From here:
You find statements like this and just scratch your head.

From our forward firing base here at Apprising Ministries along the Eastern Front of this Truth War we see Emergent rebels becoming more emboldened as they continue their build up. Here’s just a couple of examples.

  • Share/Bookmark
This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 17th, 2008 at 1:10 pm and is filed under Humor, Ken Silva, What Can You Say?. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+/- Collapse/Expand All

96 Comments(+Add)

1   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
December 17th, 2008 at 1:13 pm

Sounds like someone is channeling Admiral Ackbar…

“It’s a trap!”

2   Joe C    
December 17th, 2008 at 1:15 pm

Dangit Phil…you beat me.

I guess that makes them the Empire?

*back to getting ready for deployment*

*whoosh*

3   nc    
December 17th, 2008 at 1:21 pm

self-inflated, self-important, high strung hooey.

The “eastern front”…

Yeah…they’re sooooo important.

4   Joe C    
December 17th, 2008 at 1:24 pm

I call being the ‘rebel’ Luke Skywalker!!!! DIBS!!

5   Joe    http://www.joemartino.name
December 17th, 2008 at 1:27 pm

Can I be Han Solo?

6   Christian P    http://www.churchvoices.com
December 17th, 2008 at 1:28 pm

Joe, the link is broken.

7   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 1:29 pm

This made me laugh in the same way it always makes me laugh when I watch Notre Dame football and I hear their band playing the Imperial March.

How fitting.

8   Christian P    http://www.churchvoices.com
December 17th, 2008 at 1:30 pm

I found the page…

You can leave the link broken.

9   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 1:30 pm

fixed

10   Joe C    
December 17th, 2008 at 1:31 pm

“From the bridge of our Super Star Destroyer, “Executor” orbiting the moon of Endor in this War against the “Rebellion”, we see the Rebel Scum becoming more emboldened as they exit hyperspace in an all-out assault on the…fully operrrraaatioonnaall Death Star. Little do they know…

It’s a trap!

11   Christian P    http://www.churchvoices.com
December 17th, 2008 at 1:31 pm

Blogs need a feature that let you see when other people are writing comments or editing posts.

12   Jerry    http://www.dangoldfinch.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 1:33 pm

I got dibs on Yoda!!!

13   Christian P    http://www.churchvoices.com
December 17th, 2008 at 1:36 pm

Tim is Chewbaca, because he’s hairy and all he does is moan and grunt.

14   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 1:45 pm

How long did the call to uplift instead of accuse last? Like five minutes?

15   Neil    
December 17th, 2008 at 1:46 pm

I got dibs on Yoda!!! – Jerry

“Dibs on Yoda, I got” – would be more apropos…

16   Neil    
December 17th, 2008 at 1:46 pm

How long did the call to uplift instead of accuse last? Like five minutes?

This is not accusing – its mocking…

17   Rick Frueh    http://http?//followingjudahslion.com
December 17th, 2008 at 1:47 pm

From the outpost surrounding the Stalingrad of emergent thought, we have ordered a frontal assault upon the rebellious thugs . Our troops are fighting heroically, and we have ever confidence that the Fatherland will reign victorious.

PS – Everyone is gay but us.

18   Rick Frueh    http://http?//followingjudahslion.com
December 17th, 2008 at 1:48 pm

ReichFurer McArthur has reported much success.

19   Joe C    
December 17th, 2008 at 1:52 pm

I thought we were talking Star Wars metaphors…

I could care less about Apprising whateveries.

No malice from this guy, sorry to disappoint.

20   Joe C    
December 17th, 2008 at 1:55 pm

I can’t help it if what Ken said was inconceivably goofy and over the top.

“Inconceivable!!”

21   Joe    http://www.joemartino.name
December 17th, 2008 at 1:57 pm

How long did the call to uplift instead of accuse last? Like five minutes?

Come on! This quote is a perfect microcosm of the problem at that web page. This OP is sarcasm, much like Elijah mocked the prophets of Baal.

22   nc    
December 17th, 2008 at 1:58 pm

oy…disdain does not equal accusation

23   Rick Frueh    http://http?//followingjudahslion.com
December 17th, 2008 at 2:01 pm

I reserve the right to tear down, accuse, demean, castigate, attack, and generally eviscerate anyone as long as I am in the right. The rightness of my meal sanctifies the wrong plate upon which it is served.

