[NOTE: My apologies for the technical difficulties the past few days. I think they're worked out now.]
I read an interesting article this week about secret codes and cryptography. In one section, the author dealt with the recently deciphered diary of Charles Wesley:
The diaries reveal previously unknown information, including a sex scandal. Wesley wrote that after joining his brother John in an American colony, he fled home amid allegations that he had intercourse with a colonist after trapping her husband under a tree.
When I read this, I was reminded of how some things just don’t change – whether inside the church or out. I’ve talked to a minister in the past who always talked about the danger of young, unwed/divorced women and church pastors, in particular. For the protection of his staff, he’s implemented a set of unbreakable rules about dealing 1-on-1 with people, many of which are designed to prevent even the appearance of impropriety. It’s sad, but I have to say it’s needed.
Gossip is such an easy, insidious trap – when someone’s got “juicy” information, it just seems that the threshold for what is actually in the interest of the public is really low – especially when you’re already predisposed against the person. This is pretty much the flaw in the Armchair “Discernment” media (and the secular watchblogosphere, as well) – it’s basically 90% gossip disguised as public service.
Whether it’s disparaging a 15-year-old Christian singer who works for Disney or a pregnant 17-year-old daughter of a political figure, it’s sick. Whether it’s fudging the truth with out-of-context statements or outright lies (ex. “You folks who don’t believe in hell, like Rob Bell, Doug Pagitt …”), it’s sick.
We’ve discussed Jesus’ command to be in the world but not of the world many times. The world – kosmos – is the systems by which the world works. As we move into the political season in the US, it is sad how much the partisan kosmos of earthly politics is mirrored by the ODMery within the church – where polarized demonization is the rule and apology is just a sign of weakness.
And so it is, reading of Charles Wesley, centuries ago, that in some ways it truly seems that the more things change the more they really just stay the same…
![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")
109 Comments(+Add)
There is nothing so fundamentally unchristian as gossip. The Scriptures say it’s the tongue, not the hands, that brings hell on earth. And instead of having a “there for the grace of God go I” attidtude, many Christians look down their self righteous noses to publish the obvious which of course carries an unspoken “I don’t do that” with it.
It is impossible to accuse and intercede simultaneously, so we know that when someone is publicly building evidence against someone, they are not oraying for them and even if their lips are moving God will not hear dupicitous prayers.
There are many unseen ingredients to gossip. Envy, malice, self righteousness, judgment, hate, and many times the publisher hs committed the same type of sin. Gossip is antithetical to the cross. One bears the sin, the other spreads the sin.
My heart goes out to the Palin family, and even if we were not commanded to pray for the leaders we should pray for them, because they will find an ungracious scrutiny coming from everywhere, including those who profess to be speaking for Christ.
Gossip is a sin against the cross because it carries no redemption.
You guys are a joke. Gossip is bad, really Chris L? Did you bother to read your own website and what is sitting there right now under the \”submission to authority\” post? How\’s this for gossip?
Cheeno Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Ken,
As an answer to your question, Ingrid is a hypocrite, that’s why. She drinks wine with dinner, goes to parties with her jazzer husband that she’d condemn in a church, and is attending a catholic college (see her personal blog). It’s obvious that there’s one side for the public and one in private. Nuff said.
Then there\’s this gossip:
Cheeno Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 7:53 pm
Hey don’t yell at me, I was just responding to the original Ken’s comment. I personally saw the Schlueters at a downtown restaurant in our city which I could name but won’t and there was a bottle of pinot noir on their table –I was 8 feet away– and a glass at each plate in front of them and she drank from hers so any anti-booze stuff won’t ring true for me. Don’t ask me how I know the rest. I don’t hate Ingrid – actually I used to love her from a distance. So am i bitter, yeah. I was apparently too white trash for her tastes. Elitism isn’t very Christian, I don’t think.
Then how about this from another Ken:
Ken Says:
September 4th, 2008 at 12:39 am
Ingrid is a very attractive woman, and in her youth she found the “goddess power” that can come to women of a certain charm and beauty.
Furthermore, Ingrid realized that she could control men like pet dogs – until one of her subjects, her first husband, rebelled wretchedly against the exercise of her uniquely feminine power, using physical and emotional violence against the suffering Norse goddess.
Did anyone read the comments – closely – in her four part series on the domestic abuse situation?
More than one commenter referenced goddess worship in various linked pages.
Submission to authority is an idea that Ingrid detests. Why then, is she so tolerating of Mike R., Ken S., et al?
Ingrid is not only beautiful, she is intelligent. These circle of men have been put in place by her to do her bidding. Weak minded men who cannot see the larger strategy are useful tools and serve a purpose even if they sometimes blunder onto a painful topic.
Through these men, Ingrid hopes to gain the love and admiration from conservative Christians, and “suffer” for Christ by way of her many persecutors.
