An Alternate Explanation…
An observation from the mailbag (along w/ my own thoughts):
One ADM writes:
I have observed a strange thing. Churches will spend time and money on the most shockingly moronic videos of their pastors engaging in things like shaking their fannies into the camera (a memorable church-produced “Christmas” video) and worse. The videos are posted on YouTube, available to the entire world. Some of them are up for more than a year. Then, when I post a link to this infamy on Slice to demonstrate the shambolic state of evangelicalism, there is a sudden embarrassed rush to hide the videos as “private”, or to remove the videos altogether. One church just kept editing out the comments from Slice readers who pointed out the disgraceful behavior of a so-called “pastor.” Why is this? Are these people suddenly overcome by something called shame?
Observations:
1) She overlooked another possibility. No one wants to deal with her or her readers. Its easier to pull a video down than to talk to the unpleasant Slice of Laodicea hordes. That’s something to be really proud of.
2) She also overlooked that many Christians have an ability apparently missing from her gene pool – the ability to laugh at themselves.
3) Shame is an unhealthy byproduct of guilt, both of which are derived from sin. The last time I checked, producing sub-par-quality art (or high-quality silliness) was not enumerated in a list of biblical sins. Rather, acting peaceably w/ brothers & sisters IS something desired, and thus, the churches who pull down/privatize videos and erase anti-Christian vitriol (from other Christians) are following Christ’s example far more than the harpies and vultures who’ve ascended from the Sludge of Laodicea to stab them in the back…
And more bitter slicing:
it is difficult to imagine that Christianity used to produce some of the finest minds in the world. The brilliance of men like John Owen and Jonathan Edwards who submitted their minds to the Lordship of Jesus Christ, continues to shine down through the centuries. Harvard and Yale were at one time Christian institutions, dedicated to the Gospel and developing minds to the glory of God.
Fast forward to 2009 and the rotting corpse of Western Christianity. This buffoonery is what now fills churches today—the entire idiotic scene inspired by a children’s cartoon of singing and dancing vegetables. Infantalism rules, literacy is dead, and God-given intellects are dead, suffocated under years of video game playing, movie and television watching. Hard to believe that Christians used to produce books like “Bondage of the Will”, and translations of the Scriptures from the original languages. Today, pastors and church laity are reading “graphic novel” (comic book) versions of the Bible because they struggle to grasp anything beyond a one syllable word.
Observations:
1) Where to even begin? Apparently historical criticism was not taught in the Milwaukee schools years ago, as the writer cannot seem to discern cultural shifts from theological shifts to save her life. Moaning that the digital age doesn’t meet the success criteria of the print age – and that this is, somehow, a theological issue is more pathetic and sad than frustrating. The shift from modernist print means of communication to post-modernist visual means is a cultural one, that no amount of “spiritual maturity” (neither the author’s definition, nor the actual definition) will “cure”. Which begs the question – must one convert to modernism before one can legitimately accept Jesus? Apparently, one shrill voice believes so…
2) Buffoonery is in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I find much of Christian Talk Radio to fit the bill of “buffoonery” and irrelevancy than a YouTube video parodying VeggieTales – the key difference being that the folks in the video are purposely acting a certain way to reach a certain audience, whereas many in CTR are buffoons without purpose or method to their madness.
3) We’ve covered Manga and Graphic Novels before, but perhaps it should once again be underscored how silly and stupid the screeching about this form of art/communication is. Graphic novels have become an effective means of storytelling in modern culture. Much like translating the scriptures from a hodge-podge of Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek and Latin documents into English, translating the scriptures from words into pictures is not going to be a perfect translation – however – it takes the most important story we have to tell and puts it into a format that can best be understood by a certain audience of people. So again, must we convert the “illiterate” pagan from visual media to written media before they can be converted to Jesus?
To sum it all up, it just seems that the shrewish nattering from Laodicea is primarily an elitist, snobbish, country-club view of Christianity – far more in danger of missing Christ in this world and the next – that the targets of its poison-tounged diatribes.
But all hope is not lost.
