Friends,

Rather than merely update my previous post on Julie Neidlinger’s essay, I’d like to offer here just a couple of comments concerning something that really bothered me in the comments and replies. It was this: Some felt it necessary to compare Julie’s essay, that is, the content of the essay, to Ingrid Schleuter’s writing or commentary on such same subjects. I’m writing this as a perfect apology for everything that Julie wrote even though, to be sure, I have great sympathy for much of what she said. I am writing, however, to dispel this notion that her work, in this essay, is comparable to Ingrid’s. I have re-read the essay again and I have a least seven reasons why I think Julie’s essay differed and, as such, why it appealed to me. (PS–this post is not about Ingrid per se. It is about the comments that I read from several who said that Julie’s essay was like Ingrid’s in tone and content. Please don’t make this an ‘I hate Ingrid rant’ because that is not what it is. Also, I am not ‘on Julie’s side.’ I am on my own side, partially, defending why I found Julie’s article appealing in the first place.–jerry)

First, Julie actually visited (or had a long standing friendship) with the church she mentions in the first line of her essay. Julie was not sitting back, looking in from a distance, scrutinizing the efforts of the church in an attempt to blister them for being heretics. She didn’t go surfing the web ‘looking for a baby Jesus under the trash’ (Bono). Julie went and worshiped with those people (more than once?); Ingrid does not. That is a huge, huge difference in my book.

Second, Julie did not condemn to hell those she disagreed with, call them apostate, consider them unorthodox, write exposes about the preacher’s heretical teaching, or anything of that sort. She said, quite specifically, “I don’t blame the church; it is my own inability to fit that literally forced me to leave. I don’t really doubt their sincerity, and that many people…etc.” I might take exception to the line ‘I’ve even found, in the past, a few sermons to be interesting,’ but that’s not Julie; that’s me. (That is, as a preacher, I would be highly offended if someone referred to my sermons as merely ‘interesting.’ :) ) Uh, do I need to actually state what Ingrid (and others like her, do?)

Third, Julie did not act as if her angst was necessarily theological. It may have had theological underpinnings; or not. But Julie was rather clear through the article that her angst had more to do with her own preferences than anything else, maybe even a little home-sickness. This could have bee gleaned by most from the first three paragraphs alone, but it is also scattered throughout. Ingrid, on the other hand, frequently offers up complaints that are decidedly NOT theological, but disguised as such when really they are nothing more than her preferences. Again, huge difference.

Fourth, Julie did not blame the pastor/preacher. “I don’t know that the minister was wrong, though I think he was in some things he said. I am sure parents appreciate the ability to leave…etc…but it annoyed me” (my emphasis.) I appreciated, as a minister, that Julie had the nerve to not place all the burden squarely on the back of the preacher. With Ingrid, that is not nearly ever the case. And maybe there is some justification to Ingrid doing so sometimes, but not always. At some point the congregation full of people needs to assume some of that weight.

Fifth, Julie is not opposed to all things modern. “I’m not going to be one of those starched-collar Christians who, based on personal preference, say that this is a sign we’re going to hell in a handbasket and that all things are wrong unless they are done as they were done with the Puritans.” Isn’t this a huge, major-league, huge difference between Julie and Ingrid? Ingrid is opposed on the grounds of being opposed. Julie is opposed on the grounds that so much of it seems contrived.

Sixth, Ingrid would never, I mean never, quote Kurt Cobain to make a point. Julie would, and did. For that alone Julie get’s bonus points.

Seventh, Julie provided a solution to her problem with the church: She left. This is not what Ingrid (or other AMD types) would do. First, they wouldn’t go to begin with, and, second, they would continue to rail against the church forever and a day thus perhaps robbing some of hope, others of joy, still others of purpose, and perhaps ruining a pastor’s reputation along the way. Julie was feeling angsty so she left. OK. Maybe she was a bit sensitive. OK. Maybe she was being a girl. OK. Who cares? She had a complaint. She voiced it. Some agree and some do not. Julie’s essay was not in any way, shape or form like something Ingrid (or others like her) would publish. Ingrid (and others like her) rarely, if ever, offers solutions to what she sees as (sometimes) valid criticisms. She just criticizes.

From what I can tell, Julie had maybe three complaints and, I happen to think they are valid. In no particular order, 1) fakery/phoniness/lame-trying-to-fit-in-ness/faux trendiness/sameness/faux-coolness from pastors. I agree–it’s like everyone is trying their hardest to look in like Mark Driscoll or Rob Bell physically the way so many pastors are trying to ‘look like’ Rick Warren theologically. Perhaps what Julie wants is for someone to, I don’t know, be themselves? Did you notice how many times the word ‘fake’ or a synonym for ‘fake’ was used?

2) Imaturity among Christian men. Fellas, and ladies, I gotta be honest with you: She’s got a point. One of the best things I did in life was to go to Bible college already married and live with my wife. Talk about having to grow up fast! It was like four more years of high school with all the gossipy who’s dating who and who’s hating who and blah, blah, let’s stay up until four AM playing games and drinking Jolt Cola. I don’t think this is about Julie’s ‘dating-angst’ as some seem to think, but rather about what has been fostered among our men in the church by not encouraging and demanding that they grow up in their faith.

3) Manipulative and trite sermons. This is at the feet of the pastor and I agree. Much of what passes itself off as preaching in today’s church cannot possibly provide hope, courage, or strength to people like ‘Julie’ or people like ‘me.’ It sounds trite and manipulative. It sounds like the preacher doesn’t trust that the congregation can handle a) hearing, b) learning about, c) applying deep theological concepts. So we have to dumb it down. This is her point, I think, about ‘children’s’ church; we are not raising children to be children, but adults. Why dumb it down, for children or adults? I happen to agree with her whole-heartedly. Give the people something eat.

OK. I think that’s about all I want to say. Please remember, this is my impression of her post. I’m not trying to psycho-analyze Julie. I’m interacting with her post and defending the post against those insidious ‘this sounds like Ingrid and so why do you like it and not Ingrid’s?’ complaints that I saw in the comment thread of my OP on the subject. It is amazing that most of this, again, could have been discerned from reading the first three paragraphs of Julie’s post. Have a grand day everyone.

jerry

  • Share/Bookmark

Tags: , ,

This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 10th, 2008 at 8:53 am and is filed under Christian Living, Commenting, Ingrid. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+/- Collapse/Expand All

393 Comments(+Add)

1   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 9:06 am

OK, I can’t believe I’m going to do this, but here goes:
Why is it “insidious” to compare Julie’s post to Ingrid’s? You liked it, some of us didn’t. I get that. Why are we insidious? Maybe we think agreeing with her post is insidious. To my knowledge, no one posted that. I can understand you defending her (although I think another complete post is a bit much), I can understand everything that went on yesterday being a bit disconcerting for you, but I’m not sure how you get the corner seat for truth, where those of us who think Julie was just taking a pot shot at the Church (a position I realize she would vehemently disagree on and you would as well) are the insidious one’s.
I personally tire of mid-30 women bitching about how immature men and how “there just aren’t any good men any more.” They have every right to post/express their opinions and I have every right to post/express my disagreement.
As Chris L once posted here, “The only common denominator in your dysfunction is you.”
Now, see if I say that I’m attacking someone. When he posted a poster of it, it was funny because he shard that with someone who we all disagree with. But because you agree with Julie in this post, the handful here (and the many many more in the greater blogosphere) who disagree are insidious.

2   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 9:08 am

Friends,

“I’m writing this as a perfect apology for everything that Julie wrote even though, to be sure, I have great sympathy for much of what she said.”

The word ‘not’ should appear before the word ‘writing’. I regret the error.

jerry

3   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 9:14 am

Joe,

With all due respect, I think you took my post a little too personally. I used the word ’several’ to describe those who did what I am complaining about. Look what I wrote:

“I’m interacting with her post and defending the post against those insidious ‘this sounds like Ingrid and so why do you like it and not Ingrid’s?’ complaints that I saw in the comment thread of my OP on the subject.”

I’m defending the post against comments not against people. I also noted, at the outset, that I am not ‘on Julie’s side’ but my own. I’m sorry if you think this is a bit too much, I’m sorry if I hurt your feelings. I don’t intend to. Are we still friends?

jerry

4   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 9:34 am

Joe,

To answer your question: comments are insidious; not people. I think I clearly made that distinction.

y/f
jerry

5   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 9:46 am

Jerry,
I understand, I think what you are trying to say, there are churches out there that have issues. I agree that men, in some churches, often fail to lead. I agree that sermons can often be shallow and dis-hearting, I agree that youth groups can be a source of entertaining kids instead of teaching young men to be godly.
However, I did not walk away from Julie’s post thinking she is right this is lacking in a lot of churches, which is what I think you are trying to say. It seemed to me, that Julie is perhaps another church goer with her own agenda, and when that agenda did not look like what she thought it should she was unhappy.
The flip side is I think churches in America have so many problems because Christians are in them. I mean, seriously, some people love it that youth groups are entertaining, some love it that preachers talk about marriage, some even love their children’s program while others hate it. I think it is all a preference. Julie’s complaints did not seem to be doctrinal issues so I would say it is not the church for her.
You act as if her being compared to Ingrid is a bad thing. Ingrid is a human being as well but I would agree that she often picks churches a part and then writes about them. Julie did the same thing. There are times I read Ingrid’s blog and I think she might be on to something overall but her picking everything apart turns me away.
After reading Julie’s post it seems that a lot of it has to do with her discontentment in being single and it is hard to find a godly, mature man.(I got lucky:) but others are not so lucky. I have a lot of single friends and I know it is frustrating for them as well. I could be wrong, but it seemed that most of her issues in the post had to do with the fact that she is single. And maybe she did not intend for it to sound that way but it did to some of her readers.
I think overall that churches could do a better job reaching single, the flip side is, most singles are looking for a partner and when they don’t find one they move on to the next singles group, or church, so for the church it is hard to keep the program going.

6   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 9:58 am

Erica,

Thanks for the reply. I’m unaware of Julie’s single issues so I will leave that up to those who are aware. I just didn’t hear that coming out as a main factor of her post. What I got out of it, from a preacher’s point of view, is that there is a lot of that phony, fakery going on. I agree it is not in all churches, but it does seem to be trending that way.

Maybe I’m just jealous because I am a balding, 38 year old man who is jealous that I’m not considered hip, cool, and trendy by my senior citizen congregation. :) They mostly look at me as annoying.

I think it is unfair to compare Julie to Ingrid because Julie is Julie and Ingrid is Ingrid. And for the reasons I provided above.

jerry

7   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 10:10 am

I know it’s been said—but redundancy is my forte—the thing I loved about Julie’s original post was the honesty. As we get to know each other better, as our relationships grow, we realize that we all have our issues. Julie, in her “rant” was quick to point out her own baggage and not place the blame solely on the church or its leaders.
Her frustrations over the over-programmed tendencies are legitimate and worth our time to consider.

Her ongoing frustration is that the topic of her post was not discussed even a fraction as much as her personal life or motives were. Again, a legitimate frustration.

Agree or disagree, Julie is a redeemed daughter of God, expressing her own feelings about her own church.

I was challenged by her thoughts.
Let’s be as quick to lift her up in prayer as we are to critique her post.

Shalom

8   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 10:11 am

I go to church that the pastor supposable dresses hip and cool. I love Rob but from my prospective he dresses geeky! That is my point, everyone has a different perspective.
There is nothing wrong with being in your thirties and going bold. Some people, being serious here, find that to be cool! I am in my thirties and turning gray it is something with the middle age years:-)
I agree Julie is Julie and Ingrid is Ingrid. I think it is the style of writing being compared not the people.

9   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 10:16 am

Some comic relief:

Two blonds are staring at the moon…
Blond #1: Do you think there is life on the moon?
Blond #2: Must be, the light is on!

10   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 10:37 am

Serious question:

As a pastor I find it very difficult to be authentic or rather difficult finding people to be authentic with.

I’ve chalked it up to the “nature of the beast”.

I can’t/won’t ascribe motives to Julie but from the outside it certainly did read like this for me.

“I want people to be real”
“Men are immature these days”
“I’m tired of Family focused churches”
“I’m single”

I completely hold up the possibility that I’m wrong. We all read/write things from our own perspectives and experiences. Unfortunately thats the “nature of this blogging beast”. Write, wait, react, repeat.

11   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 10:38 am

Okay my serious question. LOL

Is it possible to be authentic in Church? I think we all long to know and be known but really do we?

As I said yesterday we all strive for authenticity while trying to fit in.

12   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 10:42 am

Chris,

I’ll answer your question this way: There is only one Mark Driscoll. That’s all we need. There is only one jerry hillyer, Lord knows that is plenty. Is that authentic? That’s what i’m talking about when it comes to authenticity and pastors who try to be everyone but themselves.

jerry

13   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 10:48 am

I am trying to be Rick Freuh

Except for that Notre Dame thingy. :)

14   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 10:48 am

Soemone posts a personal “get this off my chest” rant called “Why I walked out of Church” and it makes headlines.

I wonder how much thread traffic would be generated by posts called:

“God’s Heart of Redemption”
“The Eternal Cross”
“Walking in Grace in the Church”
“Taking up His Cross”

or a thousand other topics. The sensationalistic “Enquiresque” posts draw the attention.

Why I Stayed in Church

* I was worshiping Christ
* I love God’s imperfect people
* I wanted to serve
* I was learning patience
* I heard the Spirit
* I needed to pray with people
* I was asking God to bring my mind into captivity so I would focus on Him and Him alone.

I know, a little mundane.

15   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 10:49 am

Jerry,
Insidious is a modifier. So you seemed to be calling my comments insidious. You seemed to be saying that the people who compared Julie’s posts to similiar one’s by Ingrid were making insidious remarks. What I find interesting is that you make a distinction between a person and their comments so it’s ok for you to call a comment insidious but you seem to miss that distinction between comparisons of Julie and Ingrid. No one that I saw said Julie was like Ingrid, many did say her post was like Ingrid’s.
Why can you parse out the person from the comment but we who believe Julie’s rant is similar to one’s by Ingrid are not allowed?

16   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 10th, 2008 at 10:50 am

Interesting points, Jerry. Hadn’t even thought of all of them myself. I have attended that church since I first came to Bismarck. I would say the actual moment when I walked out was the clincher: that you can’t just show up with a Bible and expect kids to listen. It may have been a casual misspeak, but it said volumes on an undercurrent of an idea that “God needs a little help gettin’ the message out and entertainment would do it.”

“I could be wrong, but it seemed that most of her issues in the post had to do with the fact that she is single. And maybe she did not intend for it to sound that way but it did to some of her readers.”

You could be wrong. We’ll leave it at that.

“I personally tire of mid-30 women bitching about how immature men and how “there just aren’t any good men any more.””

That word “personally” again — I’m not interested in being personal, despite accusations. But notice, I didn’t say all men. I said Christian guys — particularly Evangelical guys. And I’m getting to see a snippet of that on this site. Be so careful not to use “all” and “never” and just stick with the actual things I say in the post as you discredit it.

It was, in fact, you, Joe, that for the first time made me see “Christian” “men” in a new light, and how they behave and what they really think and will say when push comes to shove. I’ve met plenty of non-Christian men that are “good men” since I’ve stopped wasting my time on fellows who claim Christ and act like blowhards. I’m not as “achingly” single as you might need to think for your theories to work.

So…thanks. That’s good work.

“The only common denominator in your dysfunction is you.”

Oddly, on this site, there is another common denominator…

Now, this has been interesting on many levels. Luckily, I’m not blond, or I’d just be ranting about that joke. Because, as you know, all I do is rant!!! Oh my.

17   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 10:50 am

But how do you know that Jerry?

Because they look alike?

Are all old men at mcdonalds not authentic because they all wear dress socks, with velcro shoes, and hats?

If you think authentic is the same as different then I don’t know if we can ever have consensus.

18   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 10:50 am

Oh and Jerry,
No offense here. Not persona at all. I find much of this to be amusing.

19   Bo Diaz    
September 10th, 2008 at 10:50 am

Is it possible to be authentic in Church?

Sure, right up to the moment that someone with a blog decides to make you famous.

Or someone decides to use your authentic statements, or vulnerabilities against you to get a pastor fired, or to get rid of elders or other leaders they don’t like.

20   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 10:53 am

Rick if we all could just be like you! Oh what a glorious day! :)

21   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 10:54 am

Is it possible to be authentic in Church? I think we all long to know and be known but really do we?

In order to be authentic we have to be vulnerable. With people around like the ODM’s that is very difficult. And I don’t mean just the ODM’s themselves but people like them in church. The result of all this is pastors and members wearing “masks of rightiouesness” and the person with the best mask is seen as the most rightioues of all… And when masks are dropped —–> Michael Guglielmucci.

22   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 10th, 2008 at 10:55 am

Your last title is interesting, Rick, but a little long.

The word “captivity” is captivating.

I’ve actually written on things so “mundane”, but you are correct in that they did not generate the brouhaha.

That is not my fault; I still wrote them.

As a narcissistic blogger, I try to periodically put out something that reflects that personal narcissism. Like this, for example.

23   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 10:56 am

“Rick if we all could just be like you! Oh what a glorious day!”

There’s a couple of openings left! :lol:

24   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 10:56 am

Wow, Julie, I am really sorry that you have been hurt as you have. You are obviously really angry with me, and I guess that is from the closed thread that you continue to bring up. You’re really getting a lot of mileage out of that comment thread. You’ve given up on all evangelical Christian men because you and I had a visceral disagreement? That’s sad.
You don’t about those who disagree with you but you can’t help but jump in when they do? That’s sad too.
Julie, I get it. You’re angry with me. I hurt you. I wronged you. That still doesn’t mean what you wrote in this thread is right or that I have to agree with it. Just as you are entitled to your opinions, I am entitled to mine.
I don’t care what you want to talk about personally or not. That comment was for Jerry, not you. Now, you’re free to tell me where it fell apart but whether or not you want to talk to me is not relevant to this thread, this blog, and my life. You’re mad at me? Get over it.

25   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 10th, 2008 at 10:56 am

I wouldn’t advise being vulnerable on this site.

You will be told you take things personally and that you’re only looking for validation.

True dat.

26   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 10th, 2008 at 10:58 am

In a public comments section, the comments are read by everyone. You use my name in your comment. It was for me. Look at the quote: “I personally tire of mid-30 women bitching…”

Not for me? Not directed at me? No need to respond? Come, now, Joe.

Don’t try to retrench now.

27   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 10:58 am

As a pastor I find it very difficult to be authentic or rather difficult finding people to be authentic with.

This could just as easily be “As a person, I find it…”

If we are not in relationships that foster this reality, we lose and so does everyone else. It sounds like Julie has found that outlet in Naomi and other friends.

I can see how a pastor may have trouble finding true authentic relationships because of the warped way many people put them on a pedestal. But I’m sure you can think of one person, Chris, who knows you and loves you and would welcome this kind of relationship.

28   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 10th, 2008 at 10:59 am

And…”You don’t about those who disagree with you but you can’t help but jump in when they do? That’s sad too.”

Wha?

29   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:01 am

wow! it took me longer to type that than I realized! that was in response to comment #10

:0

30   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:01 am

I read your post, Julie, and it was good. (about taking up your cross) You are sometimes a conundrum wrapped in a riddle and frosted with an oximoron.

But then again, sometimes not. :)

31   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 11:01 am

Never used your name Julie. And I’m far from retrenching.

32   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 11:02 am

Julie,

I don’t have a dog in this fight with you and Joe but I’m having a hard time understanding you having the right to say “I saw a pastor…and I wanted to kick his ass” (paraphrase) and Joe saying “I tire of 30-something women bitching”.

Really I’m only trying to understand your vantage point. This isn’t a game of “gotcha” for me.

33   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:03 am

Julie,

You are an attractive (from what I can see) intelligent, Christian woman. Whats not to like? I am married, 40 something with 4 kids, but if I were younger and unattached, I might rush off to North Dakota!

34   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 11:03 am

You’ve made ample statement that you don’t care about the comments of people who disagree with you, yet you can’t help but come back here and jump in–to the point of writing another post about how you are so misunderstood–and comment to all those mean nasty people who disagree with you and can’t separate you from the post.
How dat?

35   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 11:05 am

But I’m sure you can think of one person, Chris, who knows you and loves you and would welcome this kind of relationship.

Nathanael,

I do have several people like that. I guess I was more getting at how is it possible for you not to be fake (which I think is often misunderstood with guarded) and minister in a transparent way. Not setting people up for the let down of your humanness .

Does that make sense?

36   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 11:07 am

PB,

uuuuhhhhh…yeah! awkward!

37   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 11:10 am

Can we get this thread going? I am in need of more praise! :)

38   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:10 am

Not setting people up for the let down of your humanness .

From the pulpit?
Or on a personal level?

39   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:11 am

There are some people who are extremely intelligent, creatively communicative, artsy, and able to see things in many different and sometimes obtuse ways. But sometimes they get untethered to plain old vanilla reality and end up having a difficult time punching out for the day.

I have often told my oldest son, “Allow yourself the luxury of an unexpressed thought”.