Wow. You don\’t believe in ODM gossip? Read that whole thread again, Chris L. and Rick F. and read the layers of nasty gossip there. I\’ve read more gossip here about people than anywhere else on the web.
You guys make me sick. As a lurker, I have to say something. The smell of hypocrisy here is too strong.
Kim.
Funny thing is… gossip is repeating what you heard over again… I think it stopped in that thread, yet you are here spreading the gossip again…
And seem to not see that you are even doing you part in spreading that gossip… you claim to hate so much…
Sad,
iggy
Kim,
Well, we don’t delete comments here, so commenters are responsible for what they say. We also don’t ban people from commenting. Numerous people pointed out that those comments were over the line.
Kim,
Be careful, patting yourself that hard on your back and simultaneously trying to point fingers at the contributors here when you’re real beef is with commenters could lead to a serious elbow injury.
The one fellow was put in moderation and the thread was closed. Perhaps, you’d like to provide us your home address so we can run on down to your house and ’round up a posse. We can run these guys through some fancy dancy computer program, run to their house and flog them! Would that satisfy your self righteous anger?
Kim,
Amazingly, I had forgotten about those shameful comments until you went to the bother of actually republishing them for the world to see all over again. For someone who presumably hates gossip, you seem to revel in it.
Regardless, can I please ask you to stop reprinting comments made in poor taste? You can make your points without spreading hurtful words.
Thanks.
Chris L
Excellent post. At the end of the day, ODM or ADM (Armchair Discernment Ministries) are doing just that – gossip.
Isn’t it amazing how much “discernment” material one can get these days from the Internet. In the “old” days, one will have to move in the circles that they are part of. Perhaps from attending Church Conferences, or church-hopping.
Nowadays, a simple click and I can get to know who is a “heretic” – or I can declare him/her to be one.
For goodness sakes friends, the ODMer could be a serial pedophile/killer/robber and you would not even know it!
There. Fixed it.
Great article, Chris!
(Seriously)
I would guess this question has already been asked and answered, so forgive me for asking again: At what point does something become “gossip” versus exposing T.D. Jakes’ suggesting Ruth and Naomi were lesbians?
(Not-So-Seriously)
Chris L: You couldn’t keep that Chas Wesley thing to yourself?! Now how do you expect me to ever sing Rejoice, The Lord is King without thinking about this post?! Thanks a lot. ***under breath***Stinkin’ Chas Wesley and his codes!
Funny thing is… You are able to do this here and even at ODMafia… but we cannot do this at SOL or AM and many other sites… in doing this here you only mock yourself.
Stop the hate PB…
iggy
pastorboy,
RE: #8
I have said this before, but perhaps you don’t understand. Why don’t you just fire your shots from your own blog, instead of disturbing the folk here?
At least one thing I can be certain, you will not be banned, or your name smeared… cannot say the same for the ODMers.
When you throw a rock into a pack of Dogs, the one who gets hit yelps-
Sounds like Iggy has some repenten to do!
BTW PB, are you stating Ingrid IS pregnant? I guess you missed where I cleared that up and dealt with the person who was spreading those comments. I put a stop to it and you still attack me.
For the record.
1. Ingrid speaks doublespeak on things contemplative . I only pointed out a post she did which she promoted a PDF article and quoted from it. If an emerging person stated what was quoted you would have been all over it… but Ingrid gets a free pass…
2. I also noted that in a promotional that they use the word contemplative and no one states it is wrong… again if anyone you guys hate does it… they are demonized.
3. I stated clearly Ingrid is not pregnant though you seem to be saying she is above. Stop with the gossip.
4. Ken is killing his church and you don’t care. I also updated it and I am sincere in my hopes he can turn it around and have a HUGE HEALTHY church… I have stated this repeatedly… why do you defend someone who mocks others for holding a day of prayer for him? And did you join with me the other day as we did it again this year? I doubt it.
I might add that you seem fine with Ingrid calling 15 y/o girls “painted girls of Sodom” and I find it seriously twisted that you defend a woman in her 40’s that has a radio show that speaks on controversial issues as well as a blog that attacks many people with out the whole story.
It seems that if you are a public speaker no one can disagree with her and no one can speak out against her when she is wrong without being demonized as you have done to this site and to me over and over again… which interestingly proves the article here as very true.
iggy
Iggy,
All Kim is saying, and all I am saying is that you folks here and at ODM do the exact same thing.
Maybe we can discuss it next summer over some Chai since you won’t have coffee with me.
The yelping dog cliche is not only trite, but it’s also been used to justify much evil.
It’s up there with “I was just calling it like I see it” and “the Lord told me…”
PB
OK good, sort out your differences next summer! Get a life, son.