“I fear nothing when I am in the right, whoever pushes me around will find I’m full of fight.”

The Prophet Lou Costello

24   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 2:01 pm

ruach

hmmmmmmmmmmm

25   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 2:04 pm

accuse
adultery
stoned…..

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

ruach.

26   Joe    http://www.joemartino.name
December 17th, 2008 at 2:06 pm

Heretic

Pharisee

Of their father the devil

White washed tombs

dogs

mutilators of the flesh

hmmm indeed

27   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 2:26 pm

Since I’ve been watching/reading about WWII recently (Boenhoffer and the like) I’ve got to say that Ken’s writing sounds a lot like some things in “Mein Kampf”. That’s not to say that Ken contains the same heart or motivation as Hitler. But the rhetoric sounds similar.

28   Joe C    
December 17th, 2008 at 2:30 pm

Did Hitler just get injected in to this online conversation? Isn’t there a theory or principle that says that will always happen?

29   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 2:31 pm

I guess the idea of war in that one annihilates their “enemies” is edifying?

Paul never used “war” as a metaphor to attack others, but as a way to defend the faith… and that not from “people” rather from the true enemy Satan.

I see nothing but a sick call to harm and hurt others in the Name of Jesus… and this… this is the ministry of reconciliation?

iggy

30   John Hughes    
December 17th, 2008 at 2:39 pm

John and Carlos, the producers of Desperate Housewives just called. They want to take your show on the road.

Seriously, dudes. . .

31   Christian P    http://www.churchvoices.com
December 17th, 2008 at 2:40 pm

Ministry of reconciliation? What? Is that what we’re supposed to be doing?

32   nc    
December 17th, 2008 at 2:44 pm

Yikes!

Get that Hitler mess off the table…

John Hughes, we could brainstorm some names for the new show.

Christian P,

Reconciliation? We don’t need no reconciliation…we don’t need no stinkin’…

;)

33   nc    
December 17th, 2008 at 2:45 pm

Oh yeah…

if we all just…

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmRuuuuACCCH!

we’d feel the molecules align and we’d all just get along.

ruach.

34   Chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 2:46 pm

Did Hitler just get injected in to this online conversation? Isn’t there a theory or principle that says that will always happen?

Sorry if that was off color or out of bounds. The similarities to that quote and some of Hitlers was striking.

35   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 2:47 pm

I have a different take

I see the enemy as Satan, and the representatives are those who are busy destroying the WORD of GOD and trying to make it line up with their opinions of how it ought to be.

Example: homosexuality is accepted by popular culture, therefore, we need to change the scripture or reinterpret it to say it is okay, or toss it out altogether in that instance and go with feelings.

Now, the people that allow it to happen, allowing Satan to rule as opposed to God are the agents of Satan. And we battle against Satan, and thus them.

36   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 2:50 pm

PB,

So contrary to the bible stating we do not war against flesh and blood… you see flesh and blood people as satanic and that we should war against them?

iggy

37   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
December 17th, 2008 at 2:50 pm

Now, the people that allow it to happen, allowing Satan to rule as opposed to God are the agents of Satan. And we battle against Satan, and thus them.

Umm, no. We battle against Satan. Period. Our battle isn’t against flesh and blood. So if we see any person as our enemy, no matter how heinous they are, we are missing the point.

38   Chad    http://www.chadholtz.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 2:54 pm

So if we see any person as our enemy, no matter how heinous they are, we are missing the point.

And if you see anyone as your “enemy” your duty as a Christian is to a) Love them and b) pray for them

Period.

And “love” does not mean belittle, attack, smear, slander etc as a means to “win them back to your side.”

(sad that I always feel the need to preface what “love” is not to some people).

39   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 2:55 pm

JH,

Believe me… I tire of it also… and in fact did not comment for about 3 months because of PB…

I am still wondering why I even came back… maybe because I hoped to have conversation with someone more like you who can disagree without attacking others instead of discussing the topic. :smile:

iggy

40   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 2:56 pm

Iggy,

nope. We battle against the spirits, the devil, who are sometimes manifested or represented by individuals and their teaching.

Our battle is against satan. Period

41   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 3:02 pm

I think PB has brought out a major difference in motivation between his view and this site and others like it… that in PB’s view, people are the enemy, while I see that most here see that as “Satanic” in and of itself.