He rarely does…

40   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:11 am

[still shaking head over pastorboy's comment]

41   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 11:11 am

I find this comment to be rich.

It was, in fact, you, Joe, that for the first time made me see “Christian” “men” in a new light, and how they behave and what they really think and will say when push comes to shove. I’ve met plenty of non-Christian men that are “good men” since I’ve stopped wasting my time on fellows who claim Christ and act like blowhards. I’m not as “achingly” single as you might need to think for your theories to work.

Have we ever met and I missed it? I’ve never been to ND. (And Yeah, John Chisham, that was really akward and kind of…weird), I don’t know that you’ve ever been to Mi.
Also, are you saying I’m not:
A. a GOOD christian guy
B. A Christian at all

What do you know about me Julie? Who are my friends? What scares me? What excites me? How mature do people who have actually met me think I am? Tell me about me, since we know each other so well that I’ve opened your eyes to the plight of evangelical Christian men.

42   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:13 am

PB – the unexpressed thought should have applied to you, but I believe your intentions were good.

43   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:13 am

Rick,
You are correct, and I know several people like that, but they are a necessary part of the body. If no one explored and delved into those areas, we would all be tethered “to plain old vanilla reality.”

44   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:15 am

Nate – I agree, but sometimes I have met people who are obsessive. God has all kinds of people, but only some of us are Ferrari’s! :lol:

45   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:19 am

Joe – I know why you are and I have interviewed many of your acquaintences. Your 1st grade teacher thought you were strange and your 6th grade homeroom teacher thought you were intellectually challenged challenging.

I have a few things on you, but nothing serious yet. Erica promised to fax me the real juicy stuff later. Don’t worry, I’ll make Ingrid pay for the info! :)

46   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:19 am

Or Pontiac Fieros.

;)

47   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 11:22 am

See this comment is a perfect example of what I am talking about. Perspective is everything.
“It was, in fact, you, Joe, that for the first time made me see “Christian” “men” in a new light, and how they behave and what they really think and will say when push comes to shove.”
Joe was one of the first guys who ever truly showed me Jesus. That is why I fell in love with him and am still in love with him.
I think Julie’s issues go pretty deep with Joe seeing he is truly the only one on here that pushes her buttons and evokes strong emotional reactions in her. It is ponderous as to why. and no I don’t by the whole he is the one that opened her eyes up to how Christian men act. It is a nice pot shot but I think the issue goes deeper.
Just Saying…

48   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 11:24 am

Rick,
I don’t think you want my real juicy stuff…
It might actually embarrass you:-)

49   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 11:24 am

Rick,
As long as you hook me up with some of the profit, we’ll be all good.

50   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:25 am

Erica – as a gift of helps to you, here is a site that will help you!

http://faq.wordpress.com/2006/06/04/what-smilies-can-i-use/

51   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 11:29 am

Rick,
You are catching on to my illiteracy when it comes to computer technology! Thinks for the help.

52   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 10th, 2008 at 11:32 am

Let’s please not talk about how I look. That’s fairly degrading, Pastorboy. OK?

“You’ve made ample statement that you don’t care about the comments of people who disagree with you, yet you can’t help but come back here and jump in…”

I’m mainly responding to you.

“…to the point of writing another post about how you are so misunderstood…”

The post I wrote yesterday was a summation of all the events. It was, as Rick somewhat noted, a plodding “and then this happened and then this happened.” It was not generally filled with a point-by-point rebuttal, though I provided links to earlier attempts at that.

You know, Joe, I don’t mind the disagreement. Humorously, you disagree with that statement and keep insisting that it is otherwise, seemingly minding that particular disagreement. Anyway, there are lots of blogs linking to that original post that disagreed and I didn’t react at all. Direct emails, too, which you are not privy to. Since the world of experience in regards to this particular post involves so much more than you are aware of, I can say with great confidence and honesty in myself that no — I don’t mind disagreement. I do, however, mind misstatement, assumption, soundbite-quotes, twisting of words, projection, and all the other PERSONALLY DIRECTED nonsense — that, I responded to.

(I know we’re still struggling with agreement and understanding on the definition of what is “personal” and I’ll just let that go; lost cause.)

Granted, I probably won’t sue anyone. I hear that’s become popular around here.

Frankly, if you give me another month or two, I’ll probably disagree with various aspects of post myself. Such is how it is when you write something from a moment, and how it is when you are not willing to stop and say “I’m going to have this opinion on such and such forever; here I stand!” Being clay means constant remolding lest we dry out.

For example, I used to think this site had a beneficial purpose. It is, instead, full of bait and anger in the comments section. And here I am, involved in it. That’s rather disheartening, personally speaking.

Let’s put it this way: I can bicker back and forth with Joe and Erica Martino, and take mild humorous pot shots at Rick Frueh, or I can re-read the email I received this morning from a woman who merely said “thank you” for putting into words some of the struggles she was facing as an introvert, and that it helped her see herself and understand herself differently. She did reprimand me for using the word “ass.”

Now, which one will I learn and build from as a writer and a Christian? The little ridiculous and dead-end semantics game with Pastor Joe, or an anonymous woman who didn’t have to write but felt led to write to a total stranger? From which source is something of value ever going to arise?

So, in an attempt to end this nonsense, there you go. The value, the treasure, won’t be coming from this blog’s comments section — in particular, our little exchanges, Joe.

My ridiculous participation was, essentially, a little case study of my own.

I was not disappointed.

Just like old times.

53   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:33 am

I was simply trying to say….

Well I don’t want to dig a hole deeper, but I find it strange Julie is single.

Maybe Joe did cause some serious damage?

But how is that really possible over the internet?

Of course, there are not many choices in ND, I’m just sayin’

And she is brilliant, I will giver her that and that is intimidating to guys who might not have her intellect. Did I mention I love her writing?

54   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:36 am

“From which source is something of value ever going to arise?”

http://judahslion.blogspot.com/

:cool:

55   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 10th, 2008 at 11:36 am

Erica, I ask that you no longer discuss what you think my personal issues are.

That is what I am talking about.

I’m not interested in entangling with you, but I don’t believe you are in a place to even begin to grasp “my issues” just as I am holding my tongue on what I see is your pony in this race. You truly know jack about me and are in absolutely no position to project who and what you think I am.

My “issues” are off-limits. That, in case it was missed, is called personal and is not the topic here.

I am asking you to stop, and I’m doing it in a fairly decent manner. I hope that you will respect that, as I have extended the same courtesy to you.

56   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:37 am

Julie, my apologies.

I just find what you write as pretty compelling stuff.

And I might add that I actually enjoy somebody besides myself that Joe M feels like he needs to banter with. I think you have hit some hidden deep within the recesses point of hurt with Joe, and he is battling with all his counselors powers to dig it out and deal with it, but he cannot.

Hence, the frustration.

57   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 11:38 am

Granted, I probably won’t sue anyone. I hear that’s become popular around here.

Don’t believe everything you hear…

58   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:40 am

Julie

The Abanes thing made it to ND????

Wow! The internet is all encompassing!

Please don’t sue me, even if I am annoying. I can’t give up the $20 I have to my name.

59   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:42 am

Erica – you can discuss what you think my personal issues are. I’ll give you a hint, I love my German Shepherd dog with an unhealthy set of emotions. I’m a little veclempt.

Discuss…

60   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 11:42 am

Incidentally, as a professional writer you might want to check the verbiage there. I think it’s not what you heard, but what you read. I’m just saying…

Julie,
I’m glad there are people that got what you wrote and benefited from it. I’m sorry you’re so angry with me. I’m sorry that you think you can write something and not have the writer’s character and issues brought into the discussion. When that is exactly what you did in your post. You questioned their authenticity, which is discussing their issues then just like old times, when your character and issues gets discussed you get all upset, sarcastic and angry. Your issues come out in your writing (this is true of everyone). You don’t know Jack about me or too many of those pastors you rail against. The problem right now, is that it’s currently considered cool to rail against pastors and the church.

61   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 11:42 am

physician, heal thyself.

62   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 11:43 am

My “issues” are off-limits.

Says who? Just like old times is right. Julie gets to say what she wants, but then gets persnickety when others exercise the same right.

63   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 11:44 am

Julie,
I am not trying to pick a fight with you. I am simply commenting on what I see. Why am I wrong but you are not wrong?
Isn’t that what you did with the church you were talking about it your post?
I think I have made my point. You don’t like it being done to you so be careful not to do it to others.

64   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 11:44 am

John Chisham,
Is that in regard to your completely inappropriate statement toward Julie.

65   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 11:47 am

Pastor Boy,
“I think you have hit some hidden deep within the recesses point of hurt with Joe, and he is battling with all his counselors powers to dig it out and deal with it, but he cannot.”
Thats funny. Or maybe he doesn’t get like everyone else.

66   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 11:49 am

And I might add that I actually enjoy somebody besides myself that Joe M feels like he needs to banter with. I think you have hit some hidden deep within the recesses point of hurt with Joe, and he is battling with all his counselors powers to dig it out and deal with it, but he cannot.

What?

67   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
September 10th, 2008 at 11:53 am

Just for record, I still like Julie’s first post…

I don’t know. It’s a blog, not a doctoral thesis. There’s been many pastors I’d like to inflict physical harm on as well.

I mean it’s not that I hate all pastors or anything, but there are certainly ones that get I my nerves. I don’t know what’s so bad about sharing one’s opinion on such things – that’s what blogs are for.

I guess I’m just puzzled why this is such an issue at all.

68   Robbo    
September 10th, 2008 at 11:58 am

Chris L, CHris L, CHRIS L!

Where on earth are you? Are you out there somewhere?

69   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 11:58 am

I guess I’m just puzzled why this is such an issue at all.

Well Phil,
I’m not sure that it is. It’s just some agreed and some disagreed. Those who disagree believe that there is ample material to pull from to point out what could be other driving factors in Julie’s post.
As far as the banter back and forth between Julie and I… well, I guess we just don’t get along all that well. I’m not all that “good” of and “evangelical christian” man. More of a “blowhard” really who persecutes Julie.
Now, if you take my comments and direct them towards other female commenters (Amy) or Blog authors (Ingrid) mostly no one would care. Why is that?

70   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 10th, 2008 at 12:03 pm

Joe and Erica Martino:

Prior to this comment that you are about to read, do a tally of the times the word “issues” appears in comments about me written by you.

Do a tally of times I even hint at, or reference something similar, in regards to you.

Can you add? How’s that total working out for you?

Now, Erica, I refuse to take up words with you and even debate. This is not out of fear that I can’t “win”, but out of something else that I am doing as a kindness towards you. Suffice it to say that your statement: “Why am I wrong but you are not wrong?” and “I think I have made my point” doesn’t make a bit of sense in the scope and order of what’s been said or exchanged between you and I. Leave it at that. I’m serious.

Now, Joe:

“Says who? Just like old times is right. Julie gets to say what she wants, but then gets persnickety when others exercise the same right.”

In saying “what I want” did I discuss your “issues”, Joe, as I see them from where I sit?

Did I say that I think Joe is a sloppy, over-emotional writer who shoots from the hip while he accuses everyone else of the same? That he frequently projects his own tendencies towards making and taking all things personally while, yet again, leveling that accusation against others and not believing it of himself? That he gets his wife to come in and be an amen chorus? That he doesn’t necessarily think out his rejoinders particularly well, forcing people to pull apart his statements and ask for clarification before they can even respond? That I think he means well but can’t extract himself from the actual moment to see his own repetition of thought? That his arguments tend to be the same? That he frequently retreats behind temporary abashment before coming out again with another personal jab? That he has the same problem with Julie that she has with him, but is only willing to have project that onto Julie, with the aid of his wife, and not own up to it except in some kind of half-assed unmeant “I’m sorry you feel that way, Julie” apology, which means nothing? That he is like a dog on a bone and can’t let go? That that isn’t actually such a noble quality?

Did I say those things, which I would categorize as personal and as issues?

I really did not. I disagreed, explained myself, disagreed, explained discrepancies, but did not go after Joe and his motivations or issues, despite hearing, from the Martinos, that all that I write stem from my “issues” and “being single” and other fairly offensive remarks for myself, anyone who is helped or enjoys my writing, or even God who sometimes puts things into my head to write about.

Nope. I didn’t list what I think are your issues.

But that’s been rectified. Julie has said what she wanted. Since everyone else gets to, according to Joe and Erica.

“You don’t like it being done to you so be careful not to do it to others.”

Well, preach it sister. Make that a banner on the top of this site. Live by it.

Who else has issues? By all means, lets just dump our crap out there and discuss. Don’t be shy.

71   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
September 10th, 2008 at 12:05 pm

Now, if you take my comments and direct them towards other female commenters (Amy) or Blog authors (Ingrid) mostly no one would care. Why is that?

I don’t know, maybe people consider Julie more of a sister, while Ingrid and Amy are more like the aunt that has 100 cats in her basement…

I suspect we’re a bit more protective of people who we perceive to be more like us. It’s human nature, I suppose.

It’s odd because I really don’t know any of these people apart from their online personas.

72   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 10th, 2008 at 12:09 pm

“Now, if you take my comments and direct them towards other female commenters (Amy) or Blog authors (Ingrid) mostly no one would care. Why is that?”

Well, that’s the real question, then, isn’t it? That’s been the topic all along.

So, why is that? Is it even true? And if it is true, what is the difference between myself and Ingrid and other female commenters? Is there any difference?

What are you implying? What are you saying? Is it favoritism? Is it something else? Does it make you angry? Why does it make you angry, if indeed that is the case?

What if the answer is simply that, for one post, what I wrote didn’t strike a person the wrong way? So what? What does that mean? Does it bother you that this has happened? Would you rather it were different?

Why keep pressing the issue of why some agreed with the post, hedging it in my inability to take disagreement? What is the value?

What is really getting your goat on this?

I think I know.

Sour grapes make great whine.

73   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 12:15 pm

Julie,
Julie I did not come on here to defend Joe. He simply told me to go read your post and I did. We had not even discussed it. I read the post and started commenting. That is the first time he even knew my thoughts was when he read them. Trust me Joe does not need my help he can defend himself quite well.
I simply have issues(I admit it) with how people view the church today and what the church should look like.
You have the right to your opinions just like I have right to mine. I periodically comment on here when you are no where in sight. But again, You have the right to feel I come on here to defend Joe. That is the nature of the blog world. You blog, you get critiqued by everyone that is the nature of the beast.

74   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 12:16 pm

That he gets his wife to come in and be an amen chorus?

Hahaha, Julie, You show your ignorance. If you knew my wife, you wouldn’t say that. Hahaha. That is funny. Too too funny. Now to your other questions.

75   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 10th, 2008 at 12:17 pm

I believe, Phil, that people who read boring, narcissistic blogs like mine (hat tip: The Rickmeister) connect with the writers. It is that way with blogs I read.

Just as a friend recommending a product to you makes you trust their recommendation, you put more weight and give more allowance to the person you have come to know a bit better than the one you haven’t. You extend a bit more grace, or say, “well, that might be a bit much, but I know her and her past writing and I take it all into consideration and I put it in context, and so I understand.”

That might seem unfair, to extend that allowance to one and not the other, but anyone who says they don’t do it is lying.

The reaction I have when my sister calls me Jules is much different than a random person (I don’t like “Jules”). I allow her that; she is a person I know well. It’s part of the unwritten agreement, if you will.

I think Jim, a blogger I actually met, said it well in his comment on this post. You know, the difference between knowing a person online and in real life. The same thing happens between knowing a person through a personal-type blog (which mine is) and only knowing a person through the comments he/she leaves on a site.

It isn’t dishonesty. It’s a natural way of hearing things better from those we trust. Hence the discussion on how you should be a friend to a person instead of throwing the Bible in their face; they hear it more from a friend.

76   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 10th, 2008 at 12:19 pm

I’ve wasted too much time here.

I have a lesson today — thanks for your time. Gotta go.

77   amy    
September 10th, 2008 at 12:19 pm

PB,
My husband doesn’t blog, but if he did and I read a comment like you made to Julie, I would strongly suggest that he stop blogging.

People of the opposite sex break down barriers on the internet that would be there in a normal social setting.

I think people need to be very careful.

Even a comment from a married man to an unmarried lady like, ” I can’t understand why you’re still single” is inappropriate, in my opinion, both in person as well as on the internet.

78   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 12:21 pm

First question:
Yes, I believe it is the case and I do think that Phil hit it on the head. We are more protective of people we identify with. The truth is that I doubt there is much difference between you, Ingrid, Amy and even me. If we were to meet offline. No, it doesn’t make me angry. Not even close.
Second Question:
I would say you have many posts that people agree with and hold onto your seat here, there are many posts on your blog and other places that I agree with. I’ve even thought about linking to them and writing posts based on them but decided against that given our history.
Third Question:
I’m pressing the issue of why some disagreed with the post because it is being suggested that we’re not allowed to disagree with the post by some. To the point that we’re using insidious comments.
As for your rant discussion about what you think my issues are, have at it. It’s not going to bother me. The only one with the sour grapes is you, Friend. That’s it. You as much as admitted that you came here simply to respond to me. I will say that the sloppy writer comment hurt coming from you. (Kidding)

79   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 12:22 pm

Amy,
I would have to agree. I was thinking the same thing. I would be highly offended if Joe ever said that to another female online.
When you are married it is not appropriate.

80   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 12:23 pm

” I can’t understand why you’re still single” is inappropriate,”

Yes, I agree. Also this is inapproppriate as well:

” I understand why you’re still single” is inappropriate,”

Both inappropriate.

81   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 12:34 pm

Joe,
“Hahaha, Julie, You show your ignorance. If you knew my wife, you wouldn’t say that. Hahaha. That is funny. Too too funny. Now to your other questions.”
Ha ha ha what does that mean?:-)
“If you knew my wife, you wouldn’t say that?”
If I truly think you need defended I will jump in but I can only think of that happening one time and that was nine years ago . Since then I have never seen you in a situation that you need my help.
I do happen to be your biggest fan though:-)

82   John Hughes    
September 10th, 2008 at 12:34 pm

For lack of wood the fire goes out,And where there is no whisperer, contention quiets down.

I read that somewhere. Get a room guys.

83   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 12:36 pm

have lots of them but thanks:-)

84   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 12:41 pm

Even have a great prayer room…

85   amy    
September 10th, 2008 at 12:50 pm

Now, if you take my comments and direct them towards other female commenters (Amy) or Blog authors (Ingrid) mostly no one would care. Why is that

I can help answer that at least partially for you.

THe primary answer is this: Objectivity, fairness, considering all sides goes out the window with ALL people who regularly have opposing viewpoints on this site. Nasty things are said, CARICATURES are developed, and people don’t have to respond to issues since the person bringing up the criticism is a jerk, never responds, is a Calvinist, harping, on and on. For some it starts the second they make a comment – so they don’t come back.

For me “You always rant and keep asking questions when they have already been answered” begins with almost every difficult question I bring in.

“You have an agenda.”

“You are playing “gotcha.”"

And on and on.

Rarely (never?) – “you have a valid point, let’s consider it.” “You’re right, the question has not been answered, really. Let’s look at why.”

Besides that:
1)At this point in my thinking I see to much on this site that in my opinion is just plain wrong. I cannot in good conscience “be anyone’s buddy.” I don’t feel that I can, like Rick, hang around and joke, etc. So you only know a very small part of me.

2)I don’t have a website so that you can view another side of me, primarily for privacy reasons. You don’t know what I look like, and can’t be persuaded one way or another there, right? (And yes, sadly, men attribute all kinds of qualities to pretty females, before they know them at all.)

If I did have a blog it would be filled with art, music, God’s passion for children, God’s passion for lost and hurting people in other countries, nature, hiking, and other things that many of you would like very much.

I am as much like the aunt with 100 cats in the basement as Mrs. Palin is like Mrs. Clinton.

3)But then, were you to see another side of me, even so I still might be one who would fit into Joe’s statement – because even with that “other side” I would still have “this side.”

Could someone give me a link to the new article Julie has written?

86   Jerry Hillyer    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 12:54 pm

I am sorry. This is all my fault. All I was saying is that I didn’t think Julie’s post sounded like something the author of slice would write. I am sorry I posted what, at the time, sounded like a good idea. My apologies to everyone here.

Jerry

87   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 12:58 pm

I honestly think that part of the problem is that on blogs, it becomes difficult to just agree to disagree. For some reason, it rarely ends there.

88   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 1:01 pm

Amy,
Here’s a delightful article by Julie.
Enjoy.

89   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 1:03 pm

Rule of thumb – when you are getting emotionally involved or it becomes obvious that someone is taking an offense, it is time to wait for another post. In those cases nothing good or productive ever comes of them especially when it seems a few commentors are going back and forth.

It is indeed possible to be wrong while being right.