Sorry PB.. I have had enough of you over the last few days… I will be ignoring you for a while… go get some tea, pray, repent and stop the hate.
iggy
Iggy,
You must be commended for lasting a “few days”.
I would have given up after 3 strikes…
As far as the article it is great. Most of the cutting “news” at these sites seems less than important to know about. It is like passing a circus freak tent at the fair… people have that morbid curiosity and yet just inside the “freaks” are exploited not for their betterment, but for the stake of the owner of the tent.
I see no reason why SOL reports much it does… it does not edify the Body… They might hit on things like TD Jakes yet misses in it hateful attacks against most others.
iggy
BCP,
I know others are tired of it…
I really am….
iggy
Iggy,
Does the average Christian (one who loves the Lord Jesus, read his/her bible twice each day, prays and seeks to be useful in his/her local church) really care about half the issues that the ODMer cover?
Personally, I could not care less about Todd Bentley, Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, etc… Or should I be?
BCP,
I have two views on this…
1. One should be aware of what is happening out there… but not so much that it becomes an unhealthy obsession as I see some ODM’s doing.
2. Knowing the Truth is what we need focus on. A bank teller is taught how to tell a counterfeit by spending time handling real money.. when a counterfeit comes their way, they can feel it… I see it the same way. If we are immersed in the Truth, then when a counterfeit comes our way we can tell…
As far as Benny Hinn et al, there will always be these people… I know some who are really into Benny… and what they bring of his teachings are pretty sound… (strange to say that) yet I am do not endorse his ministry or his teaching as a whole for even a broken clock is right at least twice a day…. and it is more accurate than a clock that is set wrong. Which is why Paul stated that if someone preach Christ that was good enough.
iggy
Iggy,
1. Yup. Agreed. I find very little teaching from ODM sites. They will quote their fav verses – Jude 4; 2 Tim 3:5; 2 Tim 4:4 in order to justify their “ministry”. But very little else is promoted.
2. That is an example I use all the time! Except I will say that it was a policeman friend of mine who taught me how he looked out for counterfeits. Guess it is time for me to move onto a different illustration.
Every few years there will always be a new “Benny Hinn”. I think his star is fading, which is probably why Todd Bentley was so popular – until now. Who is the next big thing?
John Chisham,
For the record, any time you make it to Grand Rapids (some of my friends it is reported call it G-Rap, although I’ve never heard them use that term) look me up, I’ll let you buy me a cup of coffee and a scone at Kava House.
We can talk all you want.
Funny how he avoids you Joe… aren’t you guys in the same neighborhood? I mean I thought PB was in Wisconsin or something..
iggy
Iggy, I don’t know that I’d say he is avoiding me. We’ve never really talked about it much. BTW, if you ever get to G.R. you can buy me a cup of coffee and scone too.
I find it interesting also that when asked of some who make this assertion that “you folks who don’t believe in hell….” seem to run away when asked which hell we don’t believe in? Is it the fairy tale hell or Dante? Is it the Medieval heaven or hell?
Is it Tartarus?
Is it the grave?
Is it Sheol?
Is it Paradise?
Is it Hades?
Is it the Bosom of Abraham?
Is it Gehenna?
Is it the Lake of Fire?
Is it the temporal Hell that will be tossed into the Lake of Fire and burned up?
I have yet to be given an answer as to which hell or heaven I don’t believe in… they come and lie and then run away… and I agree it is sick…
iggy
Joe,
I would not pass up the opportunity to meet you for any reason… even if there was no coffee or scones.
iggy
Iggy,
That is the precise reason PB should not be taken seriously. When asked for dialog or explanation of his inane ramblings or his cliche quips he retorts I’m being hated because I preach the true gospel.
Which is tiresome.
And for the hundredth time the writers on this site are held accountable one to another and to the commenter’s. We’ve repented often, argued vehemently, and been challenged to change. We can not be responsible, past the moderation of some, for the commenter’s.
Sorry you were offended Kim but the freedom that gave you the ability to make your opinion known is the same that allowed them to make theirs known.
two words:
mind.
boggling.
the wild and wooly world of PB…
yikes.
Hmmm…I seem to remember someone saying once about being the first to cast a rock. Boy was that guy a great evangelist!
Yeah, but I think the religious leaders of his day had to hold the law up to him because he hung out with prostitutes and sinners all day long. It was awful. Thank God, there were well established religious leaders of the day to keep him in line.
Funny that PB missed that he was one of the first to “yelp” about how he felt this post was wrong…
That is rather funny…
sounds like he has some repenting to do …
:laugh:
iggy
oops! :laugh: should be
igs
And I stated I was around 300 pounds not 320… in fact I a;m closer to 285-290… so again… PB was very loose with the facts… as usual.
iggy
OK..