Even Saul, on his walk to Damascus, was converted from a slanderer and persecutor of Christians and Christ to a living testament to the ability of the Messiah to change hearts and minds…
![Image of The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31Jl6fhDLxL._SL75_.jpg "The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith")
148 Comments(+Add)
Let make a guess about John Owen and Jonathan Edwards. They were most likely racist and would strongly disapprove of a woman rebuking men.
Just a guess…
But apparently they liked books on bondage…
Jonathan Edwards explicitly condemns Ingrid’s ministry methodology in “Some Thoughts on This Present Revival” when he deals with lay exhortation.
Ingrid should read it.
M.G.
You know, I’ve read that a couple of times and completely forgot about it. So true. Had he lived today, he would have rebuked her rather sternly.
Sorry MG, this is the ADM version of theological buffet, take what you like and leave the rest. Here is an exerpt from the diary of Jonathan Edwards:
January 3, 1748 – Sarah had made a disparaging remark about another preacher and I had to bring her before the church today. I informed the church of her remark and I insisted I would not be a part of turning this church into a clown church by allowing silly women to criticize ordained elders.
The church agreed and Sarah asked for forgiveness, but we will watch and see if her repentance meets our standards. I didn’t want to do it to her, but I felt I owed it to her (Caddyshack)
Hey, according to Edwards, this was all preordained anyway, so what’s the point in complaining about it? It’s like complaining about your soup being cold on the Titanic…
“It’s like complaining about your soup being cold on the Titanic…”
LOL – it’s called Reformed Iceberg Theology.
I think the point is that SOL actually makes a good point, but the incessant coloring and additional commentary takes away from the observations.
I don’t agree with a lot of the posts there, more so in tone than anything else, but to say that most of the junk put out by churches to attract attendees is anything more than that (junk) is generous.
I do agree with the point made here that your motives and method of castigation can be more sinful than what you’re condemning.
So Paul, are you saying that SoL is pretty much the highest (lowest?) example of this article?
Brendt, don’t have time to read the whole post, but I generally agree with this statement as it pertains to anyone:
This is an area we all need to be careful with.
OK, well I won’t put words in your mouth.
I’ll just say that the signal-to-noise ratio is so low at SoL does more than merely obscure the point — more like obliteration.
Getting a dejavu of Danny Glover in the Lethal Weapon movies: I’m too old for this “stuff”.
Oh wow… S/N problems in engineering that lasted well into the night/morning… brings back bad memories…
There comes a time when a person is so outrageous, so harmful, so judgmental, and just so divisive that the Scriptures command us to avoid them. In essence, any legitimate point made by that source is not legitimate.
The same legitimate point can be made by someone else. (We don’t take Hugh Hefner’s advice about being non-violent, even though it’s a legitimate point)
Maybe I just have thick skin, but didn’t Jesus tell His disciples to rejoice when they are persecuted? Why such a hubbub?
If the Son of God was killed by religion essentially, why are you guys so up-in-arms over a woman with a keyboard? Really, I don’t get it.
It is amazing to me that those most persecuted are also the most silent (ie: Warren, Bell, etc). You guys seem to defend them when they see no real need to defend themselves. Why not follow their example?
Who’s claiming to be persecuted?
I’ve read pieces where both Bell and Warren defend themselves to some degree. Of course they can’t answer every specific charge, but I have seen them defend their general ideas.
I think the main reason I write here has little to do with Ingrid or Ken Silva personally. I know that nothing I say will convince them barring the miraculous. I do think there is value in revealing the truth apart from the lies, and presenting a reasoned response.
Commands to rejoice don’t prohibit responses… and, I wonder if they ever dreamed their would be persecution from within (though It really doesn’t fit the bill of persecution).
Paul – I would like to point out that I do not defend Bell or Warren or anyone usually. I take issue with Ingrid’s merciless attack on people who fall, especially teenagers. I am not persecuted, and I can provide you with many posts by Ingrid lamenting her personal persecution by the faithless hordes of emergent dragons!
E-mail her and tell her how you feel and let us know her response.
