way to say what I am thinking after reading Ingrid’s latest drive by display of ignorance. I am angry though about her most recent outburst against the Body of Christ. She was so willing to make a hit against someone that I don’t believe for a minute that she even listened to the sermon she criticizes. I am simply astounded that she has criticized this sermon delivered at the Grace Church. Here’s part of what Ingrid wrote:

Please take just ten minutes to watch the video. After watching it, you can vote on the website as to whether Christ was glorified or something else. You can forward past the out of tune guitar and singer, and just listen to what the pastor has to say.

We have been so far removed from Christ-centered worship, most evangelicals wouldn’t recognize it if they saw it. Worse still, because of a lack of biblical knowledge, the Scriptural metaphors and references within this hymn wouldn’t have any meaning to most reared at a circus church. We are generations deep now in biblical illiteracy, and that’s why the church and professing believers are in the condition they are.

See also the comments at Truth Matters where even more ignorance is on display. Here’s what the author there says:

When you have a spare 10 minutes, please go to the video link below. Before you get to the senior pastor’s introduction you will have to listen to the music director sing and then an associate pastor speak for about 2 minutes, then watch the Pastor’s introduction. The whole thing is very painful to watch. [You can also vote in their ridiculous poll which, predictably, favors a negative reaction. In fact, I had the only positive vote out of 33 or so.]

I suspect the reason why neither Ingrid nor the author of Truth Matters got it, and why they found the whole thing ‘painful’ is because they only watched 10 minutes of it, if they watched it at all.Well, just so you know, I watched the entire clip and I can say without reservation that this sermon was profoundly biblical in every aspect. I’ll only add a few caveats. First, he did look ridiculous in the Superman costume. But I suspect that he was playing the doppleganger by dressing in such an ironic way. Second, his outline was a bit difficult to follow, but he evidently provided outlines for the congregation. Third, he dealt with the Scripture from front to back. Fourth, aggghhh…he had people stand when he read the Word of God in order to, are you ready for this, ‘honor the Word of God.’ What a heretic!!!* (*Sarcastic)

Please someone tell me: What was painful about what he said? What was unbiblical about it? What did not glorify God? Mrs Schlueter, with all due respect here, did you even listen to what he preached? I am simply floored that they are bent about this message. The main part of the message, the overarching point was this: We are useless to God if we don’t forgive. How is that unbiblical? How is that painful? I’ll conclude by noting the main outline which follows this question: How can we be Biblical Supermen and Superwomen. Then I’ll note just a few bullet points that I picked up.

How can We be Biblical Supermen?

  • The Biblical Superman puts his faith in the death and Resurrection of Jesus. Put your faith in Jesus.
  • The Biblical Superman is committed to the local church in prayer, worship, teaching, fellowship, and accountability (and a few others)
  • The Biblical Superman is active in serving Christ, using his gifts and talents.
  • The Biblical Superman is always looking for divine appointments (This was really a brilliant point)
  • The Biblical Superman is bold enough to share Jesus with others.
  • The Biblical Superman takes responsibility for his actions.
  • The Biblical Superman chooses to forgive.

Can someone point out to me, because after 13 years of preaching I guess I have missed the point, but can someone point out to me at what point this outline fails to honor God? Can someone point out to me how this is ‘painful’? This is one of the most biblically derived, expository outlines I have seen in a long, long time. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this outline or the delivery or his exegesis or his orthodoxy. He argues for Pauline authorship, he tells us the historical circumstances that prompted the writing, he argues, first, that it is faith in the Work of Christ that makes the letter to Philemon possible in the first place.

I’m offering a challenge right now to the author of Truth Matters and the author of Slice: Point out one aspect of that sermon that was unorthodox or unbiblical. He dealt with the text from front to back. Offer one example of his failure and I will stop writing here. You cannot do it.

Now some bullet points in conclusion (these are a few things I picked up and wrote down, there was much more!):

  • If you are harboring bitterness, God cannot use you.
  • God sets up divine appointments.
  • Philemon=loving
  • Onesimus=useful
  • Real biblical supermen choose to forgive.
  • The grace of God makes us brand new
  • Repent.
  • Put your faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
  • Man is never more like God than when he chooses to forgive.
  • The news of the Gospel is that God forgives sins no matter how ugly they are.
  • We are NOT supermen.
  • Paul is asking Philemon to forgive Onesimus
  • Sometimes when people hurt us it is part of God’s plan for spiritual renewal (ie. salvation)
  • Forgiveness always refreshes the body of Christ.

The church sang. They prayed. The stood when the Word was read–and to be sure, they only read, for the purposes of the sermon, three verses! (Even though he read nearly half the book in the context of the message.) They talked of forgiveness and grace and repentance and Scripture and love. I counted the word ‘grace’ at least six times on the website where I watched the video. Just so you know, I am writing this defense of the preacher who preached that sermon because I know he wouldn’t do so himself. What I fear is that some lost person will happen along Slice or TM and be turned off to the sermon without giving it a chance. But I’ll say this: If I was lost and heard that sermon I would be convicted that Jesus is Lord. I am not lost and I am convicted of the Lordship of Christ after hearing that sermon. What a blessing.

Ingrid: Give the sermon more than ten minutes. TM: Give the sermon more than ten minutes. Get through the pain of being confronted with the command from Scripture to forgive and listen to what the preacher has to say. You have both missed it entirely! Oh my God, it is so sad, so pathetic that these two blogs have run down this preacher, Christ’s body, this sermon for no reason whatsoever. Oh My God! I am convinced, and becoming more so with every blog post I read at SOL, that there is something seriously, seriously wrong with their point of view.

Ingrid wrote:

We have been so far removed from Christ-centered worship, most evangelicals wouldn’t recognize it if they saw it. Worse still, because of a lack of biblical knowledge, the Scriptural metaphors and references within this hymn wouldn’t have any meaning to most reared at a circus church. We are generations deep now in biblical illiteracy, and that’s why the church and professing believers are in the condition they are.

The preacher spent nearly a third of the sermon (at least a third, maybe more) explaining and re-explaining the history and background and text of the book to Philemon. He did his part to eliminate biblical illiteracy and he is criticized and it is said that the sermon and worship ‘did not honor God’?!?!?!?!?!? My guess is that the people at Grace Church are not among the biblically illiterate. I suspect this is a church that is very good condition–especially if their preacher preaches like this every single week.