Again I see that there is some bad theology that is motivating people to hate people that Jesus loved so much to die for…

I see this is the motivation with CRN, AM and SoL… it is that people are not worthy of the same Grace that they claim have saved them because they are satanic…

Interestingly, the Gentile was considered unworthy of God by the Jew and Peter was rebuked by God:

Acts 10: 14. “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.” 15. The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

There seems to be a disconnect with some that God has made clean all people and that we are all saved by the same Grace… It seems that some deem others as still “unclean” contrary to God’s word.

iggy

42   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 3:05 pm

I see this is the motivation with CRN, AM and SoL… it is that people are not worthy of the same Grace that they claim have saved them because they are satanic…

43   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 3:05 pm

PB,

But that is not what you stated…

You stated…

I see the enemy as Satan, and the representatives are those who are busy destroying the WORD of GOD and trying to make it line up with their opinions of how it ought to be.

Notice you stated. “and the representatives”?

You then gave the example of the “homosexual”…

So is the homosexual not a person in you view?

I can only go by what you stated… and you clearly stated that “and the representatives” are the enemy… and now you say only Satan is? Which is it?

You can say you made an error… it is forgivable. :lol:

iggy

44   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 3:05 pm

Whoops

So that means you can assign motives now.

45   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 3:06 pm

PB,

And you point of quoting me was?

I stated that SoL and AM and CRN see people as satanic as you stated you did… and that to me is wrong and unbiblical.

iggy

46   Rick Frueh    http://http?//followingjudahslion.com
December 17th, 2008 at 3:07 pm

It is a challenge to correct with grace and humility. My record on that is mixed.

47   Joe    http://www.joemartino.name
December 17th, 2008 at 3:08 pm

From my wife’s blog regarding the OP at said fire station:

So I ask all these bloggers that are dying to know Rob takes on homosexuality
what is the purpose in you knowing?
Is your purpose to build others up or tear them down?
Are you without sin? If so cast the first stone. If not get a new hobby. (Emphasis mine)

Read the whole post here

48   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 3:10 pm

PB,

I can’t assign motives… but if a motivation is out on the sleeve… then one can call it as they see it. If one is in error and holds conflicting views as you have just stated I can understand their motivation. I am not assigning a motivation but understanding one.

Do you not agree one can have wrong motive and try to do what they see is right?

And again, this is an example of how you try to turn this around from what you stated clearly to making me be the “Bad” guy again.

Can you clarify your contradiction as to how the the enemy is only Satan… and yet is also “the representatives” such as your example of the homosexual?

iggy

49   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 3:10 pm

I gave as an example of what some people are doing.

The context seems lost on you.

There are people on this earth, knowingly or unknowingly, that represent Satan. They are not the enemies. They are those, like all of us, who need the Lord.

The enemy is Satan.

Satan uses people. The recent emergent stand against scripture and for homosexual marriage is an example.

The enemy is STILL Satan.

That does not mean the agents should be exposed for their wrong teaching.

The enemy is still Satan.

50   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 3:14 pm

PB,

The context is not lost on me… You clearly stated that people such as the homosexual are “Satanic” the contradicted yourself… I even gave you a chance to say that you may have errored…

Is the homosexual satanic and your enemy?

iggy

51   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 3:15 pm

PB,

I agree that Satan is our enemy… but you are stating that “the representatives” like the homosexual which are people of flesh and blood are the enemy… and the bible is clear we do not battle flesh and blood…

You are contradicting yourself and seem unable to admit you are in error of scripture.

iggy

52   Joe C    
December 17th, 2008 at 3:18 pm

If Satan is the Emperor in Star Wars….

Then who is Darth Vader?

And who does that make Luke?

53   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
December 17th, 2008 at 3:19 pm

Iggy and PB,
Speaking of gay marriage…

You guys are like an old married couple. I think you get some sort of enjoyment of pushing each other’s buttons.

I’m all for dialoguing with the purpose of seeking understanding, but at some point, you have to realize you aren’t going to really see eye to eye.

54   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 3:25 pm

Phil,

Man I agree… How do you talk to someone who cannot see major contradictions in his own statements.

I am truly trying to understand PB as to how he can hold conflicting views and unbiblical ones at that.