90   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 1:06 pm

Amy,
I would say it is the nature of blogging and participating in discussion.
I don’t come on here hoping to change anyone’s mind or getting validation from anyone because I know most all of us think we are right.
I think you have a better chance of that happening one on one but even then you often keep talking and very rarly come to the other side at that moment. I just had a conversation with a friend Friday and went back and forth back and forth. It has been the last few days that I have really thought about our conversation and played over it in my head. My husband had a conversation with a man four years ago, did not see his perspective at all then and now he sees validity to his statements.
I look at this site as a great way to have discussion that later on I think about.
Here is a great example: Just the other day, I was thinking about how my boss told me that one day I could come around and realize that God does speak to us today. I thought she was crazy and it offended me that she thought that; four years later I think God reveals himself to me in more ways then just through his word.
You never know what you say that might get stuck in someone’s head:-) But for me discussion of this nature makes me a more well rounded person, hopefully:-)

91   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 1:25 pm

Chris L, CHris L, CHRIS L!

Where on earth are you? Are you out there somewhere?

My mind is completely buried in statistics (even during drive time, which is when I do my ‘writing’ prep) this past week or so. Reams (and reams) of data and the ensuing analysis are occasionally part of my professional life, and when the reams arrive, my mind goes down the rabbit-hole.

Just scanning this thread reminds me of
a) why I enjoyed it when Julie was an author here;
b) why I really have come to dislike comment threads where people delve more into psychoanalysis of people they’ve never met than into the actual OP;
c) how silly it is when commenters say that something “isn’t personal” and then go on to beat it do death, embarrassingly, in public (a behavior, I might add, that seems to cross all partisan lines – whether it’s RA or PB or Iggy or Joe/Erica or Julie or Rick or Amy or Chris L, etc.) not fooling anyone else as to how they’ve taken something personally.

Now – back to the numbers dungeon…

92   nc    
September 10th, 2008 at 1:35 pm

I just read this thread 3 times…

It is the most random meta I’ve ever seen…

93   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 1:38 pm

It is the most random meta I’ve ever seen…

Sadly, in some ways, it was starting to look like a RA/KS grudge match, though with fewer people knowing the personal history behind it…

94   Neil    
September 10th, 2008 at 1:45 pm

Chris L.

There have been several comment thread recently that have been devoted more to spats than discussion of a topic. Maybe we should discuss (but not here) ways of minimizing this.

Neil

95   Robbo    
September 10th, 2008 at 1:50 pm

Thanks for hearing my cry, Chris L.

I am taking the liberty to close all comments on this thread at #100. Let no one doubt that I have the technical abiliity to do this. Remember this from a few days ago? ;)

CRN.info will be back up shortly. We apologize for the inconvenience. No, the site has not been erased.
© 2005 ZACH ROSING PRODUCTIONS

96   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 1:52 pm

Get your comments in now – the atom smasher in Switzerland is up and running and all of us will soon be sucked into a black hole.

Curiously enough, I sometimes feel as though I am already in a black hole. :cool:

97   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 2:05 pm

After re-reading my OP, I am actually disappointed that more people didn’t interact with the content of what I said. That is most disappointing. Live and learn, I guess.

jerry

98   nc    
September 10th, 2008 at 2:05 pm

I just re-read Julie’s post:

I’ll say this:

I think her points are well taken…age-segregation, family centered to a fault, being unreflective about the larger cultural phenomenon of delayed adolescence, etc.

My only issues with her post is this:
A.
Delayed adolesence is not just a problem for males. A woman may see the acute affects of it because you stand outside of its “male” expressions, BUT as one in congregational ministry for 10 years with the very demographic you talk about I’ve seen it across the board. There’s a lot of horribly stunted and poorly behaved young women too who need to get it together.

(And please nobody here try to convince me of it being gender specific. I’ve seen it. So bottle it. ;) I say that with love in my heart.)

another aspect of this is we do need to be careful to not conflate spiritual growth with performing to social compulsions, “ought to’s” and the personal preferences of others. There’s a fine line even between good social expectations and ridiculous compulsions that are substantially no different than the “trendiness” of my next point.

B.
I don’t think we should automatically judge that certain clothes/colloquialisms necessarily indicate something about people’s motivations/maturity. Maybe baggy jeans, flip-flops and a hemp necklace is a particular person’s cultural milieu and they actually like it and they are acting with integrity.

I can see how this may not be the case in the northern plains of the heartland since it is rare that any trends get generated from there and when trends do “hit” they end up being a bit “behind”…

( e.g. When were still living in California, cupcakes were the hot new fun trend for celebrations, etc. They were in all the restaurants, etc. This was almost 7 years ago. While going to school here in Nashville they just now are talking about the “new” cupcake craze…get my point? )

I can see the problem with immature “aping” of what’s cool, but it’s another thing to br0ad brush it and assume that whoever dresses with the current “style” is shallow/immature.

I’m not saying this Julie person thinks that, but maybe just a sentence or two clarifying that would have been good…

just my nickel…

99   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 2:05 pm

4

100   nc    
September 10th, 2008 at 2:08 pm

Who is Robbo and why does he have that power?

;)

sorry…just trying to push the thread to 100

lol

101   amy    
September 10th, 2008 at 2:15 pm

I would say it is the nature of blogging and participating in discussion.

But certainly not everywhere. I said my husband doesn’t blog, but remembered that he does participate in an academic discussion site, where people share different thoughts on scripture and its meaning. I’ve never looked at it, but he has looked at what goes on here and he is astounded at the way people treat each other. I’ve seen other sites as well where people seem to be able to share opposing viewpoints with a much greater respect than happens here.

102   amy    
September 10th, 2008 at 2:16 pm

I must have more power than Robbo.

103   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 2:20 pm

Amy,

“I said my husband doesn’t blog, but remembered that he does participate in an academic discussion site, where people share different thoughts on scripture and its meaning. I’ve never looked at it, but he has looked at what goes on here and he is astounded at the way people treat each other.”

whatever.

jerry

104   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 2:22 pm

Amen to that Amy,

Also, not self justifying, but what I said about Julie I would say to any woman without fear of offending my wife. I am not a pig, and my wife knows it. I said that in the best fatherly tone I could muster. I thought it as a complement, an encouragement, that Julie looks to me to be the total package, attractive, intelligent, Palinesque- so to speak, and therefore anyone who would not be attracted to that has a complex or a self-esteem issue.

That said, It offended her, came across wrong, so I apologized.

Of course Amy and Erica have to play my nurse maid and correct me again.

Correction taken, you can stop now.

105   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 2:34 pm

PB,

You may want to let that fire go out for lack of oxygen. You’re really not helping your cause.

Really just stop.

106   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 2:38 pm

3) Manipulative and trite sermons. This is at the feet of the pastor and I agree. Much of what passes itself off as preaching in today’s church cannot possibly provide hope, courage, or strength to people like ‘Julie’ or people like ‘me.’ It sounds trite and manipulative. It sounds like the preacher doesn’t trust that the congregation can handle a) hearing, b) learning about, c) applying deep theological concepts. So we have to dumb it down. This is her point, I think, about ‘children’s’ church; we are not raising children to be children, but adults. Why dumb it down, for children or adults? I happen to agree with her whole-heartedly. Give the people something eat.

Brilliant paragraph, Jerry. Simply brilliant.

Of course, you will not get this at Granger, Mars Hill, (MI) or other seeker sensitive, post modern, emergent, and many now mainline churches because (another thread) they are trying to please man, whether on their board or in the pews or out in the community.

Pastors fear preaching the whole counsel of God nowadays, I am afraid. I feel the frustration Julie expresses. As a Pastor, I am fortunate surrounded by Godly men who encourage me to give it to them straight. And they feel free to do the same for me.

107   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 2:39 pm

Thanks, Chris, no really. Thanks.

108   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 2:46 pm

PB,

No problem. But really stop! You don’t know a whole lot about the things you spout about.

Of course, you will not get this at Granger, Mars Hill, (MI) or other seeker sensitive, post modern, emergent, and many now mainline churches because (another thread) they are trying to please man, whether on their board or in the pews or out in the community.

Quite frankly I tire of hearing/reading about how you’ve got it all figured out.

You don’t strike me as a humble man nor somebody with a teachable spirit. You stopped having creditability with me a long time ago. With your most recent statements about Julie I really question your stability. I’ll leave it to others closer to you to figure out whether or not you are fit for ministry.

109   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
September 10th, 2008 at 2:59 pm

Of course, you will not get this at Granger, Mars Hill, (MI) or other seeker sensitive, post modern, emergent, and many now mainline churches because (another thread) they are trying to please man, whether on their board or in the pews or out in the community.

I can’t speak about the sermons at Granger, as I’ve never heard any of them, but I can say that I’ve heard some of the most thought-provoking, challenging, and Scripturally rich sermons I’ve ever heard from Mars Hill. My guess is that you haven’t bothered to listen to any of them, but yet you feel free to pass this judgement on them.

PB, your attempt to judge the motivations and hearts of those you really know nothing about is getting old. Please quit trying to compete for the Holy Spirit’s job, because you obviously suck at it.

110   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 2:59 pm

Chris,

Who says I have it all figured out?
I know I don’t, I just know what I observe. Tell me why you would have a Grease musical number on a Sunday Morning? Is encouraging sex out of wedlock by crude lyrics and cliches what God wants? I would say no according to His Word.

I mean when I see a pastor with a soul patch tell the world that Christians are bad for preaching the Gospel, and that he wants nothing to do with that type of Christianity, I have to wonder if 1 John applies to his church ” How can you say you love God and hate your brother?”

Then there is the pro-homosexual Jim Wallis and Tony Capolo who twist the scripture into a little ball. Throw in Brian McLaren, and you have a triumverate of those who want to throw away the scripture for five years until we have a chance to examine the issue.

I just know what I read, watch, and participate in.

I don’t strike you as humble or teachable? Not by you, cuz I don’t know you. Ask my elders. Ask my wife. You can feel free to stalk me in a Martinoesque investigation like he did to Ken Silva (pretty sickening stuff, you ask me) My phone numbers and address are all published. I am even on the CM&A website.

My comments about Julie or anybody else are none of your concern. She handled it, it is over. I was trying to be complementary, but, as a social misfit (obviously) I screwed it up. Get off my case! My computers and internet access are all fully open to my spouse, so she will read it soon enough and, as she understands me, she will know I am not trying to be perverse.

So whatever, Chris. I don’t answer to you, Iggy, Phil, Joe, Tim, or any of the other folks at this blog, and you do not answer to me.

111   nc    
September 10th, 2008 at 3:08 pm

huh…
when’s the last time you heard of a “bible believing” church teach the book of Leviticus, Ecclesiastes, Ezekiel?

Didn’t Mars Hill launch with a 2 year exploration of Leviticus?

That sounds so “market research/demographic driven”…

Hmmm…

Are some things a bit too pragmatic for my tastes at times? Yep.

But I can say that I attended Willow Creek for season back in the late 80’s early 90’s and the teaching I sat under deepened my devotion and love for God. It spoke of a real, lived life that sought to cooperate with God in everything and every place. (i.e. “obedience” for those of you who are terminology nazis and doubt people’s sincerity when they “don’t say it the way you say it”.)

Do I think Willow is too “leadership” fixated at times? Yep.

But the honest reality is that there is crappy teaching in a lot of churches and some of the worst I’ve heard are the ones that are NOT pomo, emergent, seeker driven, etc. and self-consciously so since they drink deeply from the toilet of “christian radio orthodoxy”.

I can attest to this because my wife and I rested for about a year where we visited about 15 churches…I heard only 1 sermon that responsibly used the texts and the guy was still just horrible to the point that it distracted from the good stuff he had to say. The rest were just coma-inducing or so bad I’d want to jam a pen in my eye just to have an excuse to leave.

So much for the “seeker/emergent” whipping boy…

BTW, the “conflation” of those two consistently demonstrates are real lack of understanding about the landscape of North American Xianity and the thinking/paradigms that inform them.

112   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 3:09 pm

Phil,

What scripture? The twisted stuff that Bell misinterprets?

Yeah I have listened to his stuff, and it provokes thoughts in me. Thoughts of ‘where does this guy get this stuff?’ I agree with Patrick Abendroth, anybody who takes such liberties with the Bible is not a Christian, and he really makes me angry…an example:

Rob Bell makes me mad because he does violence to the clear words of Jesus. On page 21 for example, when he talks about Jesus’ claims of exclusivity in John 14:6, he spins them to mean something other than what they clearly say and have been recognized as saying by Christians throughout the ages. At first I was surprised at how much Bell sounded like a radical theological liberal like Marcus Borg, but then I saw that the very first endnote in the book was an unqualified recommendation of a book by Borg! Bell’s recommended reading on his church’s web site promotes reading by John Dominic Crossan, the former co-director of the Jesus Seminar, so endorsing Borg is not a matter of isolation. Such men have a reputation for shamelessly doing violence to Jesus and His gospel.

HT Irish Calvinist

I could say more, but we have already discussed this ad infinitum, and I want to go golf.

113   nc    
September 10th, 2008 at 3:13 pm

I mean when I see a pastor with a soul patch tell…

what does a soul patch have to do with anything?
And to say that someone is saying it’s bad to preach the Gospel just doesn’t strike me as true…I’ve never heard someone say that. I mean, did they really say that?

114   nc    
September 10th, 2008 at 3:16 pm

anybody who takes such liberties with the Bible is not a Christian

Wow…who knew THAT was part of the Gospel too?
My list of additions just gets longer and longer.

;)

115   amy    
September 10th, 2008 at 3:21 pm

PB,
It’s not just what your wife thinks or doesn’t think, or what “tone” you said it in. Most people (I think) would see it as inappropriate. I can imagine a very elderly man say this with a fatherly tone in real life, and can imagine that in that situation people wouldn’t think it was inappropriate. Silly, maybe, but not potentially offensive.

You’re not that elderly, and I can’t hear your tone.

My comment (which Rick and Erica agreed to) was meant to speak of the inappropriateness of the remark. I think you could apologize to Julie for offending her in some way and still not realize how inappropriate a remark like that is in many people’s eyes.

I would have taken the “nursemaid” comment as humor if you had included Rick, who made a similar comment to Erica’s and mine. As it is that comment directed to Erica and I is . . . how shall I say it, chauvinistic, paternalistic . . . whatever, certainly not an appropriate response to well-meant admonition.

Having said all that I did NOT read all the discussion between you and others that had already taken place carefully so sorry if I was belaboring something you felt had already been addressed.

116   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 3:21 pm

Wow I guess it does suck when you write something and someone distorts it from their vantage point.

117   nc    
September 10th, 2008 at 3:22 pm

chris,

:)

too funny…

118   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 3:27 pm

Did Julie nursemaid you too? She made a remark about your comment. It sounded rather pervy to me.

119   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 3:27 pm

Rick wrote something too?

I ususally don’t pay attention to Notre Dame Fans…

Rick, the nursemaid thing…it was for you too.

All better?

:)

I m going golfing FOR REAL NOW!

120   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
September 10th, 2008 at 3:28 pm

Oooh, a Calvinist doesn’t like Rob Bell. Stop the presses!

Seriously, it’s not what this thread’s about, but I’ll take the type of hermeneutic Bell uses over J-Mac any day.

Actually to get back to the original post somewhat, I actually think a big reason modern pastors really fail to connect with audiences is because many take the hermeneutic espoused by J-Mac and apply it to their preaching. What happens is that any verse can be ripped from any passage and be made to apply to anything. Oddly enough, I see many who are sympathetic to the emergent movement rejecting this type of Scriptural cut-and-paste for a more narrative view of Scripture that lets the story speak for itself.

If we would let the story of the Bible speak for itself instead of injecting our causes and theological systems onto it, it might actually become engaging to people again. People might actually want to hear a sermon if it actually told a story.

121   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 3:29 pm

Haha, Wow, I missed John Chisham’s self defense! That was good reading.

122   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 3:30 pm

Whenever someone pulls some quote from some guy who quoted some other guy to prove THEIR point it reminds me of this.

Were you going to plagiarize the whole thing for us? Do you have any thoughts of your own on this matter? Or do you, is that your thing, you come into a blog, you read some obscure passage, and then pretend, you pawn it off as your own, as your own idea just to impress some girl and embarrass my friend? You see, the sad thing about a guy like you is that in 50 years, you’re gonna start doing some thinking on your own and you’re gonna come up with the fact that there are two certainties in life. One: don’t do that. And two: you dropped a 150 grand on an education you could have gotten for a dollar fifty in late charges at the public library.

123   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 3:33 pm

Did you just quote a movie that has bad words in it? ***Naughty Naughty***
How you like them apples?

124   amy    
September 10th, 2008 at 3:35 pm

I thought that Jerry’s description of immature guys in college gossiping about who’s dating who, etc, . . .

fit so well with the description of some college girls.

The truth is there are mature and immature folks of both sexes in college. I think I have the privilege of knowing an unusual number who are mature.

Regarding Chris’s earlier comment (I think on the previous post) about women have false images of men – daytime-soap and romance novel images- I sympathize with what he is saying.

And many Christian romance novels (of which many Christian novels are to some degree) just make things worse. Especially as some of them delve into areas that shouldn’t be delved into – for example,in one, a woman in a difficult marriage starts meeting up with her old boyfriend from high school – gentle, thoughtful, perfect – and her meeting him in secret is never condemned. Rather, she’s kind of “commended” for not going all the way with him. The emotional adultery in the book is clear, and not condemned.

(BTW, If any of you are looking for a great book to read try Deception by Randy Alcorn.)

125   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 3:38 pm

What’s really funny about the Irish Calvinist and poor Ken, is that Ken is so hard trying to get his google juice back up when it comes to Rob.

126   amy    
September 10th, 2008 at 3:43 pm

Joe,
Whatever happened to your “Martinesque” investigation? You made a number of accusations in that that were potentially harmful if true. It seems to me like it would be wise to clear up the confusion that was left by your accusations.

Not asking you to bring it up if you don’t want. But as it is you threw out some pretty bad insinuations, for which you said you had proof, but for which you did not demonstrate that proof . . . and that really doesn’t seem like a cool thing to do to anyone.

IN short, it would seem best to either 1)apologize for the insinuations 2) demonstrate that they were true 3) explain why you plan to do neither.

127   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 3:47 pm

Um, I’m not all that sure I made any accusations. I said that anyone who wants to learn about Ken can do so. Call people in his area. Call his DOM (Director of Area Missions) and find out if the SBC considers his church to be an active church. There was another guy who made some accusations. I also said that Ken isn’t worth my time. I didn’t stalk him or do whatever John (I’m not hitting on her, I’m trying to act like her father) Chisham says. I attempted to get in touch with Ken because I believe he sinned against me and that attempted contact was rebuffed.
If you want to find out about Ken and his church it’s easy to do.

128   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 3:50 pm

What’s really funny about the Irish Calvinist and poor Ken, is that Ken is so hard trying to get his google juice back up when it comes to Rob.

What’s even funnier is that the stalwart Patrick Abendroth, this bastion of expository preaching, spent several weeks in 2005, expository preaching about “Wine or Welch’s; a Christian biblical response to Alchohol”.

Not saying that’s bad rather it just strikes me as odd.

129   Bo Diaz    
September 10th, 2008 at 3:54 pm

he spins them to mean something other than what they clearly say and have been recognized as saying by Christians throughout the ages.

Oh I just love when you silly protestants say things like this. If you are the member of a denomination that began or largely grew in the US then there are quite a few beliefs you hold as central and as the “plain meaning” of the scriptures that no Christian held until the last few hundred years.

Such central issues as tossing out the sacraments, infant baptism, the nature of baptism, and the nature of the Eucharist just to start things out.

In the nature of a goose/gander issue I’d suggest that if Pastor Boy is going to condemn Rob Bell on some sort of ethereal vote by the belief of Christians through the ages that he ex communicate himself first as an example .

130   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
September 10th, 2008 at 3:54 pm

Photobucket Image Hosting

“Martinesque???”

131   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 3:54 pm

Amy,
I would agree with Joe.(No, I am not coming to his defense, or being his amen corner.ha haha)
Seriously Amy do a little research. You will be amazed at what you find out. It is not hard research either or very time consuming. Start by looking up the Director of the Southern Baptist Convention where he lives and see what they tell you.
For more fun call the IRS and see what they tell you.
Yes I have done all this…..
You will find many interesting things in a short investigation:-)

132   Neil    
September 10th, 2008 at 3:56 pm

Of course, you will not get this at Granger, Mars Hill, (MI) or other seeker sensitive, post modern, emergent, and many now mainline churches because (another thread) they are trying to please man, whether on their board or in the pews or out in the community. – Pastorboy

How many cliche’s can ya fit in one sentence, not to mention the false dichotomies…

Neil

133   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 3:58 pm

Such central issues as tossing out the sacraments, infant baptism, the nature of baptism, and the nature of the Eucharist just to start things out.

Now Bo don’t go and get rational on us. This is the blogosphere after all!

134   Neil    
September 10th, 2008 at 4:04 pm

Jerry,

I thought the seven disctrinctions you made were spot on.

Neil

135   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 4:08 pm

Time for comic relief…

The blond is in the shower and asks his wife to pass the shampoo. She passes it over, he looks at it and says: “I can’t use this. It says “For dry hair” and my hair is all wet.”

136   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 4:16 pm

Eugene,
Do you have book of jokes sitting in front of you?