Wow. I think it is time to put SOL and TM into the heap of irrelevance. They ought to be ashamed for attacking that message, that preacher, that church in such a way. Shame on you, SOL!! And shame on you, TM!! You have no ground to stand on in your criticism of this man or his message. And I think I know of what I speak since I too preach every single week. I won’t dress like superman, but who cares if I did? The point is that this man delivered an orthodox, theologically sound, expository sermon. I don’t care what he was dressed like on the outside. He was wearing Christ on the inside!!

Soli Deo Gloria!

  • Share/Bookmark

Tags: , , , ,

This entry was posted on Saturday, August 9th, 2008 at 3:02 pm and is filed under Christian Living, Church and Society, Ingrid, Theology. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+/- Collapse/Expand All

86 Comments(+Add)

1   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
August 9th, 2008 at 3:30 pm

Well if you forsake the gospel of the grace, mercy and loving kindness and turn it into works as SoL and others do, then there is no reason to not get why they hate the true gospel.

Maybe that is not kind enough or sounds mean… but really what else can it be besides, as you said, that, or ignorance.

iggy

2   John Hughes    
August 9th, 2008 at 4:18 pm

I thought the teaching was sound, the theatrics a poor choice and distracting. I see the entertainment syndrome a serious problem in today’s church. 8 out of 10 for content. – 2 for presentation.

Let’s see, I think that falls under a conviction on the Absolut-O-Meter — a little higher than a personal preference.

3   Chris P.    
August 9th, 2008 at 5:20 pm

I thought becominf superman was the result of eating the forbidden fruit.

“Wow. I think it is time to put SOL and TM into the heap of irrelevance.”

Along with you guys?

If anything, it is you that believe in the gospel of works. You are the neo-legalists. So is Warren and the entire emergent movement, i.e. all who follow Arminius.
(this is nopt a pro calvinist comment btw. It is pro-scripture, something which none of you seem to be familiar with.)

4   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
August 9th, 2008 at 5:53 pm

I only watched a little of the video so I will take Jerry and John’s word for the soundness of its content. I have my limits to theatrics, however my limits are just that.

I will make an observation about the “style” of the worship service. Even if I have a problem with a superman shirt, I also have a big problem with a litergical service that practices vain repitition, and robes, candles, altars, and other structures that are a shadow of the law.

5   richard abanes    http://abanes.com
August 9th, 2008 at 6:05 pm

Let’s think about it for a moment….okay, long enough. Here’s the issue as I see it — the ODMs will not accept as biblical/permissible anything that their own small/narrow frame of reference cannot embrace. If it doesn’t appeal to them, make sense to them, or is familiar to them — it is instantly a threat to them/God.

Rather than being able to just say — “Meh, they love God, but that’s not my cup of tea” — they list whatever it is under heresy, false teaching, last Days deception, watering-down the Gospel, etc. — whether it be music, a style of presentation, dress, a method of worship, or music.

In this case you have:

1. A guy in a superman T-Short – BLASPHEMY! It has colors and doesn’t smack of wearing your Go to Meetin’ clothes!!

2. A secular song (Scrubs theme song): BLASPHEMY!!! God knows, not a single secular piece of music can say ANYTHING that is true, or put into artistic expression real thoughts, emotions, ideas, and perceptions. Nevermind the fact that the lyrics include: “That deck of Tarot cards, won’t get you very far” — a slam against occultism.

3. An analogy is used that was not possible pre-1920: BLASPHEMY!!! Nevermind that the whole message, as the introductory statement declares, is about men “who can live their lives well for God.” To be supermen as “God calls us to take a risk.” That “God wants to make us useful.” And that it all is tied into forgiveness from God and that “none of us on our own are supermen.” But through God we can be supermen for God! Oh, the HERESY OF IT!!!!

4. The Pastor obviously has a sense of humor that is very light-hearted and doesn’t at all take himself seriously; HERESY!!!! We know God’s under-shepherds are supposed to be deadly serious, grave, sober-minded, and utterly beyond showing themselves as actually human, rather than the untouchable anointed.

Once more, we see these people placing on EVERYONE else how THEY want to live their lives; how THEY see a church being run; how THEY think a ‘Pastor” must dress on a Sunday; how THEY think music should sound in order to glorify God — all conditions that have nothing to do with the Bible, God, true holiness, or following Jesus.

The Pharisees and Legalists are alive and well — it borders on preaching a false Gospel of works.

R. Abanes

6   Jerry Hillyer    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
August 9th, 2008 at 6:45 pm

John,

You wrote: “I thought the teaching was sound, the theatrics a poor choice and distracting. I see the entertainment syndrome a serious problem in today’s church. 8 out of 10 for content. – 2 for presentation.”

Isn’t this 99% of the problem that ODM’s have with anything that isn’t theirs? But I can say with near certainty that if Paul Washer had been dressed up in a Superman cape not a word would have been said. Who cares what the presentation was like? Didn’t Paul say that the presentation didn’t matter because what mattered was a ‘demonstration of the Spirit’s power’? Isn’t this what the ODM crowd is always telling us: “My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power.”

And isn’t this what Isaiah said about Messiah? “Just as there were many who were appalled at him–his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any human being and his form marred beyond human likeness…”

Now I’m NOT saying this preacher was Messiah, but I am saying that his appearance did NOT matter. What matters was the demonstration of the Spirit’s power. He did look absurd, but that is both the point and beside the point.

jerry

7   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
August 9th, 2008 at 7:11 pm

OK – there is visual sensationalism like a supreman shirt, then there is literary sensationalism. Maybe Washer does not wear a superman shirt, but here are a few sensationalisms that can be found in just one of his sermons.

*Washer says that the reason that God will throw people into hell is because he needs to rid creation of sinners before he can create a new heaven and a new earth.

*when Washer alludes to each sinner standing before God he uses the illustration of a wax figure being melted by a blow torch

*Washer goes on and asks the congregation to imagine themselves standing before the Great White Throne judgment, and feeling their cheek twitch and feeling terrified that God has seen that twitch.

* He goes on to offer the word picture of God saying “Bring them before Me”, and heaven and earth vomiting the lost up before the throne.

* Washer says that the presence of God will be so terrible that those who are already in hell would rather remain there than come out.

* Washer uses the novel “A Christmas Carol” as an object lesson for part of his message.

So even the Reformed poster boy uses some sensationalistic verbiage to reach people. Most of the above is extra-biblical.

8   nathan    http://www.nathanneighbour.com
August 9th, 2008 at 7:41 pm

I sincerely do not understand the whole beef over “entertainment” or “theatrics”. We have so dichotomized our religion from our life. It’s ok for us to paint our faces, draw on our stomaches and yell our lungs out for a football team, but the second that a pastor wears a superman shirt to show a point, it becomes sensationalism and theatrics.