Since I am done talking to “him” I will also try to not talk about “him”…
I apologize… to all…
iggy
Why don’t we talk about how gossip is wrong without throwing any stones at anyone, justified or not? Then, everyone can learn something without feeling like they need to defend ’so and so’.
Basically, bring it back on topic.
BCP says,
Personally, I could not care less about Todd Bentley, Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, etc… Or should I be?
Iggy says, Which is why Paul stated that if someone preach Christ that was good enough.
IWTT Says,
1) Yes I believe you should be concerned about these ministries. The question comes to which gospel are they preaching and is it the Gospel of the “right” Christ.
For instance, Todd Bently states that the Lord told him regarding Lakeland “not to preach Jesus but to get the people to believe in the angels.” More specifically the angel Emma. This is not the scriptural basis for a revival. Jesus IS the revival and not some angel. My personal belief, Lakeland was bogus.
2) I believe if you look further into that section where Paul states that atleast they were preaching Christ, those that preached Christ were not preaching a “false gospel” but rather trying to make Paul look bad. After all, he was in jail and most of the commentaries that I have read state that they were seeking to ruin him (Paul) but still preached the gospel in truth.
I think it is important to know what is going in these miistries so that when you are asked you can give a “proper answer” to the flock, the body of Christ, or that individual that is sitting across the table having coffee with you.
“Whether it’s fudging the truth with out-of-context statements or outright lies (ex. “You folks who don’t believe in hell, like Rob Bell, Doug Pagitt …”), it’s sick.”
Ha!
You don’t need to take those guys out of context, they are just as ridiculous in context.
Even funnier is an article about gossip on the most gossipy “christian” site I’ve ever read.
If that’s the case, you really need to get out more…
Man, I can’t think of any article written by the writers here that would qualify as gossip. We do tend to defend those maligned by vicious gossip on the, ahem, “discernment” sites, though.
I guess in your mind exposing the hatred and malice of the ODM sites is gossip.
Ah Jesse,
That’s cute, really it is. Tell me Jesse, are you the same Jesse that street preached outside of Rob Bell events?
Cute but true, and no I’ve never had the pleasure of going to a Rob Bell event. I’ve read his books, watched his videos and heard his sermons, but never seen the man in the flesh.
In regards to gossip, it’s not so much the articles but rather the people who post here on a regular basis. I’ve read Apprising and Slice and have never seen anything worse than what you fellas throw right back at them. I don’t understand responding to to perceived “hatred and malice” with more of the same.
Jesse,
Never seen anything worse than what we do here huh?
Please, demonstrate our hatred and malice. Show us where the contributors have leveled hatred and malice, slander, lies, claims of being unsaved, at any of the ODMs. Because I can’t say the same for what the ODMs do.
And since we allow free speech here, we aren’t held responsible for some of the reprehensible things some random commentors say in our forums. So if you can show how the contributors here display hatred and malice towards the ODM or any other Christians, then I’m more than willing to repent personally.
Thanks
Joe
Make up your mind Jesse.
PS,
You sound pretty biased to me. Like you’re probably sold on everything they say as Gospel truth. Maybe you can try hanging with us for a while, see it from another angle?
Bo, I’m not sure how the comment section is separate from the site, especially when the authors of said articles regularly contribute comments.
Joe, yes I am biased against unsound doctrine, always will be.
Then why did you come here and do it?
Joe,
Sarcastic insults sent with a wink and a smile are just as bad as those sent in anger. This site has sarcasm galore. The very fact that the site has the same name as one of your reviled ODM sites, and exists solely to make fun of (or be a counter-balance as ya’ll would say) those people seems to be the height of hypocrisy. I don’t see anything different here than what I’ve seen at sites like Slice.
Where’s my hatred and malice? Pointing out that Pagitt and Bell don’t need to be taken out of context to reveal their misguided doctrine? If that’s what you see I can’t argue.
Wow … long thread!
I haven’t commented here in forever but I can’t resist this one. All 49 comments missed the key point of the post which is that there is now further proof that Calvinism is right.
Thanks Chris L. for exposing yet another Arminian.
Hey – don’t start! I’m just being a jerk … but I think a funny one.
I believe the whole reason the same name was used was in order to make it possible for unsuspecting readers to find the truth when arriving at one of the ODM sites through Google or another search engine.
There are plenty of things that make us different here. First, the articles that deal with ODM sites are not character attacks. They are refutation of poor research fallacious arguments.
It is unfortunate that there is even a necessity for such things, but when some Christians take it upon themselves to attack their brothers and sisters, we feel the need to defend those being attacked. It seems that those doing the attacking most of the time have the view that those who don’t see things exactly like them are heretics or false teachers. They define orthodoxy is the narrowest of terms, and unfortunately they’re attacks, however misguided, do cause real damage.
Jesse,
Where is the unsound doctrine being pushed by the contributors?