137   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 4:20 pm

No… … … :roll:

138   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 4:29 pm

Neil,

Jerry,

I thought the seven distinctions you made were spot on.

Neil

OMG! Someone read my OP!!! CYBI?

jerry

139   amy    
September 10th, 2008 at 5:16 pm

Joe, Erica,

Um, I’m not all that sure I made any accusations.

.

There are plenty in the “Ken Silva” thread.

And although you said you wouldn’t talk about what Ed told you online, well you said plenty. That that info that you did share come from someone other than Ed?

And then there’s the confusing thing about the phone call that Ken said couldn’t have happened as you described.

140   amy    
September 10th, 2008 at 5:18 pm

For more fun call the IRS and see what they tell you.
Yes I have done all this…..
You will find many interesting things in a short investigation:-)

Fun and a smiley face. Glee over someone’s negative whatever it is? Or are you just happy about something else at the moment?

141   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 5:33 pm

Amy,

Before you cast doubts on the topic why don’t you try to do as Joe and Erica stated? Make the calls check it out yourself then get back to us…

Yet, I bet you won’t… and you give some lame excuse that you are too busy…

Here’s a tip… take one hour from posting here and use it to make the calls…

Again, though get back to us and confirm that Joe and Erica are liars and that it all never happened….

At least try to do it before you cast more accusations against others without the facts.

iggy

142   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 5:34 pm

Amy,
The smiley faces are to show I am happy and I am not trying to be hateful since some people read everything I say in a mean tone.

143   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 5:43 pm

Well Amy, You can always call Ken Silva himself and ask him to clarify it.

144   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 6:08 pm

Friends,

I will not allow this perfectly wonderful dialogue to be confounded or irritated by references to my friend Pastor Ken Silva. He is not a topic for discussion in this thread; only Julie is. (And maybe Joe & Erica. Oh, and iggy too. But no one else. Except Ingrid. And Amy. But no one else. Well, Rick, I guess. And PB, but only a little.)

jerry

145   amy    
September 10th, 2008 at 6:09 pm

Okay, Erica.
Just want to say that I believe if someone “researched” any of us they could find someone to call who would say something negative. Something that we wouldn’t want to be made public.

I hesitate to be inclined to do any “research” about this simply because you seem so incredibly mean on the “Ken Silva” dialogue. This seems to be a very personal issue for you. I’m not sure I want to get in the middle of that.

I have also been thinking about what would be the right thing to do if for some reason I did decide I wanted to understand what was going on.

And the conclusion I came to is that
1) It would be best to invite KS to come here and explain the situation. I do think you should do that.
2)It might be helpful to invite Ed to come here and explain the situation.
3)I could e-mail KS and ask him about it.
4) If I was still left with questions Icould talk to Ingrid.
5) If I still had questions and some motivation that was good I might do the other things you have suggested. It would take me a long time to do that – I’ve never done anything like that before.

146   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 6:16 pm

Amy,
Your comment proves that you are missing the point. We’re not out looking for “negative” things on Ken. I was looking for a way to contact him because he had/has sinned against me and I wanted to talk to him about that. I called his immediate superior in the SBC denomination–something that Ken runs to to prove his authority, thus the Pastor/Teacher mumbo jumbo–and I was told that he is not considered an active church. That they are thinking about church planting in that area because his church is ineffective. Now, these were all easily obtained.
Ken’s entire edifice is a sham. That is my personal belief and I believe I can back it up. If you or Ken want to question my ability to back it up, knock your collective selfs out. Ken is not worth my time, and effort. If you want to defend him or look out for his best interest you’re going to have to do that with someone else because I’m not all that concerned about him.
Email Ken away. Have fun.

147   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 6:17 pm

As for #1, I’m no longer a contributor here, so I’m not inviting anyone. ;)

148   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 6:18 pm

Oh! and Ken has a blog where he can post his defense or thoughts or whatever they are to be called.

149   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 10th, 2008 at 6:30 pm

So.

What’s the definition of “100″, then?

150   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 6:44 pm

amy.

You just made my point… you would rather cast accusations against others and think ill of them and also look for the negative agaisnt those you disagree with than do any research that may prove your heroes are zeros…

iggy

151   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 7:15 pm

Jerry,

I think that though superficially Ingrid and Julie “sound” alike there is miles of difference between the two…

For one, Julie never called anyone names…

Again, about two years ago I would have agreed with Julie, but things do change…

As do styles… and right now that is the style that is relate-able… casual…

I still think one can be in style and in the will of God…

iggy

152   merry    
September 10th, 2008 at 7:36 pm

Julie, I read your original article a few weeks ago. I got it, I loved it, great job.

Everyone else, wow. That was ten minutes of my life I’ll never get back from reading all those comments. May I ask WHAT was the point of that? Are we really this bored? I’m sure Julie is a very interesting person, but really?? Do we all need to have such detailed opinions about someone we don’t even know personally?

Well, I have a ton of homework as usual. Peace out. :)

153   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 10th, 2008 at 7:57 pm

I call people names all the time.

154   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 8:12 pm

OK,

then I retract my statement and Julie is just like Ingrid in every way…

:wink:

iggy

155   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 9:01 pm

I call people names all the time.

Me too, though I usually filter them out before I hit “ENTER” (but not often enough to escape the search function)….

Sorry for the bizarre thread, Julie… (I almost called you “Jules”, since you gave me permission once upon a time, but I won’t push it… ;)

156   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 9:02 pm

Joe, Erica, Et.Al

Why would you do such a thing as spend your time stalking someone on the internet? What does it matter a hill of beans if Ken is an SBC pastor or not? Who cares if his church is a church or just a house meeting? He calls it a church so let it be!

I will use your own logic: If you have never been to CRBC, you have no right to criticize the Pastor (even though, like at Mars Hill, he has spoken and written and videotaped volumes)

I go with Jerry and Julie as to the post, repost, and original post. We need to do a better job as Pastors to connect with the needs of the congregation, but most importantly, we need to make sure that we are connecting them to God through our ministries, and that God is glorified in all that we do.

157   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 9:05 pm

Amy,
I have done all your steps including e-mailing Ken several times and asking very specific questions and never getting answers. I have asked the same questions in a public forum and never got answers so I decided to find out on my own what I wanted to know. Because I typically don’t believe people on the internet because I don’t know them. It is easy to believe Tony Jones is Tony Jones or Rob Bell is Rob Bell because I know them. Ken set up his on profile for himself and he was the only one that could prove he was who he said he is.
You are right, anyone can dig up anything on anyone. I am not trying to dig up dirt on Ken. I simply wanted to know if he who he says he is. I could tell you I was a doctor of a huge clinic and unless you researched it you would believe me right? Ken says he is a pastor with all these credentials and people listen and follow him without making sure what he is saying is true.
I have not found what he says to be true. And I would disagree with you; If you call someone who is suppose to be Ken’s supervisor, representing the convention. I would consider him to be a pretty reliable source.

158   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 9:09 pm

John Chisham,
Ken keeps putting his credentials up there for everyone to see, I was not checking his credentials I was trying to follow the Biblical guidelines of confrontation when sinned against. In the course of that process I came across a lot of facts that seem to contradict claims Ken makes.

159   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 9:12 pm

I am a semi-retired pastor who does not serve as a pastor in a church presently. Does that make me not a pastor? Ken never claimed to have a large church, but he is ordained as a pastor. I do not see the overall point about his small church.

I admit he sometimes uses his title to project his authority, but he has never indicated that he was the pastor of a large church. So where did he lie, specifically?

160   Phil Miller    http://www.veritasfellowship.blogspot.com
September 10th, 2008 at 9:14 pm

Why would you do such a thing as spend your time stalking someone on the internet? What does it matter a hill of beans if Ken is an SBC pastor or not? Who cares if his church is a church or just a house meeting? He calls it a church so let it be!

I think the only reason people care is that Ken has taken it upon himself to be the pastor police, and frankly, some of the stuff he posts needs to be called out for what it is. I don’t hold credentials within a denomination, but I’ve been around denominational politics enough to know that it’s generally not a good thing when one pastor in a denomination is attacking other pastors in that denomination.

The thing that is amazing to me, PB, is that you still seem to have this attitude of “Poor Ol’ Ken…those nasty Emergents keep on attacking him.” But yet you are completely blind to the fact that it is Ken who starts these battles. As far as I’m concerned any of the stuff that gets thrown at him is because of his own doing. That doesn’t mean I condone it all (i.e., the RA debacle), but it’s hard to feel compassion when a bully gets some measure of comeuppance.

161   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 9:23 pm

Pastor Boy,
To me it matters a lot. It is not being authentic or real. It is being dishonest. If Ken Silva is no longer with the southern Baptist convention then he needs to say that and not put on his website that he is affiliated with them. If he is a pastor of a small group of people that meet in his home then great say that. If you look at his page that is not how he presents himself.
To accept donations you have to have your ministry be a part of a church. Because the church has the EIN number.
There are a lot of things I presume about his church situation but I have no facts to back them up so I will keep them to myself.
I do know that he is not a part of the Southern Baptist convention like he says he is. That is being dishonest.
His church is probably a house church like you just said. I have a feeling you know the truth.
I just want Ken to be real. I will respect you for being real. I don’t respect people who are being dishonest.
My dad is a lot more conservative then I am. He is a hard core Calvinist. I love him to pieces because he knows what he believes and can back it up. I respect that. He is and lives by what he says.
My husband was a pastor for years. I could tell you about his churches I have nothing to hind. Numbers, how big your church is, or where you meet is not the issues. It is honesty and integrity.
I have a dear friend who is a pastor who has less then a hundred people in his church and works for the airlines full time as well. I respect him. I listen to him because he is real and authentic. Being dishonest does not bye you respect. That is why I struggle Ken.
I am not digging up dirt on him I am checking out to make sure he is credible. I would not let someone claiming to be a doctor do surgery on me without making sure he was in fact a doctor. But for some reason people can get online and claim they are a pastor and large amounts of people with follow them.
I can see why it will be so easy for the anti -Christ one day. We just believe what we hear.

162   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 9:23 pm

I have NEVER said anything about the size of Ken’s church. I’ve even defended him (on that point alone) here and other places. I never said he made claims about the size of his church. It matters one hill of beans whether or not he’s part of the SBC or not because he SAYS that he is. If he isn’t then he’s lying. How can this be that hard?

163   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 9:28 pm

Pastor Boy,
One more question for you and Rick.
Then my husband is technically still a pastor then right? He is an ordained ministry and we do bible studies together as a family and there is five in my family. Better yet he leads a house church that twelve people or more attend. So in your eyes I can still consider him a pastor of a church correct?
I don’t think size matters. I simply want to know in your mind if Ken can be considered a pastor and throw his weight around then can Joe?

164   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 9:28 pm

I am ordained Southern Baptist but I have pastored churches that were not. Being a Southern Baptist church is sometimes a nuance. If you give to the cooperative program, you can claim a level of affiliation.

165   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 9:31 pm

Erica – I do not believe pastors should “throw their weight around”. I have never used my ordination to claim any special authority. Yes, Joe serves as a pastor on some level. That calling is still upon him.

166   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 9:33 pm

I am ordained Southern Baptist but I have pastored churches that were not. Being a Southern Baptist church is sometimes a nuance. If you give to the cooperative program, you can claim a level of affiliation.

Not if they don’t claim you, Rick. I know how the SBC works, I’ve been in a few myself. The point is there is enough evidence to believe the man is lying. If you want to defend him, that’s fine. If you don’t believe there is enough evidence that’s fine too. The issue isn’t the size of Ken’s church, and it wouldn’t be about him being an SBC pastor except for the fact that he claims the title. I wouldn’t care if he was an Independent Fundamental, Full Gospel of Grace, Holiness, Baptist, Wesleyan, Methodistic, Lutheran, Charismatic, Pentecostal, Church. But if he claims that his church is part of the SBC, they should claim him, no?
I wonder if his church does give to the co-operative.

167   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 9:37 pm

I am not defending Ken.

168   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 9:39 pm

Yeah Rick, I thought about that after I hit submit. Could have nuanced that better. Either way, I believe there is ample evidence to support the fact that Ken has manipulated the truth many many many times to lend credence to his otherwise ridiculous statements.

169   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 9:45 pm

Rick,
I am not saying you throw your weight around and I am not a huge fan of the southern baptist convention either so you don’t have to defend yourself.
Let me ask you another question then. You say Joe is still a pastor at some level. Do you think it would be honest for Joe to give our church a name(our family church) and then set up an online ministry and call it a ministry of our church and accept donations?

170   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 9:50 pm

I can name several churches like that, including the Swaggarts, the Copelands, the Roberts, and many others. If the CRBC has a charter and membership than it is legitimate. The CRBC used to be part of the association so it was SBC at one time.

I have no idea what remains today. As far as my family church is concerned, I’ve had to remove my wife from membership due to insubordination! :lol:

171   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 9:56 pm

Rick,
You do make me laugh!! I run the show in this family so he would have a hard time kicking me off the membership role! ha ha ha I am just kidding seriously!

172   Joe C    http://joe4gzus.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 9:56 pm

172!!!!

173   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 10:00 pm

Rick,
See I would think that is dishonest. Or heck we all should do it. We all blog we could take donations while we blog. Maybe Ken is on to something here. (being sarcastic)
I don’t think it is being honest, I look at is a way to make money. I know the government has some flaws or it would not be so easy to get by with it.

174   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 10:00 pm

I tried to remove Erica once, but there went my Amen Choir.

175   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 10:02 pm

If the insubordination accusation wouldn’t stick, I could get her on being unequally yoked! :cool:

176   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 10:09 pm

Rick,
Do you have the codes for the smiley faces memorized? just wondering:lol:

177   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 10:10 pm

See i just tried it and it did not work! Rick you are setting me up for failure!!!

178   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 10:10 pm

You have to allow a space between the : for it to take. I only have a few memorized. :evil:

179   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 10:12 pm

Ok let me try it again.
:oops:

180   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 10:14 pm

See, you’re a genious! :roll:

181   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 10:14 pm

It worked!!!
Rick you are a genius! ;)

182   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 10:16 pm

I love discipling people!

:mrgreen:

183   andy    
September 10th, 2008 at 10:17 pm

Haha hilirious a thread about Bridget Jones,turnt into a thread about Ken

weird two threads

184   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 10th, 2008 at 10:19 pm

184!!!!!

185   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 10th, 2008 at 10:21 pm

185

186   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 10:25 pm

Rick,
You should get your wifes permission and start an online discipleship ministry and take donations for all the hard work you put into! Just an idea! 80

187   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 10th, 2008 at 10:25 pm

See that one did not work. The 80 that is…..

188   Joe C    http://joe4gzus.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 10:38 pm

189….

Oh wait…dangit.

189   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 10:48 pm

PB,

Why would you do such a thing as spend your time stalking someone on the internet? What does it matter a hill of beans if Ken is an SBC pastor or not? Who cares if his church is a church or just a house meeting? He calls it a church so let it be!

Who was stalking… Someone was offended as a brother in Christ and wanted to talk to the one who offended to reconcile… so he called (which was on a phone and not the Internet… though I suppose one could make calls from their computer) and talked to those who were overseers of Ken.

Now, who cares if Ken is SBC or not? Well if he is stating he is and is not… that shows his honesty and credibility… it also should be a concern as he is representing (or misrepresenting) a denomination. Also, he is misrepresenting himself as a SBC pastor and if he is not, he is a fraud.

I do agree that he can call his house meeting a church… in that though I was attacked over by Ken supporters at one time for calling my church plant of 8 people a church… so I see that Ken’s supporters will attack someone like me and overlook Ken who has 8 or less people and claims to be a SBC Pastor who has a “church”.

Really personally he can call it anything he pleases… but the SBC seems to not acknowledge his “church”… so he is not a valid “church” in the eye of the SBC.

Now I am starting a CMA church in my basement and they don’t know about it… I am a self proclaimed CMA pastor extraordinaire! So watch out… I am also starting a CMA Bible college in my living room… and a CMA baptismal in my bathroom.

iggy

190   amy    
September 10th, 2008 at 10:52 pm

I was surprised at your and Joe’s reaction to my comment. I didn’t mean to put you on the defensive. I thought that you would be surprised that I would even be willing to consider seeing what the problem with Ken is.

One of the things I meant by talking about being able to find something bad about practically anyone is that I would find it difficult personally to start trying to track down info about someone based on the fact that someone else has a personal issue with them. I understand that you do have a personal issue with Ken. Obviously I don’t know the whole situation and my concern is not really that you’re looking into Ken, but rather that I feel like I’ve overheard whispering in the library about someone and am left wondering what is really at the bottom of it; and also if it is my business at all.

I have and in fact now am researching someone because I am trying to figure out whether he is a cult leader. As I look into things I look for things that demonstrate that – because if he is a cult leader it could really affect a lot of people I know.

I don’t know what kind of things you’re talking about “knowing” about Ken – and that’s another reason I made the comment. I don’t necessarily need to know everyone’s “junk.” I certainly don’t want to.

I am also unsure in this situation as to whether or not some of the info you have gotten from Ed is info you’re actually sharing – and if that is the case I don’t think we should be talking about it.

Anyway sorry for unintentionally putting you on the defensive.

191   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 10:54 pm

I don’t necessarily need to know everyone’s “junk.” I certainly don’t want to.

LOL!

:lol:

That is because you seem to act like you already do!

:lol:

iggy

192   Scotty    http://scottysplace-scotty.blogspot.com/
September 10th, 2008 at 10:57 pm

Jerry, if it’s any consolation, I was with you on the OP also……couldn’t find the room to chime in!!

193   amy    
September 10th, 2008 at 11:11 pm

Sorry, Jerry. Didn’t want to stop the KS discussion without clarifying what I previously said to Joe and Erica.

194   Doug MacDonald    
September 11th, 2008 at 3:08 am

wow…….

195   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 11th, 2008 at 4:07 am

I think we missed a golden opportunity to discuss why people drop out of church and what can be done about it. Instead the two threads dealing with Julie’s article degenerated into analysis of character, general shallow disagreement and mud slinging matches. I really thought the people who frequent at this site could get a meaningful conversation going using Julie’s article as a starting point. I am disappointed and disillusioned.

196   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 5:47 am

“I think we missed a golden opportunity to discuss why people drop out of church and what can be done about it.”

Gene – here are some often overlooked reasons:

* The wandering heart of man
* Self centeredness
* The cares of this world
* Easily offended
* Preconceived ideas
* Need for excitement
* No strong relationships

And many times the cultural phenomenon in American culture that easily grows bored and demands new and fresh arises in the church, as well as being able to see and feel one’s own need at the expense of seeing and meeting the needs of others.

When all is said and done, the local church can do everything it can to keep people but we still must allow room for the ministry of the Spirit to call people to a place of worship and service.

197   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 11th, 2008 at 7:16 am

Gene – here are some often overlooked reasons:

* The wandering heart of man
* Self centeredness
* The cares of this world
* Easily offended
* Preconceived ideas
* Need for excitement
* No strong relationships

And some often touted reasons:

*the worship sucks
*the pastor doesn’t wear a suit
*the youth pastor has a myspace account
*the “Lord called me else where”
*I didn’t get my way
*They didn’t put the flag on stage for the 4th
*They removed the “Jones” memorial pew
*They removed all the pews

Oh wait…those are all the reasons people have left my church.

198   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 11th, 2008 at 7:38 am

OK, my last comment on Ken on this thread. Amy, I did not share any information from Ed.

199   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 11th, 2008 at 7:47 am

* Self centeredness

The following is my current opinion and should not be taken as my solidified stand on seeker sensitive churches… (note that I am serving in one)
The seeker sensitive movement set out to counter the self centeredness of the church of its time. Unfortunately some forms of it morphed into the same old self centeredness where the believers are entertained but stay complacent and ignorant to the Lord’s call for total surrender. I think this has partly come about because churches that were never called to be “seeker sensitive” copied the methods, in the hope of achieving the successes of the original, without truly understanding the heart of it. So today we have pastors trying to be what they were never called to be and in trying to be what they think is relevant, cool, hip (insert some of Julie’s descriptions here) they miss the point by a mile. It is not the relevance/coolness/hipness that is the problem but rather the copying of someone elses methods and even looks in the hope of success.

Perhaps we should ask ourselves what success is?

200   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 8:07 am

Amy,
I am not on the defensive at all. I am sorry it came across that way. I was just answering your questions.
My sources are:
The IRS
and The SBC
and a few online web pages.(which I don’t give my credit too)
I don’t know who ED is.

201   John Hughes    
September 11th, 2008 at 8:21 am

Perhaps we should ask ourselves what success is?

to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God?

202   John Hughes    
September 11th, 2008 at 8:31 am

Again I come back to Proverbs:

For lack of wood the fire goes out, And where there is no whisperer, contention quiets down.

If just **one** of the antagonists in this thread had stopped rebutting the other this downer of a thread would have died out.

**BE THE ONE**

Why do we (myself included) believe we **have** to justify ourselves to the nth degree? Was God glorified? Was the unity of the body strengthened or weakened? Did we show the world our love?