People today get more than half of their philosophy on life from “theatrics”. We are ok with watching a great movie and basking in its life lessons, but somehow our church buildings should be free from the same medium that most people are learning from. We must speak the language of the culture. For most of us, that is film, music, visual art and the spoken word.

9   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
August 9th, 2008 at 9:03 pm

Chris P – do you even bother reading what you write anymore?

You might as well have a “pick an irrelevant insult wheel” and do it at random…

10   nc    
August 9th, 2008 at 9:04 pm

hmmmm….fthat’s funny, Rick….

I love a liturgical service that has the repetition of our corporate petitions to God as the people of God speaking with one voice, and robes as symbols of the righteousness of Christ that clothes his people, candles that visually communicate the truth filled piercing presence of Christ, altars to remind me of the once for all atoning sacrifice of that same Christ, and other structures that holistically tell the story of God and it’s unique expression in God’s people–the Church.

;)

11   nc    
August 9th, 2008 at 9:06 pm

Yaaaaaaay!!!!!

CHRIS P!!!!!!!

You’re so right….as soon as your “religion gurus” close up shop then this site WILL be irrelevant!!!!

We’re on the same page…

But don’t be surprised…we all know you’re a purpose driven emergent deep down.

12   nc    
August 9th, 2008 at 9:07 pm

But, seriously, Chris P…

How does it feel to be a man-centered sycophant?

13   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
August 9th, 2008 at 9:10 pm

Chris P,

Funny as I see that my friends seek to live as Christ lived and trust in Him for all things. We seek to spread the news of the Kingdom of God…

In Contrast, I see a group of people you support worried about clothes, how people look, and many many other superficial things. In fact they also preach works as they judge others for not dressing or talking or whatever it is this week, and be like them.

I see that one is wanting men to be like them… and that is your people… and the other side you all hate, want others to be like Christ Jesus.

Go and Grow in Grace Christ, hate does not become you,
iggy

14   Jerry Hillyer    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
August 9th, 2008 at 9:23 pm

Chris P,

You wrote: “If anything, it is you that believe in the gospel of works. You are the neo-legalists. So is Warren and the entire emergent movement, i.e. all who follow Arminius.
(this is nopt a pro calvinist comment btw. It is pro-scripture, something which none of you seem to be familiar with.)”

Where in my OP did I mention the name Warren? Where in my OP did I mention Emergent church? Where in my OP did I mention ‘Arminius’? Where in my OP did I mention ‘Calvinist’?

If any of you and your pathetic group of discernmentalists bother to listen to the sermon SOL and TM criticizes, you will see that he never mentions works once. In fact, the very first point he makes is that we must put our faith in the work that Jesus Christ has already done for us: Cross and Resurrection.

The sad part is that the sermon was so exegetically sound it was almost boring. No funny stories. No jokes. No quotes. Only a couple of anecdotes at the end where the preacher humbled himself by pointing out that he needed to forgive someone.

Chris P, I say this with love, but your comments are a joke. You are so anxious to disagree that you didn’t even pay attention to what was written. This is the same problem your hero Ingrid has.

Time for you to grow up and start paying attention.
your friend,
jerry

15   Jerry Hillyer    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
August 9th, 2008 at 9:26 pm

PS–Chris P., I feel sorry for you. I really, really do. In fact, right now, my heart is breaking for you because you are so unbelievably blind to the grace of God.

16   opus    
August 9th, 2008 at 10:44 pm

thanks nc,
for your words on #10 you said it more gently than I could have.
Opus

17   Chad    http://www.chadholtz.wordpress.com
August 9th, 2008 at 10:56 pm

I love a liturgical service that has the repetition of our corporate petitions to God as the people of God speaking with one voice, and robes as symbols of the righteousness of Christ that clothes his people, candles that visually communicate the truth filled piercing presence of Christ, altars to remind me of the once for all atoning sacrifice of that same Christ, and other structures that holistically tell the story of God and it’s unique expression in God’s people–the Church.

Ditto, nc.

I know of no better way to retrain and reawaken our imaginations to the things of God.

peace.

18   Aaron    
August 10th, 2008 at 2:26 am

Yowza Chris P, way to pull that Rick Warren/Emergent/Arminius comment out of your butt so quick. lol!

I just finished listening to a sermon on humor and how the Pharisees were oftentimes comical in their rigid, religious, works-based attitudes and here I see a great example of a modern-day rigid, religious, works-based (believe in Calvin, not Arminius, and you will be saved=works) attitude. Thank you Chris P, you’re a living beacon to my Christian education of what not to be like.

God bless your heart, Chris P. I love you dearly. :) (no sarcasm, I mean it)

-Aaron

19   Stan    
August 10th, 2008 at 4:52 am

Rick,
“Even the reformed Poster boy”? What a comment, Mr. Washer is a servant of God and preaches the Word well. I wonder if ther is a bit of jealousy in your tone? And by the way, he is a Baptist not reformed.

Stan

20   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 7:50 am

We no longer must depend upon visual artifacts and structures to worship God. The time has come that we now worship in Spirit and in truth, independent from the outward and totally dependent upon the intenal. The mode of worship as outlined in the Old Testament was done away with on the Day of Pentecost.

No more “furniture” and no more outward designations for the “priesthood”. Litigurgical worship is not sinful but it still remains tethered to that which is done away with. If you need visual reminders and symbals to project spiritual truth, you need a baptism of the Word and of the Spirit.

I am partial to banners, though, which bear the name and attributes of God. They are not only part of the Word, they are worshiping God by proclaiming His majesty.

21   Neil    
August 10th, 2008 at 8:43 am

If anything, it is you that believe in the gospel of works. You are the neo-legalists. So is Warren and the entire emergent movement, i.e. all who follow Arminius.
(this is nopt a pro calvinist comment btw. It is pro-scripture, something which none of you seem to be familiar with.) – Chris P.

Now THAT is funny…

NEil

22   Neil    
August 10th, 2008 at 9:23 am

If you need visual reminders and symbals to project spiritual truth, you need a baptism of the Word and of the Spirit. – Rick.

Funny you should say “baptism” – since water baptism is a theatrical symbol to project spiritual truth.

To all; for the most part I believe those who are so opposed to “theatrics” or drama or art or dance or whatever in the context of worship are so steeped in modernism they believe God demands monologue sermons with three points (and grace super-abounds if the points are alliterated).

Neil

23   Neil    
August 10th, 2008 at 9:24 am

I wonder how the ODM’s would have responded to the theatrics of the prophets?