Most often though I feel like I am wasting my time trying…

iggy

55   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 3:28 pm

Joe,

Darth Vader would be fallen man and Luke would be Jesus. Remember Luke’s power was the Force and in that he must try to not use anger to take down Darth Vader or the Emperor… as then he would become like them.

iggy

56   Paul C    http://www.themidnightcry.com
December 17th, 2008 at 3:30 pm

Speaking of gay marriage…

You guys are like an old married couple. I think you get some sort of enjoyment of pushing each other’s buttons.

Classic! You’re absolutely right Phil.

Every time I see this back-and-forth, I get black-and-white images in my mind of the L’il Rascals and Three Stooges…

57   Joe C    
December 17th, 2008 at 3:30 pm

Yeah because the scene on Death Star 2 with the Emperor and Vader…it was like…the temptation in the desert for Jesus…

LoL….my brain’s on vacation guys. Pray for me and my squadron, we’re deploying real soon.

58   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 3:34 pm

Sadly I get no enjoyment in my exchanges with PB… and more I am not out to push his buttons any more than anyone else here who sees him as he is.. and calls him on it. I do agree he likes to dredge up things and try to push my bottons and sadly I often take the bait. I will confess it is hard to ignore someone who lies about others or acts in such ways as PB does toward me.

And have considered not commenting here anymore though I enjoy most people here, one ruins it for all… or at least for me.

59   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 3:37 pm

I also find it interesting that people seem to dump on me no matter how outrageous PB acts… I guess if I am that annoying I will not comment here anymore.. and I apologize for being such an ass.

God bless you all…

iggy

60   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
December 17th, 2008 at 3:38 pm

Every time I see this back-and-forth, I get black-and-white images in my mind of the L’il Rascals and Three Stooges…

Reminds me of this picture for some reason…

Photobucket

61   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 3:38 pm

Every time I see this back-and-forth, I get black-and-white images in my mind of the L’il Rascals and Three Stooges…

Like this (noting the uncanny resemblance of Curly to PB)?

(With thanks to Phil for the image link).

62   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
December 17th, 2008 at 3:39 pm

Doh! You beat me to it!

It’s like it’s in stereo now!

63   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 3:39 pm

Oh wow – that was uncanny!

64   Paul C    http://www.themidnightcry.com
December 17th, 2008 at 3:41 pm

I guess if I am that annoying I will not comment here anymore.. and I apologize for being such an ass.

Perfect irony: iggy signs off by saying…

“I’m taking my ball and going home – see if I care!”

65   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 3:43 pm

I also find it interesting that people seem to dump on me no matter how outrageous PB acts…

Igs -

1) I don’t see anyone “dumping” on you – in fact, I’ve been quoting you more and more…

2) I don’t see anyone excusing PB (though I see a lot disagreeing with him and his antics). My read is that some folks see you as more responsive/responsible than PB, so they appeal to you first to try to stop things. (Kind of like when my 17-year-old and 9-year-old go at it. I appeal to the 17-year-old first, not because it’s his fault, or because I’m dumping on him, but because I think he’s the one most capable (or the only one capable) of stopping the madness.)

66   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
December 17th, 2008 at 3:43 pm

I also find it interesting that people seem to dump on me no matter how outrageous PB acts… I guess if I am that annoying I will not comment here anymore.. and I apologize for being such an ass.

I don’t think anyone’s necessarily dumping on you, Ig. It’s just that you seem to continually let yourself be dragged into these arguments. I actually like what you have to say a great majority of the time. It just seems that interactions with PB tend you push close to the edge or over it sometimes.

It’s alright, man, I completely understand. There are some people who just get on our nerves. Part of being human I guess…

67   John Hughes    
December 17th, 2008 at 3:45 pm

I thought # 49 was a good summation of PB’s position. Can we re-boot with that as the baseline for further comment?

All in favor?

68   Neil    
December 17th, 2008 at 4:08 pm

I thought # 49 was a good summation of PB’s position. Can we re-boot with that as the baseline for further comment?

Agreed.

Pastorboy is correct. What he fails to see is how the ADM’s go way beyond the stuff that is obviously unbiblical and start creating caricatures to attack.

69   nc    
December 17th, 2008 at 4:43 pm

I’m telling you all, PB is on to something.

I feel so much better already:

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

ruach.

I mean, my Lectio practice was so impoverished until I learned its true meaning from PB.

Let’s all do it:

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

and you’ll feel better.

Iggy, give it a whirl.

;)

70   Neil    
December 17th, 2008 at 4:51 pm

I mean, my Lectio practice was so impoverished until I learned its true meaning from PB.