We are all the same: Calvinists; semi-Pelegians : – ) , emergents, Arminians. Few of us have a “generous orthodoxy” when it starts to get personal. Even those who coined the phrase.

**BE THE ONE**

203   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 8:37 am
Perhaps we should ask ourselves what success is?

to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God?

Amen, John.

204   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 8:40 am

And “Amen” on being the one.

“Finally, brothers, rejoice. Aim for restoration, comfort one another, agree with one another, live in peace; and the God of love and peace will be with you” (II Corin. 13.11 ESV).

205   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 8:43 am

* The wandering heart of man
* Self centeredness
* The cares of this world
* Easily offended
* Preconceived ideas
* Need for excitement
* No strong relationships

All of these things are focussed on man, which is the problem. What I am saying is that I agree with Rick (except for the whole Notre Dame thingy) on his assessment; but I also believe the major problem is that we have forgotten what the church is really all about, and that is to bring glory to God in all that we do!

It is our self centerdness, our need of man-pleasing, the cares of this world, etc. That get in the way of worship. If we would make church about God first, others second, and not about us, then we would be a lot smaller, but we would be glorifying God and honoring Him first. When it comes to the Christian faith, the first command is the first command: Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength” and as Jesus reinterated: Seek first the kingdom of God AND his righteousness and all these things will be added unto you.”

206   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 11th, 2008 at 8:57 am

People leave the church because they are more focused on church making them happy than anything else. I think the OP actually supports that.

207   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 11th, 2008 at 9:12 am

but I also believe the major problem is that we have forgotten what the church is really all about, and that is to bring glory to God in all that we do!

Ouch and Amen!

I would go one futher and say that we have forgotten what life is really all about, and that is to bring glory to God in all we do. That is the core of our calling. But the lure of success and man’s praises has perverted our efforts that we do in God’s name. I think God need to save His church from Christians(us).

208   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 9:18 am

Pastor Boy,
I can not believe I am about to say this, but I agree with you.
If you believe what you say is true then I can not figure out why you thought Julie’s posts was so good.

209   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 9:59 am

PB,
I agree with most of your statement, but am not sure about this statement:

If we would make church about God first, others second, and not about us, then we would be a lot smaller…

Why would we be a lot smaller? Our church is all about the things you wrote, and we are growing at an alarming rate.

210   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 11th, 2008 at 10:16 am

Sometimes people leave the church because God seems secondary and entertainment, schedule, habit, and babysitting (of all ages) seems primary.

One reason I’m not sure I agree with the assessment on a number of blogs that it was about my needs not being met was because I’m not used to going to a church for my needs (beyond the connection to people as a touchpoint each week). Small churches don’t have programs or ways to “meet needs” in a general sense.

In answer to a few blogs that said I offered no solutions, I decided I would attempt to do so, or at least flesh out the list of I wrote about. The first was on age segregation, which was a good thing for me to write because it made me delve deeper into why that seems a problem.

In it, I note a moment where I realized my home church wasn’t “meeting my needs” but that I continued to go anyway — the connection to a real body of believers was there. I have seen people come to that church and leave because we did not have enough programs for their kids or enough youth activities, or these other things that people believe are necessary in order to “do” church. It was a bit of a revelation when I spoke in front of the church and said, bluntly, that I didn’t come because there were programs or things there to meet my needs, but because of the people at that church and the realization that we were all in love with Christ.

I have lots of needs like anyone, but I’m not really in the habit of looking elsewhere to have them met (beyond my parents, or family, for example). In a rural and isolated existence, there just aren’t as many opportunities to church hop for need-meeting purposes. A person truly does not — when there are few people and systems in place to “meet my needs” — get used to waiting around or actively looking for needs to be met. You have to deal with it on your own, out here, and that carries across into the church: you go for reasons other than having felt needs being met.

Of course, the biggest and truest need is to be part of a body of believers in worship of God, and that need is definitely met. Which, in some churches with excessive extraneous programs, gets lost. It’s a pity when the main and really only need gets shifted.

I do believe that people leave not out of needs not being met but because of a genuine feeling that something is amiss. You can’t disregard that. Sometimes it comes in forms that manifest in ways that are seemingly minor or surface (i.e. appearance gets tied to falseness, etc.) merely as a way of trying to put a finger on something that isn’t sitting right in your spirit. In this way, you have to start somewhere to get to the bottom of what it is that is going on inside. This can be a distraction for someone only seeing the surface-ness of the charge, instead of what it stems from.

211   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 10:23 am

Julie,
Lets start from scratch. Will you tell me what the church is from your prospective and what it should be about.
If you walked into the perfect church(I don’t think one exsists but lets pretend it does) what would it look like to you?

212   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 11th, 2008 at 10:26 am

Mark 2:15-17 (NIV)
15While Jesus was having dinner at Levi’s house, many tax collectors and “sinners” were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. 16When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the “sinners” and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: “Why does he eat with tax collectors and ’sinners’?”
17On hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

Emphasis mine.

Why is it that many sinners followed Jesus? Why is it that most sinners run when they hear the word “church”?

Is it perhaps that our righteousness, relevance, hipness, whateverness is all about ourselves and not about the love and grace that Jesus radiated? I think so.

213   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 10:27 am

Agreed, Julie. Another reason could be that the direction the church body is heading is not the same direction the Lord is leading me. Chris touched on this in #197 in a semi-critical tone. But the truth is that I am responsible to the Lord for the direction He is leading me. And if the church I am attending is being led in another direction, I am free to join a body (or plant) that is more on point with the Lord’s leading in my own life.

214   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 10:29 am

Erica asked, “If you walked into the perfect church…”

My answer, “…I would ruin it by my imperfection.”

;)

215   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 11th, 2008 at 10:41 am

Chris touched on this in #197 in a semi-critical tone.

Actually semi-critical and semi-sad.

While I believe that the ultimate goal is worshipping God only I don’t think it’s possible. That’s why I have a hard time with statements like “It’s not about us.” or “That church is popular because (any variation of Seeker, Emergent).

If it’s only about God then why all the verses that talk about “giving life more abundantly” or “all these things will be added” etc…?

I’ve struggled with this issue for many years. I don’t think the church should be so open that anything goes but I don’t think the church should be so closed that the lost don’t want to be any part of it.

Where do you draw the line.

In one thread we’ve got people saying the Pastor has to give people “meat”. But in another thread we’ve got people saying that it’s not the job of the church to meet the needs of people. So who gets to decide the needs? Or what needs are most important?

216   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 10:53 am

Different churches reach different people. We live in a pretty affluent area. The church we left (on good terms) was spending more on the building and on programs. They are reaching people in that community who would never step into a little local chapel with hard wood pews.

We are now meeting with a more missional body renting a church building in a college town reaching college and high school kids who are unchurched and would never step foot into the aforementioned church.

217   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 10:55 am

(I know I used “never.”
And you should never use “never.”)

218   Doug MacDonald    
September 11th, 2008 at 11:41 am

If just **one** of the antagonists in this thread had stopped rebutting the other this downer of a thread would have died out.

**BE THE ONE**

Why do we (myself included) believe we **have** to justify ourselves to the nth degree? Was God glorified? Was the unity of the body strengthened or weakened? Did we show the world our love?

We are all the same: Calvinists; semi-Pelegians : – ) , emergents, Arminians. Few of us have a “generous orthodoxy” when it starts to get personal. Even those who coined the phrase.

**BE THE ONE**

Amen to that……

219   amy    
September 11th, 2008 at 11:48 am

I think that every church should have a smelly, drunk old man walk into the middle of the congregation, sit on a lovely old pew or an ugly new chair and ask, loudly, in the middle of the sermon:

“Am I going to hell? I murdered a lady. I need to know, am I going to hell?”

Something similar to this happened in a church I was in and I learned from my own reaction and contrasting actions of others who I really was and part of what I really valued in a church.

I wish there were some way I could duplicate that scenario in the first few weeks of any church I might attend. Reactions of people would speak far louder than whatever words they were speaking.

220   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 11th, 2008 at 12:13 pm

But the truth is that I am responsible to the Lord for the direction He is leading me.

True. This would be a springboard concept for the discussion on the various “flavors” of church, I suppose.

But I also need to be aware that that can be easy for me to use as an excuse. Which I don’t want to do.

I’ve been exposed to numerous people say “I left the church because the pastor didn’t follow the spirit’s leading” (I’ve come to see this as a common complaint for pentecostal/charismatic people leaving their church when it really comes down to conflict with the pastor and power issues). That can be code for “he wasn’t Benny Hinn enough” or, well, whatever.

So I actually find myself leaning more toward thinking “Julie, just stick it out. Stay in that pew. Give it a chance. Don’t be so picky.” I don’t want to be an “easy leaver.” But then there are the moments where it really hits the heart hard and I absolutely know I need to get up and walk out.

There are times, over the past 10-12 years as an independent adult, that I would have abandoned the church I go to for various surface reasons or in a pout of some sort (like the grumpy older fellow constantly telling me I was playing the piano too loud or too soft, never happy but only able to complain — that has made me want to leave more than a few times and say “fine — you play the piano for a decade and see how you like it”). But they were not valid; I see that now.

I can’t say enough how the moment of hearing “you can’t just show up with a Bible and expect kids to listen” struck me when I walked out of the church I wrote about.

Frankly, it would be easy to go to that church; I would be relatively anonymous and I’m a kind of introverted loner which finds that attractive. But I could not continue there. It is not good to feed that anonymity non-accountability no-real-connection tendency that lies inside of me.

221   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 12:45 pm

“You can’t just show up with a Bible and expect kids to listen”
I completely agree with this statement. You can’t.
For instance, a couple of months Joe and I took the children to the local fairgrounds. We got out of our car and walked the few hundred feet to the fair. On our way there was a street preacher with his bible open preaching and others standing around holding signs. He was shouting “You all are condemned not me but you!” and on and on. Do you know what happened? The crowd walked to the other side of the street away from him. Joe and I were annoyed. What was he accomplishing? Nothing. Was he loving those people? Absolutely not. Everyone was trying to get away.
If you expect to get teens respect by showing them a bible it won’t happen. They should meet Jesus in you. You simply love them first with your actions. By your love is how you get the oppurtunity to share Jesus and the bible with someone.

222   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 11th, 2008 at 12:52 pm

Lol Amy, situations like that are nightmares for pastors. When I was a kid our church was on the main road of a town called Parys between Johannesburg and Cape Town. From time to time a homeless person would wander into a service, usually in the evening probably looking for some protection from the elements. They would then sing louder than the rest of the congregation and always out of tune and during the sermon they would comment loudly on almost every point. Without fail they would respond to the altar call. My dad, who was the pastor, became quite an expert handling those situations. I remember praying with quite a few smelly, drunk old men. Never had a murderer though.

223   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 12:57 pm

“On our way there was a street preacher with his bible open preaching and others standing around holding signs.”

Wow, Erica, I didn’t realize that was you guys walking by! :)

224   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 1:05 pm

Rick,
That was you? :D
Ha ha You did not hear what we said to did you? ha ha J/K

225   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 1:17 pm

Not to pick a fight, Erica, but the way I understood Julia’s uneasiness about that quote was that it took place in a church where relationships should already exist.

The preacher you saw reminds me of Bullhorn Man. The condemnation message on those you don’t even know is going to be ineffective.

However, within a church family context, where (hopefully) you already have a relationship with the kids, God’s Word can be captivating and illuminating and life-saving, regardless of the age of those listening. The Spirit of God gives life to the Word in the hearts of the hearers.

Shalom

226   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 1:18 pm

“Bullhorn Man” should actually be “Bullhorn Guy” from your pastor’s Nooma series…which I love.

227   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 11th, 2008 at 1:37 pm

Nathanael,
What about the visitors? What about the fact that most kids just don’t sit all that long anymore in any facet of their life? They aren’t used to sitting through a lesson. I’m not saying that’s good but it is what it is.

228   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 11th, 2008 at 1:38 pm

Another question I have is why does that statement put it over the top? I assume Julie doesn’t have kids so if she doesn’t want her kids to be taught in that way, they won’t be. What made that statement the deal breaker?

229   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 1:44 pm

Nathanael,
You can say just about anything to me. I am not easily offended at all. :) I am pretty easy going and willing to listen to just about anything I might not agree but I will listen.
Maybe we have a different perspective on church. Your right, Christian young men and women, if you show up with the bible you could probably get them to listen but I am not sure that is all they need.
My husband was a youth pastor in the inner city at one point in his career. A bible simply would not get those kids to show up it was because they loved us because we loved them. A friend of ours is a youth pastor. He came to our church in Maryland when there was only three teens coming. They came on a regular basis because they were Christians and there families were members of our church. The church had been in existence for six years at this point and there was three teens. He was there two years and it went from three to two hundred plus. You know why? Because he and his wife loved the community in which we lived. They loved teenagers. He made church a place were they were accepted. He started a skate park and coffee house in the church but if you came he had one rule you had to listen to the praise band for a half hour and a teaching time for a half hour. Realistically what drew most of the teens to the church was the coffee house and skate part and Scott’s (the youth pastors) love for them. Hundreds of teens came to know the Lord. It was Scott showing any of them the bible that got them there it was him creating an environment that fit their needs that brought them. It was him loving them and accepting them for were they were at in life.

In regards to the comment that pastor made, I would still say you would be hard pressed to even get Christian teenagers to show up simply because of the bible. I grew up in a pretty hard core Baptist church. I was a Christian. Do you know why I went to church besides because I had to. My youth pastor and his wife were phenominal. I could talk to them about things I could not talk to my parents about. They never judged me, they loved me. By their love for me and me seeing God in them is what made me want to know God more. That is why I started wanting more of God and His word. To this day, I think God brought them into my life so I would want to know Him more.

230   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 11th, 2008 at 1:46 pm

With the potential for a firestorm.

While Mark Driscoll has some strong opinions about woman and their roles for the most part I think he balances reaching a culture and preaching the “whole counsel of God” better than anybody I’ve ever seen.

Thoughts? He seems to fit in line with this discussion if not disregard it.

231   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 11th, 2008 at 1:47 pm

You can say just about anything to me. I am not easily offended at all. :) I am pretty easy going and willing to listen to just about anything I might not agree but I will listen.

I would hope so…You are married to Joe! Just a little joke. Love ya Joe!

232   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 11th, 2008 at 1:47 pm

By the way Nathanael,
I absolutely agree with this statement,

However, within a church family context, where (hopefully) you already have a relationship with the kids, God’s Word can be captivating and illuminating and life-saving, regardless of the age of those listening. The Spirit of God gives life to the Word in the hearts of the hearers.

my question is how do you get there? What I mean is, do you think it is ok to use other “hooks” if you will to get to the Bible study?

234   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 11th, 2008 at 1:57 pm

John,
I would agree. I wouldn’t nuance it to just seeker friendly churches. Many fundy churches are all about them too, just in a different way.

235   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 1:57 pm

Of course it’s okay to use “hooks.” And I agree wholeheartedly with Erica’s points of relationships opening the door.

I was a youth pastor for two years and loved the kids. And they loved me.

I was given some curriculums by some well-meaning adults. Unfortunately, as I studied them, I realized that these “exercises” would not engage the kids at all.

So I would pray for them and for me and delve into the Word. My lessons, for the most part, were directly from what the Lord was teaching me from His Word. I tried to gear the lessons so that they were interactive, so I wasn’t talking at them. Often times the discussion would take a path of its own as the kids talked to each other while I sat and listened.

Young people are very aware if you are loving them with a motive. I’m glad Erica found youth pastors who loved her…period. That’s the gospel.

That’s not my contention. The street preacher at the fair was just not a fair comparison to the point (in my opinion) that Julie was making.

236   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 1:59 pm

Chris,
Ha ha ha
I honestly was going to write that but I wanted to save my husband the wrath of some commenter’s :lol:
He is my straight shooter. I use to be offended easily but being married to him has changed my life in many ways so now I can smile way through just about anything. ;)

237   John Hughes    
September 11th, 2008 at 2:00 pm

Pardon me. The “link” button did not do what I thought it would do. See corrected post:

Joe: People leave the church because they are more focused on church making them happy than anything else.

OK, here is the “About Us” web page for a wildly “successful” seeker friendly mega church about 15 minutes down the street from us.

http://www.grace.tv/about_grace/

“It’s All About You” — literally. There is not one mention of God, let alone Jesus. It’s YOU, this Church, YOU, family, YOU, community, YOU, Faith (in what is not clear), YOU, grace, events, activities, YOU, and YOU.

Now when you get to their values page it’s a different story:

http://www.grace.tv/about_grace/vision_and_values/

Does the literal “It’s All About You” welcome page justify the church’s Vision Page? Is this “bait and switch” justifiable / necessary? To me this is the epitome of the problem with the seeker friendly paradigm which is indistinguishable from secular marketing techniques.

238   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 2:01 pm

Pray about it, write down what you desire and need in a fellowship, and then go visiting. If you visit a church you do not like immediately, sit through the service and leave in peace. Keep visiting – keep praying.

Just thank God you live in the post-industrial revolution era and you have a choice due to mobility. Keep praying.

239   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 2:03 pm

Nathaniel,
Fair enough. I guess I am confused as to what point she is trying to make than or why what the pastor said, that was a deal breaker to her, was so wrong. Can you answer that?
Maybe I am wrong, but you seem to agree that it is not simply the bible that teens need.

240   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 2:14 pm

I obviously can’t answer for my sister. Perhaps it was the straw that broke the camels back. Perhaps it was the insinuation that God’s Word needs my help. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps.

:)

I agree that preaching minus loving is majorly ineffective. I agree that relationships are an effective way of spreading the gospel. I just thought the comparison to the preacher at the fair was extreme and not on par.

I know the phrase “lifestyle evangelism” has been beat up. But my life needs to be conducive to the message I’m speaking.

On my website and at the end of my emails and on the back of my car, I have a phrase that will be very familiar to you. “Love Wins.” That is my watchword. (or watchwords)

Shalom

241   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 11th, 2008 at 2:30 pm

I obviously can’t answer for my sister.

Thank you for not speaking for me. I appreciate that.

All discussion aside of what kids will or will not sit through (some will, some won’t — it’s too big a group to speak for) is not the point. The point is this, pared down, in a way that makes it very difficult to extract because of the way we are used to approaching church:

The Bible is not enough.

We are now used to thinking: The Bible plus entertainment. The Bible plus my clever program. The Bible plus a special event. The Bible plus.

I realize this will now launch various comments on the “Bible only!!!” crowd, but what I would then say is this:

The Bible, and the power of the Holy Spirit to make God’s word real to all ages, is not enough.

You see, God needs a little help tweaking that with some games and prizes. And a cool youth center. Because youth and kids are used to that today and what can you do about it but play along? Because the Bible and the power of the Spirit that cuts across ages and tradition and culture, is just not enough.

But it is.

Let’s use youth for the example.

Some youth are looking for fun, and that’s it, and they’ll take it in a religious format or something else. They aren’t going to stick around once the games and fun are done in life; they’ll move on. You can package the gospel in the smallest, sweetest, most fun bites possible, but it’s only an appetizer.

People have a way of cutting through BS, particularly youth, and it has been my experience as I am at events where the leaders are going wild on stage and chucking CD’s out in the audience and having inflatable games or whatever, that as I sit and begin talking to a young person on a level that isn’t condescending or patronizing…more young people come over. And then more. And pretty soon we move to another place and get into real discussion on how Christ is necessary and real in their life.

But the party is still going on in the background, and kids are having a blast, and there you go.

One unusual side-effect of my blog is the number of younger people who have emailed me and asked serious questions. Most I’ve answered privately, but I did feature one series of emails on the site. This young woman was absolutely sick of the entertainment and Bible-light place she’d been assigned to in church based on her age.

The Bible is enough for those wanting Christ. It isn’t enough for those wanting free pizza.

The moment you start to say it isn’t enough, you begin implying God’s power and Spirit aren’t quite up to the task, and that the Bible can’t cut across culture and tradition and stand on its own.

I think writers on this site would be loathe to affirm the latter, since it is frequently discussed here the “empty” traditions held up by others.

You may not think you are saying that, but you are heading down that road. It is less “what will God do” to “what can we do to make this work.”

242   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 2:33 pm

That is on the back of my van as well. I love that phrase and believe it to be true. I take it you like Rob Bell?
I used the street preacher illustration because whoever that church was that sent those people to the street corner believe you can show up with a bible and expect people to listen.
It seems to me that Julie disagrees when the pastor said
“You can’t just show up with a Bible and expect kids to listen.”
The point of me sharing the street preacher story was because I truly believe that the church sent those people to the street corner because they believe
“You can show up with a bible and expect people to listen!”
Obviously it did not work because they went to the other side of the street.

243   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 11th, 2008 at 2:36 pm

A street preacher and what I am saying is apples and oranges.

If this is not clear, the conversation is counter-productive and moot.

244   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 2:47 pm

Erica,
I thank the Lord for Rob. I pray for him and his family every time I hear him preach.
You must be so excited his sabbatical is over.