Neil

24   Josh    http://bloodtippedears.blogspot.com/2008/07/prayer-and-help-for-my-mom-carol.html
August 10th, 2008 at 11:05 am

I am the author of Truth Matters. I not only watched the first 10 minutes of that church sermon, not only did I watch the entire sermon several times, but I worshipped at that church since I was 8 years old! I left that church two years ago because not only has the method changed but also the Message has changed.

I love this pastor and want to see him drop the arm of the flesh. My purpose of the post was to show how he is using the arm of the flesh. You don’t know the whole story. You don’t know how we were asked not to witness, hand out tracts, pray, read the Bible, nothing at certain Sunday church events so that we would not offend people.

I read a few of the other comments left on here. It amazes me how ignorant people are to why the church gathers on Sundays. Someone posted “It’s ok for us to paint our faces, draw on our stomaches and yell our lungs out for a football team, but the second that a pastor wears a superman shirt to show a point, it becomes sensationalism and theatrics.” This person is comparing the “world” with “the church”. The “Church” is called OUT of the world. The superman costume made no point whatsoever. Preach the Word! The Word is POWERFUL…much more powerful than this silly stuff.

As far as what that other commentator said about football games. The term “world” (cosmos) has a range of meanings. In some contexts it means “the fallen world in its rebellion against God.” In others it means “the created order.” And in others it means “the arena of human affairs.” When we talk about separation from the world we are talking about it in the first sense of the term, in its sinful falleness. We are not claiming that Christians must separate from the arena of human affairs. But the church itself is not merely a subset of the world even in that third sense of the word. The church is not merely one of the religious expressions of the world, it is called out of the world. The culture itself is not neutral. The culture is heavily influenced by sin. The danger to the church is that the thinking and practices of the pagan culture find their way into the church. When that happens, the salt looses its saltiness and is worthless.

To distinguish between parts of human life in the world that are neutral (modes of transportation, building design, etc) and those that bring with them thinking and practices that are inimical to Christian faith, requires careful discernment. For example, consider Paul’s discussion of meat offered to idols in 1Corinthians. Though not ruling out eating it in some contexts, he warns of the dangers of the pagan culture and that its practices cannot be brought into the church.

As far as the seeker church goes, they have a deeper problem. Rather than purse gospel preaching that God uses to convert the lost and add them to the church, they feel the church has to be attractive to the lost AS THEY ARE in their unregenerate state. This is impossible unless the church is drastically changed from its Biblical calling. The false theology is that sinners have something in them that must be appealed to in order to “woo” them into Christianity. I believe the Holy Spirit convicts people of their sin. They cannot see the things of God as being attractive until after they are converted.

Blessings to you all.

25   Josh    http://bloodtippedears.blogspot.com/2008/07/prayer-and-help-for-my-mom-carol.html
August 10th, 2008 at 11:21 am

Oh, I forgot one thing. I think it’s important to read our declaration.

Here’s an excerpt:

Our Witness here at Truth Matters blog includes the following:

* to glorify God by declaring Jesus Christ in all His glory as the only hope for fallen man.

* to glorify God by testifying to the excellencies of Christ

* to glorify God by unashamably declaring the Truth of Scripture as laid out within the theology of the Reformed faith.

* to glorify God by contending for the faith

* to glorify God by calling the visible church to be obedient to true Worship

* to glorify God by promoting a radically God centered view of all things

* to glorify God by honoring God’s revealed Word through the practice of Biblical interpretation and discernment

The goals of our Witness described above are challenging ones. As we pursue this walk along the narrow path, we do stumble into the sin of spiritual pride. Some of the comments we receive here at Truth Matters blog criticize our efforts. Although the ones making these critiques misunderstand our motives, their comments typically come with some valid points. Constructive criticsim is always welcomed. Through God’s Sanctifying Grace, our words will be more effective in reflecting the Grace, Mercy, and Love within our Lord and Savior’s heart that He expresses towards this lost world, as well as His blood bought Church.

However imperfect (or offensive) we may be at times, our stand for the purity of His Church and His Truth must continue. We desire to see the visible church return to it’s biblical foundation. We desire to see a church where the Truth revealed in God’s Word is preached and taught in all it’s fullness; where the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper are prominant. We desire to see the church seek to please God, not man. We desire all of these things with the motivation of seeing God glorified, honored and worshiped in Spirit and Truth.

You can read the whole declaration here:

http://bloodtippedears.blogspot.com/2008/01/truth-matters-promoting-radically-god.html

26   M.G.    
August 10th, 2008 at 11:23 am

Rick,

Do you partake of communion?

I think you’re seriously confused on this subject.

27   Ken Silva    http://www.apprising.org
August 10th, 2008 at 11:26 am

I wonder how the ADM’s would have responded to the message of the prophets?

28   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 1:04 pm

Baptism and communion are the only ceremonial observances given to us By Christ. All the vesitages of the law, the beggarly elements, are not to be dragged into the church.

M.G. – I am confused, but not seriously. :)

29   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 2:41 pm

ADM? Armchair Discernment Ministries (congruent to ODM – which is just an online ADM) – I suspect they would have been killed since they’ve been less than 100% correct…

30   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 2:42 pm

Baptism and communion are the only ceremonial observances given to us By Christ. All the vesitages of the law, the beggarly elements, are not to be dragged into the church.

Yeah – we wouldn’t want to do anything Jesus and his disciples did, ya know…

31   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 2:51 pm

* to glorify God by declaring Jesus Christ in all His glory as the only hope for fallen man.

I agree, and nobody here or at Grace Church would disagree…

* to glorify God by testifying to the excellencies of Christ

No problem here, either. Sadly, though, many stop short – only testifying to what he was, and not what he believed and taught

* to glorify God by unashamably declaring the Truth of Scripture as laid out within the theology of the Reformed faith.

I think I’d rather just declare the Truth of Scripture (period), allowing it to speak where it speaks and to be silent where it is silent – but hey, that’s just me…

* to glorify God by contending for the faith

Agreed – but I’d suggest that SoL, TM, etc. confuse “contend” with “defend”, and do so rather brutishly

* to glorify God by calling the visible church to be obedient to true Worship

The problem becomes when we allow our tastes and/or traditions to determine what “true” worship is.