One more alternative explanation: The real shame is what they feel about shaking their flabby asses in the camera, thus causing them to remove said videos.
The shame of the flabby assed arguments put forth here should cause all of you to withdraw from blogging.
What a singular waste of time.
Understood Rick. I see this aspect as perverse as well to some degree (while other stuff I see as legit – ie: the circus the Church has become).
Not to mention taking on Veggie Tales – that’s just not right.
Yeah, cleaning up after the elephants week after week does get a bit tiring…
The problem is it’s quite easy to find examples of nutty behavior in any given human endeavor. I can’t in good conscience point to the behavior of some and condemn the whole.
I have been to a thousand churches and have never seen a clown or a motorcycle or other things. So should I google to find a youtube moment and post it to draw some sensationalism?
What a singular waste of time.
And yet are you always willing to come by and show us what Christ does not look like.
Thanks!
I’ve been in some churches where a car, or some other random thing was on the platform. But they were being used intentionally as visual aids for the sermons.
I didn’t see it as “attracting” people to come to the church so much as using high creativity and various methods toward effective teaching.
Basic theories on education delineate that a variety of teaching styles and methods are good for effective instruction.
Why is this stuff bad?
Furthermore, when there are fun videos of church leaders being silly it’s also for the benefit of the church family.
we aren’t some conglomeration of individuals, but Scripture is clear that we belong to each other.
laughter, levity, etc. are wonderful ways to reinforce that alongside all the other things a local church traditionally can do.
how is this such a threat to “reverence”, etc.?
really?
Template – this blog is the one source of imperical substance of all things spiritual. Chris Lyons has a prophetic annointing upon his life which is second to only one other. The issues here and the spiritual guidance is without equal, and those who close their ears to the divine mandate that proceeds from the river of this blog will live in eternity to regret it.
You have been warned.
* Please note that when faced with abdurdity I resort to absurdity cubed!
nc – visual object lessons are not always wrong (baptism, communion) and I have used them as well. But some of them (a bed) are over the top and just sensationalism. I never brought my Harley Dyna Wide Glide 1400 cc with open Vansen Hines pipes into the sanctuary!
Template,
If it’s such a waste of time then why do you bother?
If people like you and the other imams stopped what they were doing then you wouldn’t have to suffer with the temptation to glorify yourself with this horrible site.
and Template…
“asses”?
Such language, little boy.
I thought that was beneath you and grounds for determining goat-herder status.
Enjoy that today…if you even bother looking in the mirror.
And if you do, I’d invite you to really account for your resentments. It’s not fitting for a potential member of the God-head to be filled with bitterness.
Sorry guys, bad choice of words. When I said “Circus” I wasn’t referring to clowns and elephants, but more so the trend of church and even Christ becoming a marketing product to a large extent.
To a great degree the church has become somewhat gimmicky. Whereas Paul relied on the Spirit and the Word of God to touch the heart of the hearers (as did Jesus as in the parable of the sower), today we come more so with “man’s wisdom” and rely on business methodology.
I’d say Christ is “marketed” less to day (in America) than, say the 80’s and before. In fact, if your read some of the Emerging (not -ent) Church stuff… it’s one of their significant points.
And by today you mean post AD 313 – correct?
Ah, the sweet siren call of the idealization of the past.
Its at least as much a danger of becoming an idol as cash, country or anything else.
Jesus used many “methods” to attract people that would be frowned upon by some today.
*He gave out fish sandwiches
*He stilled the storms
*He helped with catching fish
*He turned water into wine
And other “gimmickery” things done to draw attention. As long as the message is clear, methods can be employed.
Funny it is wrong to shake ones booty to a camera… but not wrong to say “ass” a couple of times to say how profane the camera action is…
Double standard by a double minded man…
After the meeting at Wanssee which was to arrive at the final solution, Reinhard Heydrich said “All agencies will fall in line or
will sting” (in German, of course).
So Template has a precident.
Hmmm… to liken the gimmickry used today to the methods employed by Christ… a stretch. Christ’s intent wasn’t to just draw a crowd, keep it growing and growing just for the sake of it. He drew men and women to an acknowledging of the truth.