Where is our malice and hated? You still didn’t answer ANYTHING I asked you to. You sound like your just intent on creating dissension and making up bombastic claims with nothing to back them up. On the other hand, this site has documented the lies and hate coming from the ODM camp, despite what I think is their good intentions, sometimes. Their sites stand as a testimony to this.
I think that’s a good point Phil, I found this site because I was looking for CRN. Thank God.
Joe,
I was referring to Bell and Pagitt in regard to unsound doctrine, but since some of you so vociferously defend them I guess you can include yourselves.
I’m not going to dig through the archives in order to play an anonymous game of “I told you so.” I’m not the first and certainly not the only person to have seen amazing double standard used by this site. But since you asked, let’s take Ken Silva for instance. To be totally honest, I don’t like his general tone any more than you guys do. Even when I agree with him theologically, the harsh and insulting tone of his writing often negates the good things that he’s trying to say. But this site, on a regular basis, insults and mocks him, questions his character, personal integrity and theology on a regular basis. So I ask again, how is this site any different?
You are probably correct about some of these things. For example, I do question Ken’s personal integrity. I would question the personal integrity of anyone who tries to make a living bashing other Christians.
Also, what’s wrong about questioning one’s theology? It’s seems like that should be done. We can question a person’s theology without using personal attacks and calling that person names.
Okay Jesse, whatever man.
You want to come here and level claims and arguments against us and not back them up, then that’s your credibility on the line, not mine. Just remember, when you’re making a remark against someone or a group of people, the onus of proof is on you, not just “well some other people say the same stuff I do so it must be true, and I’m too (whatever) to prove it”
So…ok. Looks like we’ve reached an understanding.
I’m sorry you FEEL the way you do.
How is this site any different?
I think I’ve answered this a few times in other posts, and I know some of the other guys have as well.
I’m a little tired and overwhelmed to give the long answer, but here’s the answer that I think is key: We are held accountable by eachother.
Jesse, this site isn’t about agreeing with everybody (including Bell and Pagitt, although, I’m not really sure how you can lump those two together). Most of the authors have times where we disagree. We discuss and sometimes argue, but we don’t attack eachother. And when one of us does or says something innapropriate, we call each other on it.
So, yes, you will find comments and posts on this site that go beyond our purpose as a website. You will find things that are said that shouldn’t have been. The difference is that that is not the norm, and it is corrected when it happens.
You’re right Phil, questioning theology is totally valid.
Thank God theology has never saved anyone. Correct theology no less. Otherwise…poor thief on the cross. Think about that.
I’m out for a while, cya
It’s too bad we disagree Joe, you’re last few articles are some of the best things I’ve read on this site.
What an amazing level of hypocrisy. You’re more than willing to come on here and level accusations, but unwilling to make any effort to back them up whatsoever.
Allow me to respond with an appropriate level of response: I’m rubber and you’re glue, whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you.
Srsly, you’re pretty much justifying coming in here, slinging accusations without any evidence. Congrats, you’re Ken Silva.
“including Bell and Pagitt, although, I’m not really sure how you can lump those two together”
Seriously? The only real difference I see is that one of them still pretends to be orthodox.
KEN SILVA: Does this begin to make sense now when you hear Emerging Church leaders such as Swami Brian McLaren… (apprising new article against emerging figures).
RA: I’m just curious about theories here — does anyone know what Silva thinks he is accomplishing by referring to McLaren as Swami? Or calling Rick Warren the Pope? I mean, this is actually beyond me.
Does he think it is clever? Funny? Edgy? Or is it a deliberate attempt to mock or be nasty like kids on a school ground calling each other PooPooPants or Teacher’s Pet? It’s just bizarre.
Can you imagine Ken Silva’s “mentor” Walter Martin (LoL, not) taking such an approach?
Theories will be appreciated. I’m really curious here.
RAbanes
Right Bo, like I’m the first person ever to make that accusation. If it weren’t such a nice day and if the beach wasn’t so inviting I might be tempted to spend the whole day plucking quotes from the archives. I’m not wrong about the consistent abuse toward Ken Silva, I don’t need to dig up quotes to prove it.
That depends on what you think being orthodox is. If you mean conforming to your approved form of doctrine and practice, then they probably aren’t. If you mean conforming to traditional church doctrine…which denomination are you thinkning of?
At least you’re consistent in your hypocrisy.
No Christian, I mean conforming to essential doctrine concerning salvation. I’m thinking more of things like the exclusivity of Christ, the Bible as the inerrant Word of God, the existence of a literal hell, those kinds of things. One of them is downright heretical in his stance, the other won’t give a straight answer to direct questions concerning these things. Pretending like there’s no parallel between the two of those guys is asinine.