* to glorify God by promoting a radically God centered view of all things

Again – pretty much a subjective thing as applied by ODMs (Online Discernment Ministries) and their ADM (Armchair Discernment Ministry) followers…

* to glorify God by honoring God’s revealed Word through the practice of Biblical interpretation and discernment

Which, sadly, in most “Reformed” “discernment” blogs (SoL, AM, Tm, etc.) means worship of systematic theologies and the ‘discernment’ in a semi-churched 12-year-old…

32   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 2:51 pm

Paul in sevearl books teaches us to reject the trappings of the law. Jesus worshiped on Saturday in the Temple with the furniture of the Tabernacle. I have done a teaching of the Tabernacle with a real scale repilcas of all the furniture, but let us remember, they were the shadow of things to come, Christ is the substance of those shadows.

We worship now openly and in full face, without the veil and without the shadow, but in Spirit and in truth. Even if you believe in bring those things into the New Testament church, you must admit they are from the law. BTW – Mrs. Schlueter, Chris Rosebrough, and others believe that liturgical worship is most revelatory of NT worship. I disagree.

A believer marooned on a island can worship God just as deeply as in any church gathering and without the enhancement of any visual symbals. Music? He can make his own.

33   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 2:57 pm

BTW – If you desire to have a worship service contoured after the one Jesus attended, I hope you do not let women participate in any way and even come into where the men worship. The covenant of the Spirit set women free from the bondages of the OT, I think I like that freedom without being visually tied to the covenant of Moses.

34   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 3:12 pm

Ah – misunderstood you, Rick – I thought you were saying that communion and baptism had no place in the church (read too fast…)

35   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 3:19 pm

Sometimes I get too deep. I’m sorry! :roll:

36   M.G.    
August 10th, 2008 at 5:05 pm

Rick,

I must disagree with you again. Worship, alone, is missing something. We are the body of Christ. You cut the hand off the body, and something has gone awry.

I agree that things changed with the New Testament, and that we worship in Spirit and in Truth. But I worry that you swing the pendulum too far.

37   Jerry Hillyer    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
August 10th, 2008 at 5:44 pm

Josh,

Thank you for commenting. I’m glad you listened to the sermon several times and worshipped there since you were eight. But that’s not what you said in your OP on the subject. This is why the ‘whole story’ is a moot point when commenting on a particular post. If you had prefaced your OP with the ‘whole story’ instead of simply saying ‘watch ten minutes’ then things might have been different. But that is not what you said, now is it? (Nor, for that matter, is that what SOL said either.) You both rejected the ‘whole story’ by saying watch ‘ten minutes.’

jerry

38   Josh    http://bloodtippedears.blogspot.com/2008/07/prayer-and-help-for-my-mom-carol.html
August 10th, 2008 at 6:09 pm

Jerry,

Your comment is a moot point.

My “story” consisted of one simple question, after watching the intro, was the intro God-centered or man-centered?

That’s it.

The reason I said to watch 10 minutes is because it’s about 10 minutes into the video.

Josh

39   Jerry Hillyer    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
August 10th, 2008 at 6:35 pm

Josh,

My point is not moot. Anyone can be turned off to anything after watching ten minutes of anything. I watched the first ten minutes and I heard a song declaring “I AM NOT SUPERMAN”, and I heard a preacher introduce the sermon series. What is man-centered about that? I even agree that the superman constume was a bit absurd. But the message was orthodox evangelical gospel. Did you miss that part because you were so hung up on the first ten minutes?

Then I listened to the sermon and the sermon was anything but man centered. In fact, it was profoundly Biblical and on point. It mentioned everything that a good evangelical would want to hear: Repent, forgive, faith, grace, crucifixion, ressurection, etc. You and I must have watched two entirely different videos either that or we have two entirely different understandings of what is man centered and what is God centered.

Besides, this does not alter for one minute the fact that you judged an entire congregation based on 10 minutes of intro–and don’t tell me this is about your entire experience either because you specifically said, “Make a judgment after ten minutes.” Nor does it alter the fact that SOL also rendered a negative judgment after only ten minutes. Sad.

jerry

40   Dave    
August 10th, 2008 at 6:37 pm

RA,
Did you answer his question? Was it man centered or God centered? Thats all he asked. He wanted input in the simple yes or no form.

41   Jerry Hillyer    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
August 10th, 2008 at 6:39 pm

PS to Josh,

The only thing man centered that I can see in this entire thing is your poll about whether it is man centered or God centered. The worship was directed to God, so of what concern is it to you? Won’t God make a judgment about it? Does he need your help all of a sudden?

yours,
jerry

42   Jerry Hillyer    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
August 10th, 2008 at 6:42 pm

Ken,

You wrote: “I wonder how the ADM’s would have responded to the message of the prophets?”

Most likely, the same exact way those who originally heard them did. But again, the difference is that we are willing to admit so and you are not. We cherish grace and are willing to extend as much of it as we can to others. This is the difference between us my friend.

jerry

43   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 6:44 pm

I would not receive anything from a so called prophet who married a whore and claimed God told him to do so!

44   Josh    http://bloodtippedears.blogspot.com/2008/07/prayer-and-help-for-my-mom-carol.html
August 10th, 2008 at 6:46 pm

Jerry,

I did not ask anyone to judge the entire sermon, the church, or the congregation.

Once again, I asked one particular question regarding one particular thing. When the pastor came out in his superman outfit(the introduction), was that god-centered or man-centered? That’s it.

You don’t read my blog obviously which is fine. I was not writing in particular to you. I was, in general, writing to regulars on my blog who know the whole story. Who know I love this pastor. I have blogged many, many things about my relationship and history with this man and the church. I love the pastor and the people there. I am not going to write the whole history each time I write about this man/church.

I want “Truth Matters” to be Christ exalting, not a watchdog site. But sometimes I do throw in things like this to show the silliness that’s going on in today’s church.

Ingrid picked this up and I think that’s where the problem may lie.

Blessings.

45   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 6:50 pm

Josh,

You still missed the point… of course it was man centered…. that was the pastors point. you keyed into the obvious and missed the point of the whole service.

Again… missing the point of the whole service.

Thanks for confirming all this, now we can all move as we all agree you and Ingrid, missed the point entirely…. entirely.

iggy

46   Jerry Hillyer    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
August 10th, 2008 at 6:53 pm

Rick,

Good point. Hopefully Pastor Silva will get it. But you did use the word ‘whore’ at this blog so I suppose there will be a ‘hit piece’ tomorrow. Too bad for you.

jerry

Josh,

Four points, and then I’ll drop it. First, you did ask people to judge: The poll is that much.

Second, You are right: The problem is that Ingrid picked it up. Her commentary, to suit her own narrowly defined purposes, was much worse. I agree: She is the problem.

Third, I agree the suit was a bad idea. I said as much in the OP.