We need to realize that gimmickry is used most often to make up for (or distract from) what is really lacking: the power of God. This was not the case with Christ.
First of all, when Jesus looked at the crowds He felt compassion on them because they were like sheep without a shepherd (though religion was flourishing – imagine that).
Secondly, if you read John 6 – just an example among many – he made demands for discipleship. The 1000’s who were following for the fish/bread quickly departed and “walked no more with Him” when He outlined the requirements.
Roughly the same thing happened in John 8.
So that analogy is weak.
And not to mention, when the dust settled (Christ died), He was really only left with a handful of followers among the 10’s of thousands.
I understand you angst at Ingrid, Rick, believe me. But whether she, or someone else points it out, the church is largely powerless today and as a result has resorted to any number of gimmicks to make up for what is not there. That shouldn’t surprise us.
I don’t know if one can really say that the heart of the seeker sensitive/church growth movement is simply about growing and growing for the sake of growth.
Christ was left with only a handful and then when the Spirit came a megachurch was born overnight.
Yeah – Jesus and Paul wouldn’t use any gimmickry. No way! You know, like making object lessons out of pagan philosophers and poets or idols to unknown gods…
He would just have let the spirit of God work instead of using such gimmicks.
Because there’s no way that John 6 was more of a political statement than a justification for decimation of the church in the name of “discipleship”….
We can’t even say this for certain, since Josephus’ and other first-century authors’ numbers indicate Christians numbering in the hundreds of thousands within a few years of Jesus’ death.
Maybe the Reformed churches have become powerless in their stiff-necked worship of modernism, but I see a lot of power in Christ exhibited by many Evangelical churches in my area. I see very few examples of “powerlessness” in these churches…
The greatest examples of “powerlessness” in the church today I see demonstrated in ADMs, the prosperity gospel, and glass-half-empty handwringers like yourself, whereas I see Evangelical and Emerging churches impacting lives and making a positive impact on the kingdom, even as many eschew the political and power structures of the society the live in…
Yeah, but that happened because it was done in exactly the way I want to do things, and, coincidentally enough, exactly how the church I grew up in or wish I grew up in did things, not the way people who do things now do things.
The past was the best thing ever! The present is the worst thing ever!
BTW if they are flabby… well I agree! No one wants to see that!
“One church just kept editing out the comments from Slice readers who pointed out the disgraceful behavior of a so-called “pastor.” Why is this? Are these people suddenly overcome by something called shame?”
If the Slice crowd took a social psychology class it would all start making so much sense to them.
“because they struggle to grasp anything beyond a one syllable word.”
That’s obscene.
Paul – there are extremes, of course. And some churches go overboard and obscure the message with theatrics. But even though I would disagree with them, I cannot limit God and I cannot lie because I have met many people whose lives have been changed in that type of church. And if we measure powerless by a Finney revival standard then we are all in the same boat.
But I have been to a prominent reformed church in the area, one that subscribes to John MacArthur’s ministry. They were built a church building debt free on 5 acres by a wealthy person over ten years ago and they have not grown in that ten years. Their church is on the main street in the town as well.
They pride themselves on music style, no emotion, no altar call, and a boring teaching style that resembles Algebra II. You want to talk about no power? And like so many other reformed churches they explain it away by saying sinners don’t want the true gospel, and they measure growth by Biblical knowledge and not numbers, and all the other churches are shallow, and the worst of all “God will bring in the elect and most people are not chosen anyway”.
So if we want to single out the extremes and use that template to make our own situation look much better, so be it. We are all caught up in the culture to one extent or another. But what is most offensive to me is the way people like Ingrid can demean everything with caustic rhetoric like comment #44 and still claim to be faithful to Christ.
And the same people who are deeply offended by a motorcycle in the service, can read a tragedy of a depressed man killing his wife and son and himself, and use that as a starting point to suggest that he wasn’t a real man and he is symptomatic of the dearth of manhood in this country. Oh yea, her husband is a real man while the man eating lion goes hungry. And she tells this story because she and her son have listened to some tape.