Ok Bo,
“I cannot listen to Friel. There’s something about his voice that gives me the willies. (No offense to anyone named Willy.) Seriously, I get a cold, erie feeling when I listen to him and I am ISTJ.”
to which you replied:
“You’re hearing the hiss.”
You’re either comparing him to a snake or Satan, either way unnecisarily
good spelling there huh? Unnecessarily insulting. That’s just a recent post from you.
Speaking someone who ought to spell check, I could pick just about any post from Nathan Neighbour. His stuff drips with sarcasm and rarely serves any purpose other than to throw stones at the ODM’s, usually Ken Silva.
Kim – there is nasty gossip from all sides, that is the point. I reject the personal attacks on anyone and will continue to say so. If Ken and Ingrid allowed comments, I would voice it there as well.
Ask around, I have voiced my disapproval on issues with every writer here, with conviction and civility. None of my comments are moderated even when I strongly disagree. I submit that is being somewhat accountable.
If anyone here POSTED AN ARTICLE that had gossip about anyone, I and others would object. Your rehearsing of a comment thread failed to include this one from me -
So you have only presented the quotes that support you view and not the quotes that take people to task about those very things.
Perhaps you’re unfamiliar with the context of that particular turn of phrase. That phrase is employed by ODMs, specifically Ingrid to do exactly what you stated.
I used it as a parody of ODMs. Essentially denigrating the use of that phrase to begin with.
Glad you agree with me however, and join me in condemning such rhetoric from the ODMs.
Jesse,
Why would you defend an man like Ken who mocks me for holding a day of prayer to bless him?
I asked people to prayer blessings on Ken and he responded with a mocking post at CRN… and you say this site is bad? Show me one ODM site that has called for a day of prayer for anyone they
slander,attackwrite will balanced articles onwrite against…Show me one… just one… All I have seen is calls for prayer for people such as myself’s salvation… and I would call that arrogant.
iggy
Sarcasm is not the same thing as a personal attack. I’ve not seen Nathan call anyone names or throw stones, as you say.
The one thing you need to realize is that Nathan has probably felt the brunt of the ODM attacks more than most of us here. He’s on staff at Mosaic, a church the ODMs love to hate. To me it’s perfectly understandable if he gets a little frustrated sometimes. Even in his frustration, I don’t believe he’s launched attacks at any of the ODM writers.
Let’s be clear, gossip is different than confrontation or attacks or name calling. The post is about gossip, which I cannot remember any writer doing here.
Iggy,
I’m not really defending Silva, but rather asking what is the purpose of responding to stones with more stones? It seems to be pretty fruitless to me. I have noticed that you in particular make an effort to be gracious toward the man, that’s commendable.
Then why are the constantly taking out of context?
Where has Pagitt, Bell denied the exclusivity of Christ or the Bible as inerrant? The literal hell question…well…I don’t see evidence for a literal hell or heaven in the bible either does that mean I’m not a Christian?
*taken* not taking out of context
Oh, thats Rich…I mean funny. Is that supposed to be satire Phil? What are they when you name names and go after your favorite ODM’s? They are most certainly character attacks, real ones, not like the fake one RA accused Ken Silva of…..
You have become what you hate.
#77
Chris?
I guess I can see why you don’t take them out of context….because you agree!?
From your mission statement;
From Submissions:
From your challenge;
Sometimes I wonder if you haven’t started this site just to have an excuse to rant and rave.
Sometimes I wonder if it wouldn’t be better to keep our mouths shut and let the Lord vindicate Himself!
AMEN TIM H!!!
PB: Is that supposed to be satire Phil?
RA: Guys, I really think that they can’t tell the difference between a critical comment that is a character attack and a critical comment that casts light on a a person’s flawed thinking, facts, research abilities, conclusions, assumptions, and/or arguments. It’s all the same to them, which would explain why:
I think that’s part of the problem. They truly can’t distinguish between valid critical arguments and just being libelous and accusatory (not to mention an apparent inability to distinguish fact from fiction).
It’s kind of interesting, actually.
RAbanes
As far as Bell’s and Pagitt’s view on hell, I would say that only recently has one’s view of hell become a litmus test of orthodoxy. There have been different views about it’s nature throughout history. That hasn’t been an issue that has necessarily determined who is and who isn’t a heretic. I think that what has happened today is that Fundamentalists has turned the hell issue into one of that says, “if you don’t see it exactly like me, you are a universalist”.
It’s clear to me from reading and listening to both Bell and Pagitt that neither of them are universalists, despite the attempt to paint them as such. They are no more a universalist than C.S. Lewis was. Yet some insist on spreading this gossip.
PB,
You are one to talk. You have specifically started one site that parodies (poorly I might add) “emergents”, and another one that is a poor attempt at refuting this site. It’s a free internet, so you can do what you like, but for you to say “amen” to Tim H’s comment, “Sometimes I wonder if it wouldn’t be better to keep our mouths shut and let the Lord vindicate Himself!” is reaching new heights of hypocrisy.