Fourth, the sermon was a good sermon. And from my point of view, it contradicted Ingrid’s proposition that the church is full of biblically illiterate rubes. That sermon, suit aside, was a great sermon–exegetically speaking.

yours,
jerry

ps–I hope you are not a ‘watchdog’ site. I have visited you before, and you might not that the title of my OP is that “Slice of Laodicea misses the point….” I was far more concerned about Ingrid’s blathering than your poll.

47   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 6:53 pm

Ken,

I wonder how the ADM’s would have responded to the message of the prophets?

Since it was “spiritually discerned”, I would say we would have heard God’;s voice…. better than the ODM’s who would have stoned and killed the prophets for not being like them and their man based religion…

But then that is my thought on the matter… I guess you would disagree…

iggy

Wanting people to be like Jesus and not man since 1980.

48   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 6:55 pm

Josh,

You might want to write to Ingrid and point out her mistake. Maybe she will listen to you?

iggy

49   amy    
August 10th, 2008 at 8:31 pm

I love a liturgical service that has the repetition of our corporate petitions to God as the people of God speaking with one voice, and robes as symbols of the righteousness of Christ that clothes his people, candles that visually communicate the truth filled piercing presence of Christ, altars to remind me of the once for all atoning sacrifice of that same Christ . . . .

Amen.

All of these symbols can be reminders of “the Law.” Why is it a bad thing to be reminded of that period of God’s plan? They can also point us to Christ, just as they were doing when they were originally used. These types of symbols are also used in prophesying future events. They are earthly visual symbols that represent things that our minds can’t fully comprehend.

Elements in nature can even be symbolic of some aspect of God. I can look at a flower and cry because there is something in me that recognizes that the beauty in it speaks to a part of me that knows there is a Creator God behind the design who IS . . . but words fail.

50   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
August 10th, 2008 at 8:36 pm

“All of these symbols can be reminders of “the Law.””

And the Roman Catholic Church and the High Priest (pope) say amen. Our teaching can reveal types in the Old Testament, but our worship is free from the furniture and liturgy of the law. I have also seen sometimes where those who practice such liturgical worship can be prideful about it. Not all, but some.

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ has made you free and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

51   nc    
August 10th, 2008 at 9:45 pm

Actually…

Every church has liturgy…

Some is more formal…some is not.
But if your church gathers for worship/teaching/prayer..

it’s all liturgy.

Liturgy simply means “work of the people”.

52   Neil    
August 10th, 2008 at 10:51 pm

Once again, I asked one particular question regarding one particular thing. When the pastor came out in his superman outfit(the introduction), was that god-centered or man-centered? That’s it. – Josh

This is a false dichotomy based on what the man was wearing… which is, of course a culturally based subjective construct. I thought he looked a little silly, but to judge his spirituality on what he wears?

53   Neil    
August 10th, 2008 at 10:52 pm

I agree with Amy.

54   Neil    
August 10th, 2008 at 10:58 pm

After all that has been written, I see nothing that dissuades me from thinking the objection is over methods not the message… and that’s a shame.

Neil

55   nc    
August 10th, 2008 at 11:38 pm

hmmm….

well based on that thinking and the “plain meaning of the text”…the only way to be God-centered would be to enter naked and/or be clothed in animal skins.

56   John Hughes    
August 11th, 2008 at 5:08 pm

“I agree with Amy”

Wasn’t that a ’50’s sit-com?

57   John Hughes    
August 11th, 2008 at 5:09 pm

well based on that thinking and the “plain meaning of the text”…the only way to be God-centered would be to enter naked and/or be clothed in animal skins.

58   nc    
August 11th, 2008 at 5:16 pm

I don’t know, Rick.

I don’t see anything of the law in my church’s more formalized liturgy….

Maybe the RCC theology behind their forms speak of “law”, but I just don’t think formal liturgy necessarily indicates what you say it does.

59   John Hughes    
August 11th, 2008 at 5:16 pm

Oops:

well based on that thinking and the “plain meaning of the text”…the only way to be God-centered would be to enter naked and/or be clothed in animal skins.

Well if we are sticking to the plain meaning of the text the only way to be truly God-centered would be to be dressed in modest apparel (culturaly relevant-based) that does not draw attention to itself to where it is a non-issue. But if the intent is for the apparel to make an illustrative point to the message then I would say it was successful and not a sin issue. Silly in my opinion, but not sinful, per se.

(But in the spirit of full disclosure I have a great problem with this type of theactrics and the whole entertainment oriented approach of the Seeker Friendly movement).

60   nc    
August 11th, 2008 at 5:39 pm

Don’t get me wrong…do I think silliness can make the things of God seem trite? Of course, I just don’t get where this Josh person is coming from…

There’s a “man-centered” boogeyman behind every rock these days.

61   nc    
August 11th, 2008 at 5:40 pm

I mean…

A suit is just so God-centered.
Obviously.

62   John Hughes    
August 12th, 2008 at 8:32 am

Obviously

63   Chad    http://www.chadholtz.wordpress.com
August 12th, 2008 at 8:57 am

We no longer must depend upon visual artifacts and structures to worship God. The time has come that we now worship in Spirit and in truth, independent from the outward and totally dependent upon the intenal. The mode of worship as outlined in the Old Testament was done away with on the Day of Pentecost.

Rick, it is true we no longer have to depend on visual artifacts to worship God because God is with us, Immanuel. The beauty is we get to have our cake and eat it too. There was a time when that was all people knew. Now we know more fully (in Spirit and Truth) what these things point us to.

I don’t see Pentecost as being the day past worship models were done away with. They certainly changed over time but I think that had more to do with logistics. Hard to continue worshiping in the Temple when you are bringing in Gentile converts and especially difficult when it has been destroyed.

In the same way banners display for you the majesty of God there are a variety of forms of litury that do the same and lift people out of their present state of self-centeredness and train us to focus on the God who has given us all of this.

peace,
Chad

64   nc    
August 12th, 2008 at 10:46 am

symbolic actions in a corporate setting of worship, etc. have nothing to do with the OT. They are provisional, culturally determined religious expressions.

65   m e brooks    
August 18th, 2008 at 12:18 am

I was only able to watch through the song. Once I saw the S t-shirts on every one and understood that the song was a secular song I hit back on the browser button. I saw that the preacher wasn’t using a Bible now seemed to have any notes which he had prepared so I left the sermon. What was apparent was that the church was trying really hard to make the sermon relevant. Matching shirts, songs, themes, etc. A wonderful production.