245   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 2:47 pm

Julie,
“The moment you start to say it isn’t enough, you begin implying God’s power and Spirit aren’t quite up to the task, and that the Bible can’t cut across culture and tradition and stand on its own.”
Sure it could, but God did not intend for it to stand on its own. I truly believe that. I believe nothing is out of His control or by a accident, He is the creator of all. He created those games, that pizza, those s blow up toys. He created all that stuff to be used to glorify God. He created you to be at that event, that day, to minister to those teens. We can not limit God. He is the creator of everything. Nothing happens by chance. God uses relationships, people, His creation ect, ect to reach people. He does not just use the bible.
If God just wanted us to have the bible then that is all he would have provided for us but he created us with lots of other things to use for His glory and honor. He even created us to have fun!

246   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 11th, 2008 at 2:54 pm

I think, Erica, we’re communicating on different levels and wavelengths.

Thank you for your time.

247   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 2:57 pm

Nathaniel,
I am glad his Sabbatical is over, it is nice having him back. It was a great summer full of “interesting speakers.” :-) I learned a lot.

248   Sandman    
September 11th, 2008 at 3:06 pm

Here we are now. Enterain us!

That verse from Nirvana may oversimplify things, but that seems to be the mindset people are catering to now more than that old adage, “People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.”

I can’t say I understand everyone’s POV completely, so I’ll humbly state my own reference point with a question: What is wrong with having something expected of you?

When I was a student in K-12, and later at Spartanland, I expected I needed to go to class prepared to listen, learn, take notes, ask questions, what have you. I wasn’t doing the instructors a favor by showing up; they were getting paid regardless.

I come to work prepared to do the job for which I was hired. I don’t show up thinking what a big favor I’m doing the company just by being there. No one is irreplaceable.

I don’t think I’m doing God a favor by coming to church, praying or studying the Bible. But when I go, I believe there are things that are expected of me or I should expect from myself.

If you’re at a church service or event, and you can’t expect “church type stuff” or matters of a spiritual nature will be at the center and not a tangent, something is really wrong. Lack of leadership; lowered expectations; lack of discipline (not talking corporal punishment); taking “be all things to all people” to being overly accommodating to people and making them feel too comfortable where they are… I don’t know. What I do know is that the mindset expressed in the line of that Nirvana song seems to say “by virtue of my presence, you owe me.” And some churches are yielding to that.

Joe, I don’t want to say enticements, incentives, or “hooks” as you say, are inherently bad, but I don’t think we want it to turn into one of those free trips to some exotic location to be trapped there for the duration for a high-pressure time-share presentation.

249   John Hughes    
September 11th, 2008 at 3:06 pm

I didn’t know God was the primary cause of pizza! Wow. That must be why I like it so much.

Wow Erica, your thoughts in #246 when taken to their logical conclusion are a minefield of jumbled theological concepts to places where I just don’t have the energy to go. But thank you for being so honest with your beliefs.

1st thought: what did Christian youth do before pizza and why did it take God 6000 years to come up with it? Now go discuss yourselves.

2nd Thought. Why do I think of XXXChurch when I think of the blow up toys God supposidely created?

(I’m stopping now) :-)

250   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 3:09 pm

#222

Erica, I completely disagree.

You can open up a Bible and have the kids listen. You can open air preach without people walking or running away. By the power of the Holy Spirit, I have experienced both.

In our small church, our kids are taught straight from the Bible, and they sit in church during the preaching and they get it! We have Sunday school, the curriculum is the Bible, and the skilled teachers are able to communicate to the kids at their level straight from the Bible. The children have a project table at the back of the church, where they work on bulletins that are for their age group that represent the scripture lesson for the day. Our teens are taught straight from the Bible, we have the occasional pizza party but that is after the Bible study. Our Bible study is on Friday night, it is well attended, and then afterward they go out and hang out at a Christian club.

As to open air preaching, I know your ‘pastor’ is against it, but it is effective. More people hear the Gospel in one good open air session than an average church or small group reaches in a year. Sometimes the emphasis is all wrong; and the tone is perceived as ugly. But I believe the most loving thing a person can do is to present the Gospel in the open air, or one to one.

One of the main reasons I dislike Rob Bell is because of Bullhorn guy. He is discounting the importance of the great commission (which is a commandment to make disciples, the first step to making a disciple is that they are born again and the must hear the Gospel to be converted) for the great commandment. He believes that it is love to make a person comfortable (feeding them, clothing them, teaching them) while they are on their way to hell.

Oh yeah..Jesus died for everybody, Right Rob?

I understand why he believes that evangelism isn’t important, I guess.

251   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 3:30 pm

“Oh yeah..Jesus died for everybody”

Yes, He did John. :)

252   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 3:31 pm

One of the main reasons I dislike Rob Bell is because of Bullhorn guy. He is discounting the importance of the great commission (which is a commandment to make disciples, the first step to making a disciple is that they are born again and the must hear the Gospel to be converted) for the great commandment.

Which is a demonstration of your willful ignorance of Bell and what he and his church believe.

Just because they disagree with method (i.e. being a “jerk for Christ”) doesn’t mean that they disagree with the need to make disciples…

253   John Hughes    
September 11th, 2008 at 3:36 pm

Hey off topic. But I live in Pearland in Houston about 20 miles from where the eye of the hurricane is going to pass through. Say a few prayers for us for tomorrow night!

254   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 3:41 pm

The Bible is enough for those wanting Christ. It isn’t enough for those wanting free pizza.

The moment you start to say it isn’t enough, you begin implying God’s power and Spirit aren’t quite up to the task, and that the Bible can’t cut across culture and tradition and stand on its own.

I agree that the Bible is enough.

As for “hooks” (whether with kids or adults), I have no problem with being “seeker sensible” (to steal Mark Driscoll’s jargon) – meaning that I’m all for tearing down abiblical traditions, jettisoning “Chrisianese”, etc. if these things are standing in the way of the unbeliever and belief. In fact, it would be rather fair to say that many of these traditions are simply “the Bible plus” in an institutionalized format.

With kids, I have no problems with having a pizza fellowship night, but if “fellowship” is all the group exists for, then it’s missing out on the completeness of the gospel.

255   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 3:42 pm

But I live in Pearland in Houston about 20 miles from where the eye of the hurricane is going to pass through. Say a few prayers for us for tomorrow night!

Will do. My grandmother is living in Seabrook, and my folks were supposed to fly down to Houston tomorrow morning, but have now canceled…

256   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
“You can’t just show up with a Bible and expect kids to listen”

I completely agree with this statement. You can’t.

I completely disagree.

While I agree with you that the “bullhorn guy” model of being a “jerk for Christ” is a royal loser of a method of witnessing, I can tell you that my son belongs to a small accountability group of guys from different churches who come together each week with a parent who comes with just a Bible.

You can show up with just a Bible, but if you’re not prepared to go to the mat and become an integral part of a person’s life, you’re just wasting air…

257   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 3:47 pm

Jesus gave out fish sandwiches to his congregation. He also served wine to another gathering. Money in the fish’s mouth? A great catch of fish for Peter?

Hooks are fine. The problem is that often the teaching seems to get watered down or compromised. It is a balance.

258   jose    
September 11th, 2008 at 3:52 pm

Chris,
Are you saying that open air preaching guy is a ” jerk for christ “?
Maybe I am not understanding this.

259   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 4:00 pm

PB,

so you think being a jerk for Jesus is good?

You oughta love this guy then…

iggy

260   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 11th, 2008 at 4:15 pm

John Hughes-1st thought: what did Christian youth do before pizza and why did it take God 6000 years to come up with it? Now go discuss yourselves.

Back in on the discussion: I kinda agree with everybody. Is that possible? Or does it need to be either/or?

John I guess I would counter with; what did God do with people prior to Guttenberg turning his alcohol machine into a printing press?

261   John Hughes    
September 11th, 2008 at 4:28 pm

John I guess I would counter with; what did God do with people prior to Guttenberg turning his alcohol machine into a printing press?

He had a bunch of guys with quills and scrolls. It annoyed the ducks but got the job done.

A printing press is a machine. Not a marketing methodology/hook like pizza. Apples and Oranges (or steel and pepperoni in this case). They are not the same thing.

262   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 11th, 2008 at 4:29 pm

what did God do with people prior to Guttenberg turning his alcohol machine into a printing press?

He gave them large, brick/stone ovens in which to make pizza.

263   John Hughes    
September 11th, 2008 at 4:30 pm

Chris L,

Your grandmother should probably evacuate that area. The storm surge could very well be a problem there. We are too far inland (about 20 miles) so we just have to contend with the wind, rain and local flooding. (and a dog who has to sit on my head in the bed when it rains).

264   nc    
September 11th, 2008 at 4:34 pm

You don’t like Rob Bell because of Bullhorn guy?

He’s discounting the Great Commission because he takes issue with a particular method that he hasn’t see be effective or he’s had to pastorally deal with the damaging aftermath of some hamhanded crazy people?

You see, PB, it’s the broad sweeping pronouncements about what people are doing, etc. that just don’t make sense.

If you want to justify your good experiences with open air, then talk about how it’s different for you, but at least acknowledge that that image of Bell’s resonates deeply for people–because, sadly, it’s an accurate description of something you, fortunately, have not experienced or perpetuated, hopefully.

When I think of Bullhorn Guy I don’t think of a sincere outdoor presentation of the gospel–as you state is your practice…

I think of the crazy guys with signs in Santa Monica who preach at people with some gospel mixed up with crazy conspiracy theories and end of the world scenarios…condemning and damning people they know nothing about instead of offering the hope of God’s redemption…

Which is what happens more often than not anymore…

I suspect THAT is who Bell takes issue with…

265   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 4:35 pm

To me we are discussing
“How do we get teens to listen?”
I think we need more then just the bible others think we need only the bible.
Am I on track with everyone?

266   nc    
September 11th, 2008 at 4:36 pm

hmmm….

would you rather hook people with pizza or hook people like the puritans that put people in stocks and performed corporal punishment on adults for not coming to church?

Those naughty, man-centered puritans…
motivating people to be at church like that…

;)

267   nc    
September 11th, 2008 at 4:37 pm

Julie,

you’re funny…
thanks for the laugh…

those ovens look amazing by the way…

268   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 4:38 pm

NC,
“I think of the crazy guys with signs in Santa Monica who preach at people with some gospel mixed up with crazy conspiracy theories and end of the world scenarios…condemning and damning people they know nothing about instead of offering the hope of God’s redemption…”
THANK YOU!
That is exactly what happen at the fair that day. Joe and I both said “where is the hope?” It was all how everyone was condemned but them.

269   jose    
September 11th, 2008 at 4:43 pm

Maybe is the mental picture you guys have of the guy standing on a corner sending everyone to hell that’s bothering you. But we do open air preaching and the reception that we get is awesome. We don’t stand there and yell at people. We start singing and people stop and listen thus allowing us to talk to them on a one-one level. Sometimes I feel some generalized the bullhorn guy. No everyone is like you picture it to be.

270   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 4:46 pm

Pastor Boy,
I love how you know what my church does.
In fact, one of the reasons I go to Mars Hill is because I have always had a passion for people and evangelism.
I had NEVER found a church until I attended Mars that reaches out to the unchurched like they do.
Rob does believe in evangelism. In fact, just recently he talked about his biggest pet peeve was when people say they “are missionaries” because he believes we all are missionaries.
I am glad Open air evangelism works for you. It does not work for everyone. I find there to be more effective ways. However, believe it or not, thirteen years ago I was on a open air evangelism team. I frequently went to Brooklyn, NY and stood in parks and shared the gospel.
I know this will really surprise you but Joe did too :o
But hey if it works for you knock yourself out!

271   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 4:48 pm

John,
Thanks for sharing, I will be praying for you guys.

272   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 4:49 pm

And we don’t use a bullhorn.

Actually, amplification is better, because people can hear you without having to raise your voice to be heard (which sounds like yelling!!)

I don’t like the parody Rob Bell made of the Bullhorn guy, like the guy Iggy shows as a parody of an open air preacher, who is simply preaching against sodomy, not for the Gospel. I don’t like that guy either!

It just bothers me that he paints open air preachers with such a broad stroke. It bothers me that he emphasizes good work ‘love’ over preaching the Gospel. It seems he thinks preaching the Gospel is hateful!

273   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 4:50 pm

Erica,

I was just in Manhatten preaching the Gospel-

Union Square Park…..wow what a trip!

274   amy    
September 11th, 2008 at 5:14 pm

“you can’t just show up with a Bible and expect kids to listen”

I’ve seen it happen over a period of 4 years in one church. The kids were in the “Sunday School” after the singing, etc. I went with my kids for a few times because we were new, they were small, etc.

The ages of my kids were about 4-6. I think, but am not sure, that the class included kids about ages 3-9.

The teacher had a Bible. And I kept thinking, “Isn’t she going to use visuals? Etc, etc. The kids listened. Attentively.The kids participated in answering questions.

The girl teaching was I think some type of early education major. She had good relationships with many (probably all of the kids) outside of class, during the week.

They had a short play time at the end of the lesson.

Now I wasn’t in that class all the time, but I think what I saw what was the normal class procedure.

Then there’s another situation when a man who had taught on the college level was asked to teach 3rd and 4th grade Sunday School.

And he taught the kids how to study the Bible on their own during that class. No visuals. No videos. No skits. An amazing # of “My kid is enjoying that class so much” comments.

My own kids and I have sat and read and talked about Bible passages, learned scripture, for half-an hour to 45 minute slots on a regular basis. Many parents do this with their own kids or in small groups.

275   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 5:14 pm

Pastor Boy,
You said
“It bothers me that he emphasizes good work ‘love’ over preaching the Gospel. It seems he thinks preaching the Gospel is hateful!”
Exegete this passage for me. I seriously want to know what it means. Not a trick question. I am thinking through what you said.
Luke 10
25On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

26″What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

27He answered: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[c]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[d]”

28″You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”

29But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

30In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. 35The next day he took out two silver coins[e] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

36″Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

37The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”
Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

276   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 11th, 2008 at 5:18 pm

Can I do the exegesis here? Or should I send it in an e-mail?

277   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 5:24 pm

Whatever you would like to do. I am flexible. As long as you don’t care if I ask questions.

278   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 11th, 2008 at 5:28 pm

He gave them large, brick/stone ovens in which to make pizza.

That was classic…literally!

A printing press is a machine. Not a marketing methodology/hook like pizza. Apples and Oranges (or steel and pepperoni in this case). They are not the same thing.

Trust me when I say that I’m the last guy that would defend the consumerist mentality to Church. So in a sense I’m agreeing that the bible is enough. However I’m also not saying that just reading straight from the bible with no commentary or life application is enough either. To me it’s all about maximizing an opportunity to allow people to encounter God through his word.

This consumer mind set is so entrenched in American Evangelicalism however that when you begin to suggest that God could/will work, in many ways more powerfully, when we remove the fluff it’s almost considered blasphemy. I’ve know many a person who requires a (insert latest/greatest pastor here) study that it is rather obvious that we’ve missed the forest for the trees when comes to encountering God.

We’ve settled for hearing other peoples experiences with God rather than seeking our own encounters with the Great I Am.

279   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 5:44 pm

Amy,
I would agree with you.
I love my evening bible readings with the girls. In fact, we are about to start doing it together as a family at dinner time and I look forward to it.
But that is not all we do. They get to play in there day as well:-)

280   amy    
September 11th, 2008 at 6:09 pm

In ministry, all of us take this wonderful and incredible gift that we’ve been given, God’s Word, and replace it with something that is a poor substitute.

For me, it’s not “scripture only” in ministry that is the key or what is commanded, but rather “scripture in use” in ministry. And making sure that if something that could be viewed as “creative” is involved, the entertainment doesn’t distract from the message or distort in any way who God actually is.

Ministry can involve simply reading God’s word with someone else. Sharing a scripture from that Word, in word, or in action, or both. Discussing the Word. Praying together. Serving together.

Summing up my outside “ministry” this year, it looks like this:

Being involved in, supporting a Bible dedication in another country. You wouldn’t have to convince those people, who are reading the Bible for the first time in their own language, that they need to “get excited” about the Bible.

Writing and performing scripture-based puppet shows overseas.

Writing and illustrating a book which shows scripture being put to use in one specific culture and will hopefully help the people reading it apply the scriptures to their life.

Coaching a girl’s sport’s team, which includes having devotions with them. In reality the whole scenario, not just the devos, has been learning about God and what he wants in attitudes and relationships. We’ve especially learned how to forgive ill-tempered adults.

IGod’s Spirit should be right their in the midst of what we’re doing – whether it’s cooking dinner for one’s family or changing a diaper, or helping a neighbor till their garden. I really don’t think the study and application of God’s Word can be separated from the fact that His Spirit is with us always in whatever we’re doing, if we belong to Him. He can be within us, filling us and empowering us, or within us, grieved.

281   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 11th, 2008 at 6:46 pm

Amy,
I must say you did a better job of summing up what I was trying to say then I did :-)

282   Nick    http://www.ruminatingrants.wordpress.com
September 11th, 2008 at 11:29 pm

I realize, I run the risk of Julie castigating me here but I find her comment to be utter nonsense. It sounds nice, it makes a great sound bite. It will preach nicely. I’m sure John Chisham loves it. So does Fred Phelps. Go visit his site, he has Bible verses next to all of his hateful stuff. It’s the same argument that the non-musical COC people use.
I would suggest that none of them actually believe it and neither does Julie. Good grief, look at her comments here. The conversation about her post was moving along and then she showed up. I realize she took great offense to parts of it, but then her responses go completely against this Bible she says is her everything. Soft answers turn away wrath and all that.
Some guy who says they’ve never met taught her all about Christian evangelical guys? What does that say about her Dad? What does that say about the men in her little down home church?
Then she all but calls Erica stupid? Really and truly are these the actions of a person who is all about just Bible?
I’m not going to bring up every part of her post but you cannot say something as inflammatory as she did and then get mad when people hone in on it saying, “Well, that isn’t the focus of the post.” The guy that she walked out on and openly shellacked in her post doesn’t get to talk about what was said next.
Then Chris Lyons apologizes to her! That was amazing. For what? I think this site is guilty of team politics. I know that isn’t popular but come on, if Ken wrote what Julie wrote he’d be burnt at the stake. OK, that last part was an exaggeration.
Oh and Joe, let it go man. You and the girl are not going to get along. Maybe you wronged her in previous life? I had hoped you would just let it slide. She’s not going to see things you’re way. It’s like wrestling with a pig, the only thing that happens is you both get muddy. LET IT GO. Why do you even comment here?
John Chisham, is it true you told someone to shove it? Someone sent me an email today telling me that. I’m investigating. :)

283   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 11th, 2008 at 11:38 pm

Nick,
Do I know you? Are you the Ryan that comments on my blog? As for letting it go, you’re right I probably should have. There came a point where I was just commenting to get a rise and that probably isn’t all that beneficial. Why I comment here is an interesting question.

284   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 11th, 2008 at 11:51 pm

So does Fred Phelps.

I am also a Nazi.

285   Erica Martino    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 12th, 2008 at 12:03 am

Nick,
You are amazing. I am not good at articulation at all. You just summed everything I have been saying to Joe over the past two days up so beautifully.
As Julie was threatening me to stop yesterday, I was laughing and telling Joe, all she wants to tell me is how stupid I am. She should just say it. I know I have horrible grammar and spelling. It does not define me. I backed off because I refuse to be as condescending as she is.
So today she finally got it out, she thinks I am stupid.
I even asked Joe why he bothers commenting here.
You and I must think the same way only you articulate what you are thinking a whole lot better. That must mean you are smart!:-)

286   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 12:52 am

Are you saying that open air preaching guy is a ” jerk for christ “?

Most of what I’ve seen (in terms of open air preaching – including videos of John C), yup

Your grandmother should probably evacuate that area.

She has, but prayers are definitely needed. My grandfather died last year, and the house they lived in is where they’ve been for several decades…

Julie,

you’re funny…

Exactly – I find much of Julie’s writing incredibly funny (realizing that I find Dennis Miller quite funny, as well, in the same vein).

I don’t like the parody Rob Bell made of the Bullhorn guy

I don’t think it was a parody, John – the guy he showed is pretty much the guy I walked past for 3 years at Purdue on a daily basis. In fact, Rob’s bullhorn guy looked a little laid-back compared to Brother Max…

Then Chris Lyons apologizes to her! That was amazing. For what?

Let’s see – probably because it was in line with the mission of the site…

So does Fred Phelps.

I am also a Nazi.

Yeah – Phelps is the Godwin of the Christian Blogosphere…

287   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 7:24 am

I have come to a more refined view of Bell’s Bullhorn Guy. I am now viewing it charitably that Bell’s criticism is leveled much more at the tone rather than the method.

What if you and a friend were visiting a couple that was living together and you began to speak of Christ to them. As you were speaking your friend keeps interrupting and confronting them about their sin of living together in harsh terms. So while you might agree with your friends view, his tone and manner was counterproductive to what you were sharing.

That would be what many bullhorn guys are doing.

288   Erica Martino    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 12th, 2008 at 7:39 am

Rick,
I would say Rob is not a fan of the method.
I wonder how productive it is to lead someone in a prayer and leave. Where is the follow up. Where is the relationship?