(Nevermind the inherent irony of Tim H. posting a comment about it being better for us to keep our mouths shut. I guess it’s hard to practice what you preach if what you’re preaching is being silent!)
Jesse,
I suggest you read some of Paul’s writings where he addresses those who try to do him harm by name…
Then get back to me… cuz this site is miles above those sites you are saying it is like… for one thing you are free to voice your own opinion here… that should help you see one HUGE difference.
iggy
Rick:
Exactly. This thread left the OP at comment #2.
PB:
You need to find new material, because the old stuff just doesn’t ring true.
Please – provide me with quotes where I have quoted someone out of context, outright lied about them, or (in all seriousness) mischaracterized their beliefs for the purpose of demonstrating their heresy.
On the way back from the Purdue game this afternoon, my wife and I were discussing how similar the MSM treatment of Sarah Palin has been in comparison to the ODM treatment of Bell (and others). Both love to mischaracterize to “score points”. Both have absolutely zero sense of humor. Both exist in self-made islands of self-righteousness. Neither appear to have any example of Christian behavior. Nach.
“As far as Bell’s and Pagitt’s view on hell, I would say that only recently has one’s view of hell become a litmus test of orthodoxy.”
Because everyone was basically on the same page. Today there are so many pages we could start a mystery novel, which is what hell has become. Remove the general concept of heaven and hell and you have a different Christianity.
Well, I don’t want to go to far down this road, since it doesn’t have much to do with the OP, but I don’t think I would say there was always one view. Or I would say the one view that was the majority wasn’t the position that most evangelicals hold to today. I’ll just leave it at that for now.
Northern Colorado. Is that a high school team?
chris,
They can’t prove it… they can only take one sentence out of context and twist it like a pretzel until it fits their own twisted view of what they want Pagitt or Bell to believe.
As with McLaren, I have yet to see a quote that states his view on the things he “so-call’s” denied.
What we have here is liar’s lying…slanderers slandering and divisive people cause division… and not one shred of evidence or fact (beside a footnote quoting from a book some think is possibly a heretic). Even when it is pointed out that they are misreading their proof, they can’t see things like McLaren repeating what the person questioning stated, or Pagitt looking at how entwined God is in creation and how it reflect who He is and twisting it to mean Pagitt is a Universalist… even after I showed a direct answer to that question in which Doug stated that he was not…. yet some insist on still spreading lies and gossip on that. They will take anything even some one’s testimony and twist it to dishonor God and that person… for they have no shame at all… and prove it here at this site over and over as they mock others when shown they are wrong.
It seems it you can’t prove it, you just say it as if it was true until you get as many people believing you as you can… hmmm sounds like Germany in WW1 and WW2.
iggy
Actually, no, Rick – annihilism has been around for centuries, in addition to multiple other ideas of how hell is manifested… Recognizing that there are some aspects that are found in scripture and others that have been “filled in” by tradition is not a denial of hell…
MacLaren doesn’t really have any views, just a growing number of possible theories.
chris… did you notice PB answered with out giving a real answer? Did you notice that he seems to evade giving proof?
sorry, but once again PB cannot back his claim… and adds to his own shame.
iggy
oooh, that Tim H he sure told us good…
(read with western twang)
Thank you…
Example of gossip:
Chris Lyons is a closet Notre Dame fan.
Tim H,
Now there might be some of that here… yet mostly it is to point out where someone has tried to harm another brother or sister in Christ who has been attacked by outright lies, half truths and self righteous blathering over preferences… so yes sometimes there is a rant and a rave… but mostly it is protest and a call to come to their senses and return to what the bible teaches.
I agree and really this site does not even address half of the garbage out there… so I guess they are doing as you state and I see God doing things right and left. Just when the ODM’s seem to have the upper-hand, they slip into using the worldly tactics and show who they really are. In affect they expose themselves and I believe God is revealing more and more what these people are really about. I see that they are really scared right now as revenue is down so they need create a fake crisis against some all the while using the same tactics they call unbiblical such as using lawyers to try to shut down sites… and overlooking copyright laws and wonder why YouTube will not allow their video on it’s site.
They disregard so many biblical teachings and demand much from others, yet when pressed they only respond by claiming the person in disagreement is not saved…
Each year that this truth war passes it is revealed by God as to the farce it is… and this site only does a small part in all of it.
iggy
YouTube is a cesspool. So why is it wrong to preach in a bar but it’s OK to post on YouTube?
Jesse,
I was gone all day playing football, sorry I couldn’t respond. So if you liked my posts, what do we disagree on again?