The Word of God doesn’t need a production behind it to make it relevant. Preachers of the Word do not have to be creative in Its’ presentation. Do depend on anything but the Word Itself and the Guidance of the Holy Spirit is to depend upon the Flesh. Dependence on the Flesh will yield a Church in which 57% of its’ members believe that Jesus isn’t the only way to Heaven.

Judge the fruits of this movement. Yesterday 5000 “Believers” gave O’Bama a standing ovation even after he ducked the softball questions given to him concerning his faith and abortion. This is the guy who voted twice to allow health care workers protection in Illinois when they allow babies who survive an abortion to die slowly on the table instead of doing all that is possible to heal and sustain their precious lives.

In that day seven women shall grab hold of one man and say “give us your name we will provide our own bread and own raiment. only give us your name that our shame may be removed”. paraphrased… Isaiah 4:1.

66   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
August 18th, 2008 at 12:37 am

Wow, ME, you have drunk the kool-aid, haven’t you?

67   Bo Diaz    
August 18th, 2008 at 8:19 am

rel·e·vant
–adjective
bearing upon or connected with the matter in hand; pertinent:

Yes, it’d be a real shame if a sermon were actually relevant. Why imagine what would happen. People might actually want to come into our holy church building.

Oh wait.

I was only able to watch through the song. Once I saw the S t-shirts on every one and understood that the song was a secular song I hit back on the browser button.

You have no idea what the sermon was even about because you didn’t watch it.

Its amazing that the hate you’ve nurtured in your heart has grown to the point where you condemn your brothers and sisters without reason.

68   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
August 18th, 2008 at 8:44 am

Judge the fruits of this movement.

Yes… the ODM world and its followers seem to care less to look at the facts, but quick to judge the outside of the cup… while their own inside seems more in need of cleaning. Using their own standard… hate is their banner… a lie is their banner… and Jesus is just a tool to use to abuse, judge and condemn others with.

So much for reconciliation in the ODM world.

iggy

69   Jerry Hillyer    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
August 18th, 2008 at 9:06 am

me brooks,

You wrote:

The Word of God doesn’t need a production behind it to make it relevant. Preachers of the Word do not have to be creative in Its’ presentation. Do depend on anything but the Word Itself and the Guidance of the Holy Spirit is to depend upon the Flesh. Dependence on the Flesh will yield a Church in which 57% of its’ members believe that Jesus isn’t the only way to Heaven.

OK. Since you also decided to paraphrase a quote from Isaiah, allow me to go ahead and quote from Isaiah and let’s see if your statement resembles anything remotely close to the ‘truth’.

Here is Isaiah 20:

1In the year that the commander came to Ashdod, when Sargon the king of Assyria sent him and he fought against Ashdod and captured it, 2at that time the LORD spoke through Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying, “Go and loosen the sackcloth from your hips and take your shoes off your feet ” And he did so, going naked and barefoot.

3And the LORD said, “Even as My servant Isaiah has gone naked and barefoot three years as a sign and token against Egypt and Cush, 4so the king of Assyria will lead away the captives of Egypt and the exiles of Cush, young and old, naked and barefoot with buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt.

5″Then they will be dismayed and ashamed because of Cush their hope and Egypt their boast. 6″So the inhabitants of this coastland will say in that day, ‘Behold, such is our hope, where we fled for help to be delivered from the king of Assyria; and we, how shall we escape?’” (NASB)

Now here’s my point. It appears from this text that Isaiah the prophet didn’t say a single word for three years. It appears from this text that all he did, for three years, to prophesy, was walk around stark naked.

And you say the Word of God doesn’t need production value. Pshaw! Fact is you don’t have any idea what means God might use to see to it that his people (and the lost!) hear what he has to say. Furthermore, have you ever read the book of Revelation? That was one giant production there wasn’t it?

I think you are boring me with your attempt to keep the Word of God relevent by keeping it stuck in the 1700’s.

with love,
jerry

70   m e brooks    
August 18th, 2008 at 11:37 am

You didn’t address Isaiah 4:1. That day is coming. Coming soon.

Would you say that the church is in a better state now than it was in the 1700’s? What was the divorce rate in the 1700’s in the church when compared to now? What about the adultery rate? What about the teen-pregnancy rate? What about the 50 Million Babies who have been sacrificed to the god of Prosperity since the 1970’s? Many of those were given up by those in the church in America. I seriously doubt that the Church in the 1700’s would have 57% of its’ members state that Yeshua wasn’t the only way to Heaven. How many Pastor’s have fallen from the Pulpit in today’s church through Immorality? How many in the 1700’s? The truth is that the World and the Church (in America) is one in the same. There is no difference. Look at the statistics. The Church mirrors the Unbelieving World in every category. Look at our Fruits.

The modern day mega-church and all those who are “seeker-sensitive” preach nothing more than Christianized Humanism. Cheap Grace. God is a Vending Machine. A Rich Grandfather who spoils HIS grandchildren by indulging them in everything they desire.

Isaiah did what God commanded him to do in Isaiah 20. Can you honestly say that God is directing these Modern – day Christian Concerts with a devotion thrown in?

What type of Church in your Opinion typifies the Church of Laodicea mentioned in Revelation 3? Can you identify these Churches today?

You can label me as a “hate-monger”. You can attack me. But you cannot attack the message. WE, the American Church, has departed from the Faith. We do not need Yeshua. He is outside knocking wanting to come in. We believe we are rich because of our material possessions and humanistic theology, but in fact we are Utterly Impoverished. We are infected with Wordliness in our pocket books, entertainment, music, worship, sermons, relationships, and etc. Everything is “me” centered. This is our “Best Life Now”. etc. etc. etc. Nothing is Yeshua centered. He is outside knocking wanting to come in.

71   Chad    http://www.chadholtz.wordpress.com
August 18th, 2008 at 11:46 am

Would you say that the church is in a better state now than it was in the 1700’s?

In a word, yes.

A cursory study of church history will show that the church in every era has had it’s problems. I find it laughable that some would think a higher percentage of people in the 1700’s would know more about doctrine and theology than people today when the majority of people couldn’t read or write.

The modern day mega-church and all those who are “seeker-sensitive” preach nothing more than Christianized Humanism. Cheap Grace. God is a Vending Machine. A Rich Grandfather who spoils HIS grandchildren by indulging them in everything they desire.

I would agree that there are SOME churches that teach this. But for you to use grandiose words like “ALL and “NOTHING MORE” is far fetched.

WE, the American Church, has departed from the Faith. We do not need Yeshua.