Let’s all do it:

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Yeah, well Pastorboy was in error on two things; 1) the first is the obvious – the Lectio Divina as posted on marshill.org in no way repsembles or promotes the Hindu mantra, and 2) the Hindu mantra is not “Hmmmmm…” anyway (if you are gonna mock something you should be less sloppy about it), the Hindu mantra would be “Ohhhmmmmmm…”

71   Neil    
December 17th, 2008 at 6:02 pm

After reading the missive I must admit, though, I am impressed how many complicated, manipulative, and disjointed references Ken can make in one rambling thought… completely non-sequitur… but impressive.

72   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 6:05 pm

Paul C,

Just curious….

What ball am I taking home?

I see the only one with a ball to take home is the owner of this blog who can say he had enough and delete it… or not let comment go any more…

Or…

PB in that I allow him to bounce his ball of attack on my person and then I fall for his bait.

But really… I am only a commentor here and if I choose to not comment… how is that taking my ball home?

:lol:

Really and why, if you think i am gone talk such behind my back?

I appreciate what you guys had to say (Chris L and Phil) and will try to take a different approach if I am commenting here… as in ignoring PB… yet… if he lies about me I ask that someone else will state the truth… and I will try to not be such a Stooge in your eyes.

And John H…

How do you consider PB’s summary when he stated just before it..

I see the enemy as Satan, and the representatives are those who are busy destroying the WORD of GOD and trying to make it line up with their opinions of how it ought to be.

(emphasis mine)

He then uses the homosexual as the example of a representative… and as far as I know homosexuals are flesh and blood and people… for whom Jesus spilled His precious blood for.

He then backpedals and claims that he never meant “people” who are “flesh and blood” and then gives a better reasoned statement… but still denied what he stated in the first place.

I guess to me I see him floundering in made up doctrines and incapable to see that he contradicted himself.

How do you reconcile that he states that people like the homosexual being flesh and blood are the same as Satan?

I just cannot get how even you would let that go. If I had stated such it would be scrutinized and double checked and you would have given a rebuttal… yet it seems that you will let such and unbiblical view slide as PB is more on your side than mine…

I consider you more fair than some that post here… but to overlook obvious error seems a bit of a double standard and what I see is the major error of most fundamentalist churches.

I hope you consider what I am saying.

iggy the Stooge (not to be confused with Iggy and the Stooges.)

73   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 6:13 pm

Neil,

Maybe PB was eating cookies while reading the bible…

thus the hmmmmmmmm

Sorry and Iguess I have been doing Lectio Divina wrong and if it was so great to PB to empty his mind and go hmmmm…. well I might as well join…

Ohmmmmmm…. hmmmmmmm… ohmmmmm…

Man… I feel so… empty… my brain is totally empty… and PB makes so much sense now… hate gays cuz they are representatives of Satan… hmmmm…. hate…. gays…. they are not flesh and blood…. hmmmm ….ommmm…. hate…. gays…. gays represent satan in the flesh…. hate… gays… and metro sexuals cuz they are better looking than me…. hate…. iggy…. hate…. gays… iggy… and anything Ken Silva or Ingrid hates… hate… representives of Satan cuz they are not flesh and blood….

Oh yeah this is fun… and I feel so empty and cold… and mean… I get it now!

iggy

74   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 6:32 pm

lalalalalalalalalalalalala
I can’t hear Iggy
lalalalalalalalalalalala

whoops…this is a blog…

covering my eyes

75   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 6:33 pm

ass

spoke

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

ruach

76   nc    
December 17th, 2008 at 7:02 pm

ummmm….I’m confused by #75.

77   Joe    http://www.joemartino.name
December 17th, 2008 at 7:04 pm

I think it was confession?

78   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
December 17th, 2008 at 7:51 pm

Baalam and the ass. I was lectio divining on it.

beat

ass

spoke

why

huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

The Eck method brings light also.

79   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 8:53 pm

If we have to be Baalam and the ass. I would gladly be the ass. PB can be Baalam . At least how he does his Lectio Dinivining…

Which has nothing to do with the real thing…

The ass at least saw and obeyed God… and the ass spoke clear as God allowed him… so… breeeey….

He who has ears to hear and eyes to see. :lol:

iggy

80   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 17th, 2008 at 9:20 pm

The Eck method brings light also.