If it’s on theology saving people, and you think it does, then yes we completely disagree. But I’m pretty sure Jesus and the Apostles disagree with you too. And here’s another difference, just because you might be wrong, doesn’t mean I’ll say you’re not Christian. I should say, my position is that a Person saves us, not a correct set of doctrines that get checked off in our ‘get saved’ checklist. Besides, NO ONE’S theology is even close to 100% correct, probably not even 50% correct when compared to the fullness of ‘correct’ ‘theology’ about God. So that can’t be the judge. God is.
I’m glad you enjoyed my studies. If I could figure out how to get the ‘write’ tab on the site admin to work for me again, I’d post this week’s study too lol. But right now…it just gives me a weird error everytime I click “write”. (hint hint, someone help!!
)
Joe
No, that would be an example of an outright lie.
“Chris Lyons once broke up with a girl for being a Notre Dame fan (among other things)” would be 24-year-old gossip…
Northern Colorado. A real powerhouse. Who’s their mascot, a skier?
Iggy,
I’ll clarify,
I like to read this site because there are many, many times when it seems like the posts and the responses are really great.
Butthen you guys get into theis spatting back and forth and seems like such a waste of time. It seems mean, vindictive, angry, hurtful, hurting, and not quite Christlike.
I think I read this in another thread by Rick F, We call ourselves Christians but we aren’t Christians.
I personally feel that this site, in it’s mission has set itself up to be the police and it’s no different than the ODM’s that this site fights against.
It’s like “vain arguements…”
Rick,
What is SDSU?
LOL!
TimH,
Again, I will clarify also… did you notice I agreed with you on some points?
What I am saying is the HUGE difference is that you can express you opinion here and you cannot at most ODM’s sites (who allow comments) without being told you are not saved… so notice this difference… we do not judge and condemn YOU… we may not agree and may debate.
Also, it seems that if you look at who may start these spats… it is usually someone who comes and states something untrue, slanderous, hateful or totally off topic and just plain divisive we will tend toward rebuke… and yes often that can be a bit too harsh and not as gentle as it should be… but we are dealing with habitual liars and slanderers who continue to come and repeatedly sin against others and many of us… so we may tire of that unchristian behavior.
Personally some of those should be placed on heavy moderation as I am tired of going over threads from weeks again trying to untwist the lies they state. It is a waste of my time and I sometimes wonder if I should even come back. In fact I have left before over some of these people as I was tired of their hate and lies.
Yet also hope you notice that there is not much of the “Amen” crowd things happening here. We do not agree on many things yet seem to get along for the most part. I may debate and disagree with some here and they are free to disagree with me… I do not find that at all at the ODM blogs.
Disagreement is not sin… it is iron sharpening iron… but when someone is stating untruth or carelessly tossing out statements of others that they have twisted to cause strife and division that is sin.
I hope you can see the difference… yes we may rant and rave… and that is not a sin… but allowing some to commit unjust acts against others is.
iggy
SDSU is the powerhouse of the century and we beat them!!
I think people confuse “imperfect” with “just like the ODMs.” Those are two separate things.
I used to read Slice. One day I noticed a mistake and alerted Ingrid about it. No response, no change, despite several eventual emails. If the mistake isn’t glaringly obvious (like publishing patently false information) then my sense is that correction isn’t really important to her.
I’ve never gotten that impression here.
My fundamental question for ODMs, and those who support them, is how can we be a witness if we fail to abide by those basic journalism standards even the secular papers follow?
ODMs talk a lot about not being worldly. ODMs, though, have proven themselves to be incredibly worldly by adopting the journalism standards of the lowest rungs of a rapidly (and sadly) devolving profession.
This place isn’t perfect, but by no means has it become what it hates.
M.G. – The tests of a blog are these:
* How do they indiscriminately repeat exposés about the personal lives of people?
* How do they deal with inaccuracies in their posts when they are exposed? Do they blame their source or take full responsibility and make corrections to avoid future mistakes?
* Do they us cute and mocking labels to persuade their arguments through literary devices?
* Do they admit their own frailties and does that admission make their attacks more measured and circumspect?
* Do they practice a scortched earth policy that dismisses any accomplishments of those with which they disagree?
* Do they ever speak correction among their own blog camp?
* Is there a discernable pathos and compassion in their tone or do they hold out people for scorn and disdain?
* Do they react disproportionately when they themselves are confronted or attacked, or do they take it with grace?
SoL has fundamentally failed each and every test. And the sad things is that many of these people have energy and many obvious skills that could be used more pervasively to promote the kingdom of God.
Protecting systematic theology is fine, but taken in the context of reaching the world, its impact is minimal. A minimally orthodox believer with a vision to reach the world, promotes the kingdom of God to a much greater extent than a completely “orthodox” believer who is consumed with investigating everyone esle’s doctrine.
Iggy,
Thanks for your clarification…
And let me apologize to all… I will take my own advice and apply…
Sorry if I offended you NC…