I agree there are many American churches that fit this category. My guess is that you and I would disagree as to who they are. On thing is for sure – some of the antics of ODM’s and others certainly make it seem they do not need God. We only need them to tell us what is right and wrong.

peace,
Chad

72   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
August 18th, 2008 at 11:53 am

I would say that the Scriptures indicate perilous times in the world and itching ears in the church.

However, the proportion of God’s grace needed in the church in every generation is…you guessed it…

100% !!

73   nc    
August 18th, 2008 at 11:54 am

ummmm….

there was no golden age, folks.
sorry.

I mean…even the hebrews had to be told not get it on with animals and their moms.

Excuse my being blunt, but please…
please…
puh-leeeeeeze.

btw, the creation of “teen-pregnancy” as a problem is the result of the extended childhood of the victorian ideal…

you don’t have a problem when kids are being married off at 13-14, etc.

I mean we could go on and on with those questions.

Was the church of the 1700’s in a better state than in the 1300’s or the age of the Fathers and Doctors?

Really…Paul was such a bad pastor…His letter reveal that the people of Corinth, Galatia, etc. were just a mess.

He must not have been doing modern, systematic, verse by verse (nevermind that the verses are a later innovation) exposition of the texts and telling people how they were all pieces of crap to the glory of God.

ME,

honestly, there’s a nugget of truth to what you are concerned about, but I’m afraid it’s awash in a sea of rhetorical flotsam…

74   nc    
August 18th, 2008 at 11:56 am

Jerry,

I’m going to lay on my side for year and eat food cooked over human poop and play with stick figures in the dirt.

If it was good enough for Ezekiel, it’s good enough for me! How dare I question the “methodology” revealed by God and contextualize things…!!!

75   Jerry Hillyer    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
August 18th, 2008 at 12:01 pm

ME,

who attacked you? I simply pointed you in the direction of Scripture. How is that an attack?

From my perspective, as a preacher of the Gospel with nearly 14 years of service in that capacity, I would say the church is neither better nor worse than the church in the 1700’s. I would say it is a false comparison.

I would say that the church typified by the church in Laodicea is every church in every generation or else those words in Revelation 3 are irrelevant and not Scripture. If they don’t apply to every congregation then they apply to none. Furthermore, it is not my job to analyze every congregation and see which church fits into which description, neither is it yours. It is my job to make certain that I preach faithfully to the congregation God has entrusted to me. And you didn’t read Revelation 1 where it says that Jesus walks among the lampstands, did you?

Now if you are truly interested in what I think about the way a lot of things are, then go and visit my blog and listen to my latest skycast. It’s on the front page. But I warn you, I am speaking to my congregation and no one elses. That is the problem with SOL and presumably you. You think, mistakenly, that it is your job to monitor the progress of the church. Sorry. That is the job of Jesus who walks among the lampstands and warns that if we are not careful, he will remove them.

Did you read that part?

jerry

PS–I never labeled you a ‘hate monger’ or say anything resembling an ‘attack.’ Methinks you want those labels so that you can gain sympathy from others. You will get none from me.

PPS–I don’t see what Isaiah 4:1 has to do with this conversation concerning whether or not the author of SOL got the point or not.

76   Jose    
August 18th, 2008 at 12:03 pm

Why dont we instead encourage mebrooks?
NAH!! lets continue mocking him it’s more fun.


Jerry,

I’m going to lay on my side for year and eat food cooked over human poop and play with stick figures in the dirt.

If it was good enough for Ezekiel, it’s good enough for me! How dare I question the “methodology” revealed by God and contextualize things…!!!’

77   nc    
August 18th, 2008 at 12:04 pm

Jerry,

don’t worry about it…
taking it to the extreme is the way some people try to neutralize criticism of their positions

78   nc    
August 18th, 2008 at 12:06 pm

Jose,

Have at it…what’s there to encourage?

Why does vigorous disagreement mean someone is being attacked?

I’m sure ME is a good person…a person’s ideas are not the same thing as the person.

Grow up.
Seriously.
I’m encouraging you to do so.

79   Jose    
August 18th, 2008 at 12:14 pm

I am sorry nc
did offend you?
You seem upset?
WHo needs to do the growing up?

80   Jerry Hillyer    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
August 18th, 2008 at 12:35 pm

ME Brooks,

Be encouraged friend. The problem is not necessarily that we disagree about the state of the church but that we disagree about where the problem is, what the problem is, and, more importantly, whose methodology is best suited to fix the problem. I, and I suspect many here, think that the problem is a spiritual problem that cannot be solved by might or strength but only by the Spirit of the Lord.

But beyond that, that’s not really the point of this thread or this blog. The problem is that there are people, not unlike the author of SOL or Pastor Silva, who think that they have been chosen to solve the problems of the church globally by pointing to all the church’s flawed people and methods. Instead, I think the apostle Paul wrote letters to individual congregations and said to them: Here’s the problem, here’s the solution. Get with it!

The church does not need popes. The church does not need SOL, AM, CRN.info. That’s the problem. And I am fairly certain that the main objective of this site is to work itself out of a job like any good missionary. But we will continue to defend those who cannot defend themselves against the likes of people who think it is their job to monitor the progress of every local congregation that they DO NOT belong to. It is simply not their job. Period.

jerry

81   nc    
August 18th, 2008 at 12:38 pm

Jose,

1. Not in the least. Be encouraged–there’s no offense taken or given.

2. If I was upset I would’ve written that “I’m upset”. Be encouraged–I say/write what I mean. I’m all for clarity.

3. Maybe we all do in our own way. But that’s not the point actually. I’m just encouraging you to take good care of yourself.

Hope that helps.

=)

82   Chad    http://www.chadholtz.wordpress.com
August 18th, 2008 at 12:40 pm

well said, Jerry.

83   Jose    
August 18th, 2008 at 12:44 pm

Cool then,
Been taking care of myself alot lately. you do the same.
blessings.

84   nc    
August 18th, 2008 at 12:45 pm

Jose,

:)

85   m e brooks    
August 18th, 2008 at 1:00 pm

iggy Says:
August 18th, 2008 at 8:44 am

Judge the fruits of this movement.

Yes… the ODM world and its followers seem to care less to look at the facts, but quick to judge the outside of the cup… while their own inside seems more in need of cleaning. Using their own standard… hate is their banner… a lie is their banner… and Jesus is just a tool to use to abuse, judge and condemn others with.

So much for reconciliation in the ODM world.

iggy

86   Chad    http://www.chadholtz.wordpress.com
August 18th, 2008 at 1:04 pm

I concur – Iggy did say that :)