So does Montana Power and Gas….

iggy

81   Rick Frueh    http://http?//followingjudahslion.com
December 17th, 2008 at 9:41 pm

The Stooge thing – hilarious. The gay thing – sad. Human gender was a creation of the Creator, but in some ways they represent the Creator (the image thing). I do not mean the physioloigical reflection of human gender, I refer to the attribute part of human gender. It is not insignificant that the woman CAME OUT OF THE MAN, so when God made Adam he had both male and female attributes (not physiological), but God divided them and made corresponding physical bodies capable of pro-creation.

To discuss the female attributes of God, without totally changing the Biblical references, can be enlightening without coming to a “goddess” conclusion. Of course we all know God has a long beard and a 70 something appearance.

82   John Hughes    
December 19th, 2008 at 9:37 am

It’s all a balance. Though our battle is not against flesh and blood but spiritual forces of wickedness this is in the ultimate sense, this does not absolve the individuals being so led. The gift of free will works both ways in redemption or to destruction. People are responsible for their actions and **some** people are enemies of the cross.

Christ has His ambassadors and Satan has his. Both are real people of flesh and blood.

However, even if people are our enemies or enemies of the cross, Christ made it blatantly clear how we are to handle them – i.e., we are to love them.

But to balance this out we are to be gentle as doves yet wise as serpents. I do not believe the Bible teaches pacifism in regards to combatting evil.

Again, its a balance of the **full** counsel of God. We get in to trouble when we veer to the right or the left.

83   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
December 19th, 2008 at 10:04 am

Christ has His ambassadors and Satan has his. Both are real people of flesh and blood.

However, even if people are our enemies or enemies of the cross, Christ made it blatantly clear how we are to handle them – i.e., we are to love them.

I understand and appreciate what you’re saying here, but I guess I’m still hesitant to refer to or think of any person as an “ambassador of Satan”. It’s just to easy to think of terms of defeating that person. I would also note that Satan has no ambassador because he has no real desire except to kill people. So even if a person were conceivable doing his bidding, they in the end are still his enemy and he will kill them.

I think it’s more helpful to look at those people as captives rather than enemy agents. So just like in the real world, a captive can become attached to his captors, I think some people can be attached to the satanic evil in some sense, but in they end they still need to be liberated.

84   Rick Frueh    http://http?//followingjudahslion.com
December 19th, 2008 at 10:44 am

Here is another gem from Ingrid who cannot conceal her joy over a church publicly disciplining a woman who is being promiscuous. The woman goes to the press because she doesn’t want her children to hear her sins.

“She claims to be worried that her children will hear about her fornication because they attend the church. She thinks this will be news to them? It certainly will be now when they go online and see their mother’s mug on CNN. This church needs to be thanked for their biblical stance at a time when morals, not to mention IQ’s, are circling the drain.”

Ah yes, the Christian response, assessing people’s IQs while silently suggesting your own superior intellect. And the use of the word “mug” is more evidence that Ingrid continues to use coarse and common language that openly displays a hubristic careless for people. Many must involve themselves in all local church issues as the overseer of all that goes on.

This woman is in sin and needs to be corrected in love, however in conjunction with her own misguided conversation with the secular press comes a helping hand in serving up the entire gossip narrative to faithful consumers of such dirt. Is it any wonder sinners avoid church at all costs and by association…Jesus.

85   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
December 19th, 2008 at 11:50 am

So Biblical Discipline outlined in Matthew 18:15-17 is out?

She is a member of the church…

She was confronted privately, then with two or three…

86   Rick Frueh    http://http?//followingjudahslion.com
December 19th, 2008 at 11:58 am

That was not my point at all. The publicizing of this lady’s sin beyond her local church is offensive, as well as questioning her and other’s IQs. It is regretable that we cannot see the self righteousness in which Ingrid clothes her words, and the joy she exhibits in the misfortune of others, especially when some of our own misfortunes are in the past.

The narrative, even when printed in the secular press, was not in need of additional spreading by those of us not involved. And true to form, no call for prayer, either genuine of perfunctory, accompanied the post.

87   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
December 19th, 2008 at 12:03 pm

I think this woman brought the response on herself by publisizing it to Fox News.

88   Joe    http://www.joemartino.name
December 19th, 2008 at 12:15 pm

So Biblical Discipline outlined in Matthew 18:15-17 is out?