289   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 7:53 am

There are many testimonies of people being saved by a tract. Where is the relationship in that? I was saved watching television. Where is the relationship or follow-up in that? It is myopic to limit God (as you noted earlier) to any method.

If your description of Bel;l’s view is accurate, I return to my previous view that Bell exhibits a form of evangelistic hubris. (they must do it my way)

What relationship is there in community evangelism meetings? As God was dealing with me right before I got saved I saw some bumper stickers that pushed me forward. I saw a Jesus statue in a cemetary. I heard the song “I Want to go to the Sun” live by Peter Frampton in Radio City Music Hall and the Spirit made that meaningful in my journey to Christ. And I was high on hallucinagens at the time.

God can and does use all methods, it’s the tone that should be watched.

290   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 7:57 am

Not to mention that the Braodawy play “Godspell” was central to my conversion as well. And that was written by an unsaved Jew named Schwartz.

291   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 7:58 am

God can and does use all methods, it’s the tone that should be watched.

So true!

Thank you to all who turned the tone of this thread around.

292   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 8:05 am

Jerry – there is a good post. What is evangelism and what are the methods and what are the essentials to provide the greatest effectiveness.

293   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 8:27 am

I am now viewing it charitably that Bell’s criticism is leveled much more at the tone rather than the method.

There was so much in that video that was disturbing not just the method. A few highlights:

1) The guy uses his company printer to make fliers for his “mission”

2) He walks by people in need several times. And does nothing.

3) He interacts with no one! During his entire “mission”. No co-workers, no family, no friends. Why?

4) This was an actual event that Rob witnessed. The bullhorn outside the concert that is.

5) Several times when he’s walking he walks to the other side or walks with his eyes down.

So while some immediately look at the fact that Rob pointed out the bullhorn guy as being the problem. It was more about how he lives all of his life and not just on the method of open air preaching.

294   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 8:30 am

I will give extra credit points to anyone who can identify the author of this song.

Father, hear thy children’s call
Humbly at thy feet we fall
Prodigals confessing all
We beseech thee, hear us!

We thy call have disobeyed
Into paths of sin have strayed
And repentence have delayed
We beseech thee, hear us!

Come sing about Love!
That made us first to be
Come sing about Love!
That made the stone and tree
Come sing about Love!
That draws us lovingly
We beseech thee, hear us!

Sick! We come come to thee for cure
Guilty! We seek thy mercy sure
Evil! We long to be made pure
We beseech thee, hear us!
Blind! We pray that we may see
Bound! We pray to be made free
Stained! We pray for sanctity
We beseech thee, hear us!

Come sing about Love!
That made us first to be
Come sing about Love!
That made the stone and tree
Come sing about Love!
That draws us lovingly
We beseech thee, hear us!

By the gracious saving call
Spoken tenderly to all
Who have shared man’s guilt and fall
We beseech thee, hear us!
By the love that longs to bless
Pitying our sore distress
Leading us to holiness
We beseech thee, hear us!

Grant us all from earth to rise
And to strain with eager eyes
Towards the promised Heavenly prize
We beseech thee, hear us!

Come sing about Love!
That made us first to be
Come sing about Love!
That made the stone and tree
Come sing about Love!
That draws us lovingly
We beseech thee, hear us!

295   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 8:35 am

Thomas Pollock?

296   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 8:39 am

Do I get bonus points for knowing that it was in “GodSpell”?

297   Nathanael    http://www.borrowedbreath.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 8:45 am

I was going to guess William Gadsby. But if Chris is right (which he usually is) I’m guessing Mr. Schwartz did not use any Gadsby hymns in his production.

298   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 8:46 am

It seems to be an adaptation by Stephen Schwartz of the original hymn “Father, hear Thy children’s call” by Thomas B. Pollock writen for the Godspell musical.

299   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 8:48 am

Hey this research thing is made quite easy by Google. :)
Perhaps we can notify Ken Silva. :D

300   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 8:50 am

Hey Nick,

Why don’t you come to my house and ask me personally. I would love to show you some evidence.

301   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 8:51 am

Who’s Info Is It Anyway – The site where the points does’nt matter. :mrgreen:

302   Eugene Roberts    http://eugeneroberts.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 8:54 am

Oops, I meant the site where the planks doesn’t matter. :lol:

303   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 9:00 am

My point in that song is that it was written by a unsaved Jew named Stephen Schwartz and that God used it to bring me to Christ.

Evangelism Happens!

304   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 9:07 am

Rick,
Evangelism happens in all sorts of ways, but what was the final straw?

I mean, what was said, preached, what did you read? I know, Christ was drawing you to Himself. But what was it you heard or read that allowed you to respond to Christ with knowledge?

I am just curious. For me, it was the law, the knowledge of sin that made me understand what Christ did for me. It was also the first time I heard that He requires more than being a baptized, confirmed, member in good standing of the church.

305   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
September 12th, 2008 at 9:11 am

I haven’t read through all these comments because, well, I’ve been avoiding it, but I when see something like this, I feel compelled to respond:

As to open air preaching, I know your ‘pastor’ is against it, but it is effective. More people hear the Gospel in one good open air session than an average church or small group reaches in a year. Sometimes the emphasis is all wrong; and the tone is perceived as ugly. But I believe the most loving thing a person can do is to present the Gospel in the open air, or one to one.

If it were just a matter of people “hearing the Gospel” I believe America would truly be a nation of Christians by now. We have more Christian radio and TV stations than any other nation in the world.

I believe a lot of people have “heard the Gospel” (I don’t even like using that term because it distills the Gospel to simply be words), but they haven’t seen the Gospel demonstrated to them. They have heard people yelling on street corners, at football games, and other things, but what they haven’t seen is people willing to serve them and love them. And don’t tell me that simply telling them is loving them. Try telling your wife you love her when you don’t spend any time with her. She won’t and she shouldn’t buy it.

The fact is that a lot of Christians don’t really love non-Christians. They see them as nuisance, really, and what they really want is for them to become just like them. They want non-Christians to admit they’re wrong, and meanwhile Christians still maintain that they are right about everything. I think that if Christians actually served in humility for a while some of the walls that non-Christians have put up would naturally come down.

306   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 12th, 2008 at 9:23 am

Hey Nick,

Why don’t you come to my house and ask me personally. I would love to show you some evidence.

Ah, the grace of a pastor boy

307   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 9:26 am

Phil, I agree and I disagree.

You are setting up a false dichotomy. 90% of the stuff on TV isn’t the Gospel. And, as you later state, it is just talking. (It is also a mass appeal for money, which is a turn-off) We also have more access to the scripture, more freedom to choose a church, attend a Bible study, etc. than any place else in the world. Why are people not Christians? Because God has not drawn them, they are hard of heart, slow to respond. It is not because of lack of depth of relationships.

Now, would it not be pragmatism to say that open air preaching does not appeal to your sensibilities so it must not work, therefore it is ineffective? It depends on what you measure as success. To me, success is when people hear the Gospel and have the opportunity to obey it. I don’t lead them in a prayer and put a notch on my belt because now they are ’saved’. Only God does the saving. But we are called to preach, and yes, live the Gospel. We can do so in the context of relationship, or out of the context of a relationship through tracts and through open air preaching (though, in open air, the most fundamental of relationships is struck up)

And by the way, when it comes to things that are of the Spirit (as your boy says, everything is spiritual) Christians are right. Non-Christians are controlled by their flesh, they cannot discern spiritual things. True Christians want to see people saved so they can look more like Christ. I don’t want anyone to look like me. I am a dolt who sticks his foot in his mouth frequently. But how dare you say I do not love non-Christians? I spend most of my time with them in places they enjoy!

308   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 9:27 am

# 307

Hey Joe, what does that mean?

309   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 12th, 2008 at 9:27 am

John, it means that your response seemed a little less than grace-filled.

310   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 9:30 am

How so? I was offering for Nick to come over to my home so I could show him some evidence

Since when is hospitality not grace filled?

Joe, I think you are projecting. Maybe you have had a bad home invitation experience. I mean, I have my wife’s apple and rhubarb crisp, coffee, and other pleasantries!

311   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 9:31 am

I still think Julie’s post was extraordinary.

And what does then number 100 mean, anyway?

312   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 12th, 2008 at 9:31 am

Excellent, If I ever get to your neck of the woods you can get all that together and we’ll have a pleasant time I’m sure.

Nick,
Yes, John did say that. It’s somewhere here in the comment sections.

313   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 9:38 am

Can we all agree that God can use anything he chooses to bring people to himself?

That would save a lot of the semantics of these type of arguments.

Just a thought…

I’m going back to my newspaper, listening to Paddy Casey, and enjoying my cup of Java (iced).

314   Bo Diaz    
September 12th, 2008 at 9:40 am

Why are people not Christians? Because God has not drawn them, they are hard of heart, slow to respond. It is not because of lack of depth of relationships.

The shallowness of Calvinism is on display again. I don’t need to do more than repeat the same phrases over and over again loudly in public, if people don’t respond its not because I’m out of touch and an utter failure at connecting with people, its because God wants them to go to hell.

315   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
September 12th, 2008 at 9:43 am

Why are people not Christians? Because God has not drawn them, they are hard of heart, slow to respond. It is not because of lack of depth of relationships.

How convenient – just blame God. It’s obviously His fault, not ours.

You somehow seem to think that open air preaching has some sort of special calling from God. Like it’s one of the preferred ways. I think that a good case could be made that open air preaching and teaching was a preferred method in the first century for many pragmatic reasons. First, most people were illiterate, and having someone get up and talk to a crowd was the quickest way to get information out quickly. Secondly, there was big movement in Greek culture built around the importance of rhetoric, and this had actually made its way into Jewish communities. It wasn’t uncommon for itinerant philosophers to go from town to town sharing new ideas in a public square. Actually many of Paul’s letters were probably meant to be read aloud in this fashion.

Now compare that to today. Generally the only people who stand on street corners and speak publicly are street preachers or fringe political activists, and most people consider them crazy. So I’m not saying that God can’t somehow work through this because He is gracious, but I don’t see that it needs to be a normal way the Gospel is communicated. It’s just not the primary way people receive information today, at least in Western cultures.

316   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 9:44 am

Bo,

God doesn’t want them to go to Hell, that is why he sent Jesus.

He does not want you to go either, Bo. Simply repent by confessing your sin, and forsaking it, and place your trust in Christ. He will give you a new heart and a new understanding. You will have new desires, and a new spirit that will guide you.

317   Bo Diaz    
September 12th, 2008 at 9:48 am

He does not want you to go either, Bo. Simply repent by confessing your sin, and forsaking it, and place your trust in Christ. He will give you a new heart and a new understanding. You will have new desires, and a new spirit that will guide you.

Says the guy earning his way to heaven.

318   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 12th, 2008 at 9:49 am

Sins like…oh nevermind that wouldn’t be very grace filled either

319   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 9:51 am

John actually in your case I’m really glad that you don’t do relational evangelism. Open Air is probably the best way that God can use you.

320   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 9:58 am

Bo and Chris,

If I had to earn my way to heaven, I wouldn’t have a chance. Thats why I need God’s grace more than any man.

But you can take and insult me and mock me all that you want, but please, do not push away Christ. Do not refuse to respond to His grace. I am pleading with you, don’t consider the idiot messenger, consider your sin and what Christ has done to purchase you, to redeem you and make You His own. I plead with you to repent and trust Christ!

321   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 12th, 2008 at 10:00 am

LOL, Chris you Pagan. I knew you weren’t a real Christian.

322   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 10:01 am

Chris,

I do not know what that means, but I do know that I am very effective, by God’s grace, doing both. I have many people right now I am spending a lot of time with, whom I have presented the truth of Jesus, who just are not ready. I am developing relationships with them, loving them, being a Christian in front of them.

Please pray for my Muslim friend, My Jewish friend, and the number of Hindu friends I am spending time with right now that they may come to a knowledge of the Savior.

323   Bo Diaz    
September 12th, 2008 at 10:05 am

PB,
At this point the kingdom of God is best served by you doing as little damage as possible rather than as much good as possible. Your flawed and damaging theology treats God’s creations and image bearers as less than God’s creations and image bearers. You do violence to both the word of God and individuals who God died to save.

And you may pay lip service to grace whenever you’re called on it, but your actions and conduct speak otherwise.

324   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 10:05 am

John,

A few things:

1) I don’t have a problem with Open Air preaching, at all. I rather enjoy watching somebody who does it well.

2) I wasn’t mocking you. I sincerely believe that God uses in us what we are good and comfortable doing. It appears that you are more comfortable with Open Air preaching.

3) I’ve done the whole “turn or burn” theology for more years than I care to remember. I’m in a much more settled theology of “I ask God to save me every day”.

Hope that clears up any fear that you may have for my salvation.

325   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 10:17 am

Bo,

You don’t know me, so don’t pretend that you do. I pray that you and your imago dei may one day be saved.

Chris,

I am sorry that you were included in that last post in that way, It looked as though was responding to both of you, but the second post was what I was writing to you in reality alone. The first post was for Bo. I hit the submit before I proof read.

326   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 10:20 am

And Chris,

I don’t believe in turn or burn. That produces fear filled converts. I am looking more for a contrition, because God will not turn a contrite sinner away. I believe God desires tear filled converts, those who have an awareness of sin, and have a sorrow that leads to repentance.

The burning part is what motivates me. I don’t want anyone to spend one minute in Hell. Thats why I warn people.

327   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 10:22 am

PB – I believe experience driven theology is dangerous, however experience considered theology can be a temporing influence on how we interpret Scripture.

I was more convinced that Jesus was the Savior and God is the flesh than I ever was convinced of my sin. I knew I was a sinner, but I felt that life was hollow and without real purpose until I came to believe in Christ.

The law stuff, that would not have influenced me as it did you. And that is the point, God can and does use whatever He desires. I know people who wre drawn by “Jesus Christ Superstar” and were later converted. I have np problem with street preaching as long as it lifts up Jesus and not the sin of unsuspecting people.

“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ” certainly doesn’t dilineate sin against the backdrop of the Mosaic law. I will always have a difficult time with Calvinists who insist on some Biblical script while on the other hand they profess that the elect will be saved and the non-elect aren’t offered salvation.

We Arminians have the theology that necessitates a conversation about message and method. Calvinism is just going through the motions.

328   Bo Diaz    
September 12th, 2008 at 10:23 am

You don’t know me, so don’t pretend that you do. I pray that you and your imago dei may one day be saved.

Ah the hypocrisy. I don’t know you well enough to evaluate your fruit (despite reading your own words that you’ve posted for everyone with an internet connection to read) yet you know me well enough to evaluate the state of my salvation.

Oh, and then you treat me like garbage while doing it.

You look far more like Christ’s enemies than Christ.

329   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 10:25 am

So, Rick

Is what you are saying is you didn’t hear or read any words about the love of Christ for you? I am just curious.

And by the way, the hyper-calvinism you refer to is not my modus operandi.

For Notre Dame fans, that means I am not a hyper calvinist. :)

330   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 10:26 am

OK guys, we veering again. I pronounce you both saved.

331   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 10:28 am

I don’t believe in turn or burn. That produces fear filled converts. I am looking more for a contrition, because God will not turn a contrite sinner away.

John,

This is where I think we ALL can agree.

Can I suggest that you don’t know Bo either so your pronouncement of “seek God” was probably equally as offensive to him as his statement was to you?

332   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 10:29 am

PB – I am not judging you, I am suggesting that we all take a little wider look at methodology and toneology.

BTW – Ingrid suggested some of us became almost “incontinent” when we disagreed with her obsession with Miley Cyrus. So in the future, if you feel your emotions rise during a thread, you can ask for and receive an “incontinent” break!

333   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 10:30 am

Sorry Bo you posted as I did. Also not trying to rally to your defense. I’m sure you’re quite capable.

334   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 10:30 am

Hey Bo,

No offense, but since I don’t know you, I must make the worst case scenario assumption. If you are a human being that is breathing, I must tell you about Christ. If you are a Christian, you will understand that. If you are not, you may or may not appreciate it.

So again, I pray your imago dei (image of God for Notre Dame and Yankee fans) is saved, and you are made into the image of Christ!

335   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 10:32 am

Wow!

336- the new 100

336   Bo Diaz    
September 12th, 2008 at 10:35 am

PB,
I pray that you use this as an example to modify your behavior, especially towards those who need the gospel. Unfortunately, you are more offensive than the gospel.

337   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 10:37 am

Bo – perhaps PB’s methodology needs some tweeking, but I admire his boldness and concern for the lost. :)

338   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 10:37 am

Bo,

Thanks for your opinion.

339   Bo Diaz    
September 12th, 2008 at 10:41 am

Bo – perhaps PB’s methodology needs some tweeking, but I admire his boldness and concern for the lost.

I also admire my daughter’s desire to take care of lightning bugs, unfortunately that desire almost always ends up killing them.

340   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
September 12th, 2008 at 10:49 am

I also admire my daughter’s desire to take care of lightning bugs, unfortunately that desire almost always ends up killing them.

God’s fault as well…

Darn unrepentant bugs!

341   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 10:57 am

OK – I’m becoming a little incontinent.

Isn’t calling your enemies “incontinent” a veiled way to curse? The subjcet “matter” has been used extensively in the swearing world! :lol:

342   pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 11:08 am

incontinent: (def)

The condition of all Notre Dame Football fans and New York Yankee Fans!

:)

343   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 12th, 2008 at 11:37 am

Pastor Boy,
Where do you see Jesus using this method of evangelism in the gospels?
“God doesn’t want them to go to Hell, that is why he sent Jesus.”
I thought he sent Jesus because He loved us. I must be missing something…
I have never seen it referenced in the NT that God sent Jesus to the cross so we can avoid Hell…

344   Robbo    
September 12th, 2008 at 11:37 am

I’m back.

What’s the definition of “100?, then?

I have no power or authority of any sort on this site and I couldn’t hack a website even if you brought it to me on a silver plate with a small axe on the side. I just wanted the comments on this thread to end.

Adios, amigos

345   nc    
September 12th, 2008 at 11:53 am

RE: you “must” assume the worst case scenario.

So much for faith in the absolute, sovereignty of God…

346   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 12:03 pm

“I have never seen it referenced in the NT that God sent Jesus to the cross so we can avoid Hell…”

John 3:16 among others. God loved us and because of that love saved those who believed from hell.

Praise His name!

The croos DID something, it wasn’t just an emotioanl expression of love. God’s love was the catalyst, however the cross was the colossal reflection of that love.

Salvation itself implies deliverance from among other things – hell!

347   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 12th, 2008 at 12:25 pm

John 3 16 says, For God so loved the World that He gave his only son that whoever believed on Him might not perish but have eternal life.

The focus is on having eternal life with God.

348   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 12:33 pm

Gaining eternal life and avoiding eternal death are embedded in the same act. The cross. They are inseparable. Eternal life cannot be gained with a rescue from eternal death. We were all on the road to eternal death.

349   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 12th, 2008 at 12:33 pm

Rick,
I find it fascinating that the greek word for Parish is Apollumi. Which literally means to destroy.
I am confused, how does that refer to Hell?

350   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 12:41 pm

If you are opening a Bell teaching on hell count me out. Supplant “lake of fire” for hell if indeed you wish, but whatever term or reality is your preference we were delivered from something bad before we could enjoy something good.

351   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 12th, 2008 at 12:46 pm

Matthew 18:14
In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should be lost.(or Apollumi to be destroyed)
Luke 13:3
I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish(again the greek word Apollumi)
Luke 21:18
But not a hair of your head will perish.(same greek word)
John 10:28
I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. (or no one can destroy them)
John 11:50
50You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.”(be destroyed)
John 17:12
12While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled.
Acts 5:37
After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered.
2 Thessalonian s 2:10
and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

I think you get the jist. Why are you saving them from Hell? The word seems to imply they will be destroyed.
Where do we get that those who choose not follow Christ will burn Hell?

352   nc    
September 12th, 2008 at 12:51 pm

interesting…

Erica,

are you saying that the way we understand that verse is grounded in a hermeneutic move (i.e. a decision of the interpreter ) instead of something inherently obvious in the language?

353   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 12:51 pm

There are many verses that teach a “forever” and “day and night” reality of the unsaved, and the rich man in “hell” would certainly have desire the obliteration theology and not the justice he seemed to be enduring.

354   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 12th, 2008 at 12:58 pm

Rick,
I like you. I consider us internet friends. And I find your assertion that my belief about what happens after we die to be a Bell teaching. Erica (I wonder if this makes me her Amen choir?) brings up some excellent questions. I believe what I believe because I believe it not because some balding guy who happens to be an anointed teacher teaches it.

355   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 12th, 2008 at 12:59 pm

Should say I find that to be insulting

356   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 1:04 pm

I have listened to Bell’s several part teaching on the word “hell”. He emasculates the eternal aspect from it and claims it refers to earthly predicaments.

If what you are saying is that you disagree with that, then OK. Does Bell believe in the “destruction” of unbelievers and not the continuing conscousness? I thought I herd him say that the lake of fire could be interchanged with what normally passes as a definition of hell.