This is what people are teaching their children, to look down upon the entire society with a self righteousness that dismisses everyone but you and yours? I tell you now before God, I would attend Osteen’s church before I went to church with Ingrid. As a matter of fact, on the other end of the scale, she is as bad as Joel Osteen because he preaches a positive thinking gospel and she spews a gospel of hubristic judgmentalism.
And Paul, you said, “But whether she, or someone else points it out”. I will not stick my hand in a spittoon in order to find a nickel. To me that nickel is worthless. So it is with anything true coming from that fountain of self righteous toxin.
Rick – I am a bit offended.
I really loved Algebra II.
Rick, I appreciate your view from looking at this from extremes. You are absolutely right and I agree.
Self-righteousness is just as damnable as any other sin, and maybe even worse because of the sense of rightness (pride) a person feels.
At least your comment is more honest than some in that it acknowledges some of the things done in the name of Christ are ridiculous.
Funny you make a comment like that when you know very little about me. The broad-brush stereotypes like this that you make, Chris L, are just as damaging and angry as the ADMs you castigate. In fact, I see more hand-wringing here on this blog than I ever do myself – and that over a woman.
I go back to my original point – persecution from within (the church) is as old as man. It will never go away. To get up-in-arms about perceived ‘persecution’ and slander is missing the point that Christ told His followers this very thing would come. We are not to lament and whine and cry, but rejoice.
Yeah, I’ll take an Algebra II lesson over a John MacArthur sermon any time…
I don’t think we are to just simply rejoice when some Christians are attacking other ones. I think we should do something about it.
Does a parent sit back and rejoice when siblings are at each others throats. They do something about it.
No one is just sitting here and whining, anyway. We are simply refuting lies with truth. Many of us have taken active steps to remove ourselves from situations where we were suffering under spiritually abusive people like the ADMs. I don’t see why you think they should just be free to take out whomever they want.
“Gimmickry” is in the eye of the beholder… and to make the statement above, you must “discern” that the goal is to “keep it growing and growing just for the sake of it.”
I think judging the hearts/motives of others is every bit as dangerous (if not more) than the use of a gimmick.
Phil – remember, this is spiritual warfare. Throwing the stones back over the fence, proverbially speaking, is not really all that effective. That’s what I see in a lot of this back-and-forth. It is a fleshly exercise in which both sides (ADMs and .info alike) seek to justify themselves.
That’s a very objective view Phil.
People will do what they want to do…
One of the most eye-opening accounts in the NT is in Matthew 26. Think of the 2 extremes.
While the Sanhedrin was putting the finishing touches on how to bring down Jesus, where was He? He wasn’t arming for a mass revolt. He was sharing a meal in the house of Simon the leper. He carried on with things, not allowing detractors (in fact, murderers) to take Him off course.
It really illustrates the mind of Christ in the face of opposition.
Both my brothers are engineers with a healthy math backround, but I am a right brainer and I hated math. I was one who gleefully recited a Shakespearian soliloquy rather than solve some meaningless equation.
What a piece of work is a man. Yep, a real piece of work!
It can become a “fleshly” exercise no doubt… hence the recent post by Jerry warning against this very thing.
That said, Ingrid’s recent attacks (as an example) cannot go unchallenged. And while I agree with your Matthew 26 example, the choices to challenge Ingrid or minister to the needs of others are not mutually exclusive.
If you saw someone attacking your actual brother or sister, or even simply heard them telling lies about them, would you simply sit back and do nothing? I would suspect not. I suspect you would at least say something along the lines of, “hey, back off man, that’s my brother you’re attacking”.
So, yeah, I don’t deny there’s a spiritual aspect to this – everything is spiritual. But we can still refute things using logic and rhetoric. That’s a big part of what the Apostle Paul was doing in his epistles.
Maybe having such a sharp spiritual/physical divide is what allows the ADMs to think the way they do. They think the are talking of purely spiritual things, but they don’t realize the actual harm that is left in the wake.