She is a member of the church…

She was confronted privately, then with two or three…

Wait wait wait! When your friend and fellow fighter in the “truth war” Ken libeled me and I wanted to talk to him about it. He went public and one or your other fellow fighters said that Matthew 18 didn’t apply b/c the church didn’t exist yet.
Changed spots confuse me.

89   Bo Diaz    
December 19th, 2008 at 12:15 pm

So Biblical Discipline outlined in Matthew 18:15-17 is out?

She is a member of the church…

She was confronted privately, then with two or three…

Did you read the article? She withdrew her membership. At that point she’s no longer subject to the authority of the church.

90   Bo Diaz    
December 19th, 2008 at 12:17 pm

I’m just wondering when pastorboy is going to initiate church discipline against Ingrid and her husband. After all she’s divorced and re-married.

91   John Hughes    
December 19th, 2008 at 1:24 pm

Rick, I am basically in full agreement with your assessment. Yet I counsel balance. God operates through people and Satan operates through people.

Human government (i.e., flesh and blood) is God’s agent for justice. Injustice is purpatrated by humans no matter the controlling deception behind the scenes. Conversely temporal justice and the mitigation of unrighteous acts are conducted by humans.

We can’t **just** pray against unrighteousness and injustice, because the “solution” in most instances requires the actions of people (not discounting direct divine interventions and not considering the eternal rammifications of sin, which are separate issues).

And God instructs us how to handle these situations. I agree that Ingrid is not behaving biblically.

92   Eric Van Dyken    
December 19th, 2008 at 1:48 pm

Rick,

As to your post #86, I do agree with your points, but I’d like to “pick” on one small, but sort of important clarification. Your use of the word “misfortune” I think is, well, unfortunate. I would characterize misfortune as being in a car accident or having your house burn down, and I’ve not seen Ingrid glory in any event of that nature. Although I won’t assign you this motive, it seems to me that you’ve softened the concept of sin with your choice of words. I’ve not seen in the past that this would fit with your character or overall views. I find soft words for sinful actions to be troublesome, especially in light of an overal culture and sometimes prevalent church culture that labels sin with tems such as a “poor choice” or some other soft term.

Again, I don’t take umbrage with your premise that Ingrid at times displays an unhealthy and unholy glee or revelry in pointing out the sins of individuals.

93   Rick Frueh    http://http?//followingjudahslion.com
December 19th, 2008 at 2:20 pm

The word “misfortune” was antiseptic but I did not mean to diminish sin. But Ingrid has had some “misfortunes” in her own life in the past from which I am sure she has received God’s forgiveness. But love covers a multitude of sins, and I would assume we let the local church handle the situation without arms length commentary from around the globe.

But when you read words like “mug” and the questioning of people’s IQs, you then realize this post was not redemptive, it wasn’t instructive, and it wasn’t even corrective which should be in humble love. It was pure flesh and meant to elevate the status of the author, even when said author is not an elder in any local church (Biblically). All this at the expense of a deceived woman and her unsuspecting children.

I find the entire post repulsive and without any Christian value. Posts about Biblical discipline are fine, but they will not have self righteous verbiage and will not unnecessarily pile on a specific person with whom we have no authority. It is just “Christian” voyeurism meant to rival the National Enquirer.

94   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 19th, 2008 at 2:51 pm

Joe,

Changed spots confuse me.

Really it shouldn’t confuse you… PB is notorious at picking and choosing what he wants to believe and follow in the bible.

As with other ODM/ADM people they overlook clear passages in Scripture and negate them by man made loop-holes.

This has been the same since the time of Jesus and which Jesus often confronted of the “religious” of His day.

So… at least PB and others are consistent in that they will do anything they “feel” is right in their own eyes and find ways to justify their own self regardless to Scripture.

It is that “nailing Jello to the wall” I speak of about PB who will argue circle if he deems the person is “right” in his own eyes regardless to facts, truth and scripture.

I guess with them, if you hate someone and it feels good sin and attack your brother to make your own sin seem less.

iggy

95   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
December 19th, 2008 at 2:52 pm

Rick,

I think that you slighted the National Enquirer… you need to repent. = )

iggy

96   Neil    
December 19th, 2008 at 3:06 pm

RE: the woman and church discippline…

What’s the point of publically exposing someone who has voluntarily left the fellowship?

What logic is she using when she goes to the press complaining that the church is going to make her sins public?