357   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 12th, 2008 at 1:07 pm

Rick,
My point is that I am not here to talk about what Rob believes. I am here to talk about what I believe.

358   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 1:15 pm

Fine. I believe there is an eternal place of justice and judgment for conscious souls who are without Christ and die in their sins. The noun used for such a place is unimportant.

And to the original point, I believe the cross is the sacrifice which through faith rescues a condemned soul from such a destiny and gives to that soul the destiny of God’s eternal presence.

359   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 12th, 2008 at 1:18 pm

Ok, Great. Now we’re getting somewhere. You and I would disagree on the statement,

The noun used for such a place is unimportant.

I think the words Jesus chose to use are very very important. He could have chosen any word, and he chose that word for a reason.
To the original point of Erica’s question, I believe the eternal, relationship with Christ is the message.

360   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 1:23 pm

I do not believe the message can be sectioned. John the Baptist surely warned of a coming retribution while Jesus said if He was lifted up He would draw all men to Himself. I would suggest the message is profound and multi-aspected. Of course Jesus is the core.

I would agree that some over emphasize the judgment part to the detriment of the lifting up Jesus part.

361   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 12th, 2008 at 1:25 pm

I am not at all going to a Rob Bell teaching it is simple word studies.
Why focus on the punishment? What about John 10:10?
Psalm 6:4 Turn, O LORD, and deliver me; save me because of your unfailing love.
Psalm 13:5 ut I trust in your unfailing love; my heart rejoices in your salvation.
Psalm 25:7 Remember not the sins of my youth and my rebellious ways; according to your love remember me, for you are good, O LORD.
Proverbs 10:12 Hatred stirs up dissension, but love covers over all wrongs.
Lam 3:22 Because of the LORD’s great love we are not consumed, for his compassions never fail.

This is all about Gods love Gods love Gods love

John 13:34 A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.
John 15:9 As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love.
John 15:10 If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father’s commands and remain in his love.
John 15:12 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you
John 15;13 Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.
Romans 5:5
And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us.
Romans 5:8
But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
Check this out:
Romans 8:36-38
You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. 10But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness. 11And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.
I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. 19The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed. 20For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21that[i] the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.

22We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he already has? 25But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.

Did Paul have it all wrong? He talks about hope, what we have in Christ. He talks about what a life with Christ looks like.
Why do we think evangelism has anything to do with what we don’t have in Christ or our punishment for not having Christ?

362   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 12th, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Joe,
BTW, because of my great stupidity I need you to be my “amen choir”:-)

363   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 1:31 pm

Erica – I agree that our gospel is one of hope. But we cannot eject the theology of “hell” either.

The verses you quote are great, but warning can be used in evangelism, not like a club though.

Rev.20:7-8

I hope we agree on the basics. I have to go now so do not believe for a second you have won any argument because I do not respond. I have the complete truth in all things and I am parsing it out to deserving saints and sinners. :lol:

364   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 12th, 2008 at 1:40 pm

Rick,
I did win! ha ha ha :twisted:

365   Julie    http://www.loneprairie.net
September 12th, 2008 at 2:51 pm

Some guy who says they’ve never met taught her all about Christian evangelical guys? What does that say about her Dad? What does that say about the men in her little down home church?

Granted, that’s not quite a “your momma” comment, Nick, but did you really just take a jab at my dad? I mean, really?

The difference here is evident in your own comment: “guys” versus men. The men in my church are just that. They are men. They put away childish things. In seeing how they behave in life, and towards women, and how they treat me, I see a difference in their generation to the one I am a part of and the one coming up. It is their mature and Godly example that has made the problem so clear. Age has, granted, some to do with it.

I look at Chris L’s comment — and yes, he and I have disagreed before (I think it was a post about drinking or something) but it was done with maturity — as an example of this. Men ought to lead, and if they lead poorly…well, we follow as we are led.

My dad is awesome, by the way. He’s the reason I’m learning to fly, he’s strength and patience and humor embodied, and if you’d like to understand our relationship a bit better rather than throw out that comment for quickie justification purposes, you are welcome to read it on my main blog under the “family” category. I provide the link for your convenience.

Then she all but calls Erica stupid?

Do you know why I did not wish to delve into things with Erica? It has nothing to do with her intelligence. It has to do with me not wishing to get into it with a fellow sister in Christ. While neither Amy nor Erica nor any other woman here made that request of me, it is one I choose to extend, now, for various reasons that will likely not be understood nor well received here. I don’t believe you can find where I said “Erica is stupid.” I would never say that to another woman, nor believe it. I saw no point in entanglement when we were talking about two different things.

Soft answers turn away wrath and all that.

Yes, they do. It’s a point well-taken for all of us. (Perhaps that’s why Chris L. “unbelievably” extended an olive branch.) But how does that concept align, then, with your post on your site in which you can’t determine, for certain, if I’m even a person? I am a “girl/woman/person”, a sort of “take your pick I’m not sure”, a mild jab at best and part of the reason I do not like to get embroiled into battles with my fellow sisters: there are enough barbs out there. Whether they ask it of me or not is of little concern; it is the choice I have made regarding such things on the internet and I do not wish to do otherwise if I can help it.

You are free to say what you wish on your site, however. As I wrote on a recent post (and must hold to myself):

“You have something to write? Write it. In the end, it’s God, you, and the blank screen. You have to answer to the first, have to live with the second, and have to step out in courage with the third.”

My most consistent regrets in what I write are when I step out in anger, and not in courage. We are all held accountable for what we say/write. Pastors are also additionally held accountable for those in under their care. I know some on here are ordained ministers. One thing my friend Michael (and now my pastor) has repeatedly said was how serious he takes Hebrews 13:17. While random people on the internet may not seem like your flock, I wouldn’t be so quick to assume that. Whether you like or agree or want to shout me or others like me down is not the question; if you are a minister of the gospel, you are a leader keeping watch over a larger flock. You are accountable for what you do.

So, instead of mocking me for saying that an earlier experience with an ordained minister online led to a way of thinking about Christian guys that is negative, and instead of throwing things at my dad and the men in my church as a red herring, perhaps there should be some consideration of that verse and what it could mean.

What does it mean, this internet and how pastors interact? Who is their flock? Is it only local? Are they only geographically responsible and accountable? This is no laughing, snide thing.

This is not meant as fire wood for fire.

366   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 12th, 2008 at 3:25 pm

Julie,
I’m not going to speak for Nick, but I’m not sure those were “jabs” (although Nick there are some there now that seem pointless), I think his opening line is kind of odd but not necessarily a jab. More of a “I’m not sure what to write so that she doesn’t get mad” idea.
Also, his comments and question on this thread are one’s that I have to admit I thought about. I mean I realize we had a rather large fight and I didn’t apologize the way you wanted me to (I either read that here or on your blog, I’m not sure) but really how much do you know about me? How much could I teach you about any guy, etc?
I think some of Nick’s questions and points are legit. Some not all. This too is not meant as wood for fire.

367   Erica    http://joemartino.name/erica
September 12th, 2008 at 4:13 pm

Julie,
Say what you want to me. I am not offended easy I just enjoy conversation.
So if you were not implying I was stupid then why the “we are different wave length comment?” Honestly that is how I took it that you were implying I was not on the same intellectual level as you. If I mis-read that I apologize.

368   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 12th, 2008 at 4:47 pm

There is no one on my level, and I do not mean that pridefully either. :cool:

369   Nick    http://www.ruminatingrants.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 5:29 pm

Hi Julie, Did my comment make you want to kick my ass? Or maybe dump my coffee over my head? Well, I am wearing baggy pants and flip-flops. I am working but from home and I don’t drink coffee. Cannot stand Starbucks. I prefer tea. Homemade preferably.

For some clarification here. Sal, the guy who wrote the post is almost 60. I’m in my early 40’s so don’t being your age crap to me. I’ve been married for almost 21 years. I have three kids. I’m not young and the only one I see that is immature here is you. Talk about projection! No one who actually knows me has ever even suggested that and many of them have read your post, my post and subsequent comments. My mom actually told me that she liked part of what you had to say, “but it’s too bad she comes across as such an angry young lady who hates men.”
I wasn’t taking a stab at you or daddy. I was making a necessary point. Put down your martyr complex and look at what is being said. You know nothing about us? How do you know we even claim your religion? Maybe you ought to stop sharing verses about what other people should be reading and considering and consider some verses yourself. Maybe you ought to take another break from blogging and consider that you don’t know everything like you seem to think you do.
You are amazing! You can dish it out, but the minute it comes back you get all snitty.
What really annoys me is the fact that I agree with part of your post but it gets lost in all the drama. Poor Julie, always getting picked on.
Pu-lease.

Joe Martino, what part of my update is too much? What part is dishonest? What part is gossip? It’s all true, it’s all linked.

370   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 8:46 pm

Okay I think we’ve been around the topics enough. All in favor of closing the thread say “I”.

“I”

371   Nick    http://www.ruminatingrants.wordpress.com
September 12th, 2008 at 8:56 pm

Ok, you know what Joe Martino? I just went to her site, thinking that maybe I was being too harsh? You ARE NUTS!!! For a girl that is so concerned about the Bible (said with as much sarcasm as my one lung can muster) she loves calling people names. Here’s one of my favorites. From http://www.loneprairie.net/lp_studies/2008/08/bitter-and-whining.htm

So the self-assured idiots out there who can’t see the forest for the trees can focus on the imperfections of the messenger and totally miss the message and go home and pat themselves on the back for their astute judgment on a complete stranger and remain safely ignorant and without a hope of grasping something bigger outside of their own understanding and not realize what a complete moron they are.

Then she goes to the guy’s webpage whom she insulted, and does she apologize? Nope. Well, that’s not true she does and she follows it up with a “but…” Now my daddy was a simple man, but he used to always tell me that an apology followed by a “but…” wasn’t much of an apology. Her posts proves that there are a lot of angry people in the world. They are angry with the church and that should be examined. But this girl needs help.

372   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 12th, 2008 at 9:03 pm

Actually the guy in the picture has a pretty reasoned and well articulated response.

Here

373   Sandman    
September 12th, 2008 at 10:40 pm

I can’t believe this has gone on for nearly 400 comments.

There is a pre-existing conflict here between a couple of people that has yet to be resolved, and now there’s this log plopped on the fire. It doesn’t really matter who started it, but that no one seems willing to stop it.

I’m just wondering who among the conflicting parties is big enough to work to resolve this without an audience, or drop this without feeling the need to have the last word.

374   merry    
September 13th, 2008 at 1:54 am

Agreed, Sandman. This conversation should have been done less than one hundred comments in.

Nick, unless you know Julie personally, I’m wondering why you even care about her or the comments left by pastorboy. I find people blogging about people that they know nothing about a little creepy.

This whole thread and many comments left by many different commenters I’m finding disturbing/creepy on many different levels. Whoever has the power to do so, can you please close this thread as soon as possible?

375   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
September 13th, 2008 at 9:21 am

I’ve applied the 24-hour block so that perhaps some growing up will occur in the meantime… We don’t lock comments until 10 days are up, but we do apply the temporary block if circumstances warrant.

(And yes, less than 100 comments are relevant to the OP).

376   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 14th, 2008 at 1:49 pm

OK, so here’s my concern with the post:

1. What about the guy that she calls lame? I realize it has been said the post isn’t about him but he’s in it and that seems unnecessary.

2. What about the church she is talking about? What about the people who love that church, who have found healing there?

3. She seems to make an observation that the only reason people are saying Hi to her is because they “have to.” How does she know?

4. She said she “had to walk out.” My question is why? Why did she “have to” walk out?

5. I understand some churches don’t “fit a person.” I’ve been there. My question that I wrestle with is how long do we need to give a church until we can accurately decide if we feel like we fit in. How subjective is that feeling? The author of the OP references her home church, but is it fair to ask the new church to be like the old church? The relationship with the new church is new. All relationships take time.

I believe these questions are only about the post, if I have failed in that, I apologize.

377   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 14th, 2008 at 1:56 pm

Legitimate questions, Joe. There were a few comments that did veer off course. Thanks for apologizing, we all need some comment evaluation from time to time. :)

378   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 14th, 2008 at 7:08 pm

I’m amazed that the OP concerned how Julie is not like Ingrid and 378 replies later, we’re not even remotely close to that subject.

“I”

379   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 14th, 2008 at 7:27 pm

So Jerry,
Does that mean you don’t feel my questions are pertinent? I realize you get this post and you agree with it so can you address my questions?

380   Joe    http://joemartino.name
September 14th, 2008 at 7:28 pm

Or Jerry are you just looking for an “Yes, Jerry you’re right, her post isn’t like Ingrid’s.”

381   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 14th, 2008 at 7:53 pm

No, I’m not looking for ‘yes, Jerry you’re right, her post isn’t like Ingrid’s.’ I’m looking for, ‘no, jerry her post is like Ingrid’s and here’s why,’ or ‘yes, jerry her post is like Ingrid’s and here’s why,’ or ‘yes and no jerry her post is and is not like Ingrid’s and here’s why.’

That’s all. Any single one of those responses, in my humble opinion, would have been appropriate to a post that dealt with 7 specific reasons why I thought Julie did not sound like Ingrid.

Granted, I did list three main ideas that I gleaned from Julie’s post, but even they were somewhat beside the point. I think that my original post on this subject, where I linked to her post and to a follow-up interview by the internet monk, would have been a better place for 90% of the conversation that has taken place in this thread. That’s all I’m saying.

I don’t own this blog. I don’t own this thread. I don’t own the internet. It’s just my opinion that most of the conversation has nothing to do with whether or not Julie’s OP sounds anything like something IS would post as SOL.

It’s my opinion, that’s all.

y/f
jerry

382   amy    
September 14th, 2008 at 8:05 pm

Jerry,
You can consider this as “one more” on-topic post.

Take the last, oh, perhaps 25 of Ingrid’s posts on Slice. I’ll get really brave and say even 50.

I think that you will find that they certainly “can’t outdo” Julie’s post and interactions related to the post (Nick’s quote of Julie in #372 for example), ESPECIALLY if you try to focus on the POINT of Ingrid’s post, in the same way that a number of people have said that Julie’s POINT needs to be focused on.

383   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 14th, 2008 at 8:15 pm

Now, as to your questions, my responses are in brackets:

1. What about the guy that she calls lame? I realize it has been said the post isn’t about him but he’s in it and that seems unnecessary. [In my opinion, the guy she calls lame was a catalyst that's all. I think she stated it wasn't about him personally or individually, but rather what 'he' represented in general.]

2. What about the church she is talking about? What about the people who love that church, who have found healing there? [You noted yourself that Julie used a whole bunch of personal pronouns in the OP. That is the point: It was her opinion of her experience. It was hers. And, if I do recall correctly, she left the church. She didn't stay and make a stink. She left. Maybe that makes her as much a part of the problem; maybe she should have stayed and helped correct the problem; or, maybe, she left so that she wouldn't be a part of the problem because she does love the people of the church and wants to respect their right to continue on in that place. It was Julie's problem; she solved her part of it: She left.]

3. She seems to make an observation that the only reason people are saying Hi to her is because they “have to.” How does she know? [Haven't you ever felt that way? I have. And since my OP was from the preacher's point of view, I might say it this way: Sometimes I feel like the congregation is singing, or listening, or even saying hi to me because they 'have to.' You know. I can't explain how one knows; one just does.]

4. She said she “had to walk out.” My question is why? Why did she “have to” walk out? [I explained what I think about this above. Seems to me, it is better for her to leave than to stay around and be a problem or a trouble maker or a wave maker in a negative way.]

5. I understand some churches don’t “fit a person.” I’ve been there. My question that I wrestle with is how long do we need to give a church until we can accurately decide if we feel like we fit in. How subjective is that feeling? [It's perfectly subjective. I have no objection to its subjectivity. Apparently, neither does Julie.] The author of the OP references her home church, but is it fair to ask the new church to be like the old church? [Nope, it's not fair. That's why she left.] The relationship with the new church is new. All relationships take time. [She didn't tell us how long she had been there, but I was under the impression that she had been there before. Perhaps Julie could tell us, but I am of the opinion that it shouldn't take that long. That's my opinion.]

I hope that helps, if not, sorry. Again, I was looking at Julie’s OP from the point of view of the preacher. I might have said similar things from ‘my point of view.’

jerry

384   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 14th, 2008 at 8:17 pm

PS–I wonder if the hit count on Julie’s blog have increased since this entire things started? :)

385   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 14th, 2008 at 8:19 pm

OK Jerry here you go:

This post read like Ingrid’s because it came across as angry and ready to punch someone. It seemed to focus on church not meeting the author’s needs and not being done the way the author wanted it to be done. There was no mention of church being done for others but about what was wrong with it not being done for the author, in my opinion.
While I agree that we have elongated adolescents, I believe the author sounds similar to Ingrid in that she is implying that that elongation is only occurring in the church and with men. I know plenty of women that it is occurring with and plenty of people in and out of the church. This portion of the post is similar to Ingrid’s style in that Ingrid seems to be constantly ranting about the demise of the church, hearkening back to fond days of yesteryear.
Furthermore, in my opinion, this post is similar to Ingrid’s in that it lacks grace. In it she promises to kick someone’s ass, she talks about dumping coffee on someone’s head and she rhetorically asks, “How much more lame can he try to be” or something to that effect. While the author has repeatedly said that the point of her post was not these insidious statement, they cannot be separated out of the OP. This too is something that in my opinion Ingrid has attempted to do in the past.
Lastly in my opinion, this post is similar to Ingrid’s in that it fails to address these questions:
1. How would the people of the church she is writing about feel if they read her post? What kind of emotions would they experience if they were to read her words that seem rather hateful and full of hurt towards their church?
2. How would the pastor of said church feel if he were to read her post?
3. How would the guy who is wearing the baggy pants and holding the coffee cup feel if he we were to read her post?
4. What about the people who are waffling about church attendance but have found healing at this church? Would this help or hurt their spiritual journey?
This post is similar to Ingrid’s because in truth the author does not seem to care about those people in my opinion.
Lastly this post seem to be very much like Ingrid’s because it does not seem to take into account this verse

Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.

How does this post build up people? Especially those people mentioned in my comment here? Now, I want to be quick to point out that I also fail at following this verse frequently. But you asked….

386   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 14th, 2008 at 8:23 pm

Jerry, She didn’t have to walk out in the middle. None of us know for sure if someone is saying hi to us because they want to or not. Jerry, you’re lame. Don’t take it personally, because the rest of this comment isn’t about you, it’s about the OP and my responding to you, but if I see one more person posting under a pen name I am going to kick their ass.

See Jerry, now this entire comment is wasted. I’ve lost any chance of keeping it on topic. As far as how long it should take, my wife and I took almost a year to find a church once. We went there for a long time before we decided we fit. You know what changed our mind? We got involved. I still don’t know how long it should take.

387   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 14th, 2008 at 8:28 pm

Joe,

Thank you. That is what I have wanted from this post. You were not the only one who thought she sounded like Ingrid. I’m not the only one who didn’t. When it is all said and done, what I hope for, is this kind of conversation. I’m not at all concerned that people disagree with me. In fact, I’m glad you did and do. I have learned much about many people, Julie especially, since this OP and thread took off last week. Seeing some of the responses from Julie has been troubling for me because I was seriously interested in what she wrote–from a preacher’s point of view. Some of the responses she has written in this thread–and at other blogs where her OP was pinged–have been troubling for me precisely because they came off as exactly what you said: Graceless and somewhat defiant, arrogant, and way too sarcastic for someone trying to make a serious point. I get she has a sense of humor and a seriously valid point to make that I agree with at many points.

Sadly, her temperament in defending her POV has been disappointing.

Anyhow, thanks for honestly answering my question. I see your point of view, and I will think on it more. This conversation will help me craft better posts and be a better, more consistent writer for CRN.info.

Thanks again!
jerry

388   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 14th, 2008 at 8:32 pm

Joe,

“Jerry, you’re lame. Don’t take it personally, because the rest of this comment isn’t about you, it’s about the OP and my responding to you, but if I see one more person posting under a pen name I am going to kick their ass.”

Seriously?

jerry

389   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 14th, 2008 at 8:33 pm

OH. Nevermind.

:)

I stand by what I said.

jerry

390   Joe Martino    http://joemartino.name
September 14th, 2008 at 8:35 pm

For the record, No not seriously. I was trying to make a point.

391   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
September 14th, 2008 at 9:00 pm

Joe,

I know. I only got it after I wrote that. No worries.

jerry

392   Joe C    http://joe4gzus.blogspot.com/
September 14th, 2008 at 9:43 pm

Almost at 400!! :)

393   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
September 14th, 2008 at 9:59 pm

The thing that mirrored some of Ingrid’s posts was the hand grenade type of criticism. There was not much redemption offered.

One Trackback/Ping

  1. John Chisham, Pastor? « My Thoughts on Everything    Sep 11 2008 / 10am:

    [...] called out on it, he gets all angry. pastorboy Says: <!– after publication. –> September 10th, 2008 at 11:33 am I was simply trying to [...]