Let us be realistic about the preachers of the past. Many had great and edifying devotional writings, but we make a gigantic mistake to immortalize them and bring them forward into today without the proper context. Those who scream about context seem blind to the context of their heroes. They practice a not so subtle form of human idolatry.
The puritans were absolute legalists and manytimes had a self righteous spirit. Who could argue that Calvin was a self absorbed bully with little kindness and worshiped doctrine? Finney (my favorite) was abrasive and self righteous. Most of them were racists with some doubting the equal
humanity of blacks.
The pulpit lends itself to power and pride, and one can weep while reading Spurgeon’s sermons on the cross and then read a prideful dismissiveness as he speaks of doctrinal opponents from that same man. There are today people who will believe almost anything their favorite preacher says, some even coming close to obssession.
Many today have traded humility and love for an imagined prophetic mantle, and the exhortation to “speak the truth in love” now means to them “speak the truth and that is love”. And so instead of gently but unmistakeably confronting some of these churches and their methods, they speak with a demeaning viciousness that elevates them and destroys their targets, the latter being subservient to the former.
We are Christians, believers, followers, and imitators of the most humble and loving Person who ever walked among us. If anyone had the authority to destroy it all it was Him. We must becareful as we correct, since without love correction is nothing more than a self elevation without and care or concern for the target of our horrible words.
It just may be that the sincere pastor, driven by his desire to reach people, who drives a motorcycle into the service as a teaching object, is more favored in God’s sight than the smug, vicious, self righteous, and demeaning blogger who eroneously and openly attached God’s name to a ministry of destruction.
And just for the record I believe Ingrid is much worse than is Ken. Ken has his goofy labels and infinite self links but for the most part he deals with doctrine. Ingrid is just a self absorbed human invectoid.
Rick,
When I hear ADM’s complain about “modern” methods and/or gimmicks (I am thinking in broader terms than just Paul C’s comments) I think about things such as Billy Sunday and “Hitting the sawdust trail” and the “Anxious Bench” and Billy Graham and “The buses will wait…” and altar calls…
All man-made methods and potentially (if not actually) gimmicks.
Paul C,
How very “emergent” of you
Neil – the ADMs hate the anxious bench. They claim that anything that smacks of human manipulation can result in false conversions (If you’re a Calvinist who cares). My reply is hand a leaflet of Bible verses among the congregation and you avoid your own interpretation, voice inflections, personality, and anything human. Because we all know humans can easily thwart God’s power.
In fact, I see more hand-wringing here on this blog than I ever do myself - and that over a woman.
Yikes.
Doesn’t Paul Washer deploy some kind of “anxious bench” or “weeping bench” or some other thing like that?
I’m wondering if I actually heard that somewhere…
anyone?
The irony is that many of the Revivalists in the past were Calvinists, and many Arminians accused them of emotionally manipulating their audiences. It’s just funny how today many of the Neo-Reformed folks throw out the charge of emotionalism and sensationalism against people. Jonathan Edwards could have been accused of many things, but he certainly wasn’t a stoic and unfeeling person. I don’t think he would approve of the hatred that spews forth from the ADMs today.
#47
I’m contacting the American Bible Society to get Galatians ripped out of the Bible immediately.
Yes, there is a tinge of sadness, even embarassment, to see a bunch of men running around with placards and getting all tied into knots over the comments of only a single woman who doesn’t even feel the need to respond to you anyways…
Re #59… Ironic isn’t it? They bemoan contemporary “post-modern” methods, instead choosing to glorify the past… when, if they look into the past they should also bemoan it and it’s modernist methods as well.
Paul C.,
We understand your point… we should all just ignore Ingrid and allow here vitriolic (and often false) accusations and opinions to go unchallenged.
I think the concept of the “anxious bench” is kinda refreshing – the concept that is, not necessarliy how it was employed.
And although it is a product of a different century, it really does align better with a relational gospel and post-modernism against the formulaic (almost magical) gospel of modernism.
I suppose taking this line of logic (that we are not to oppose since the existence of opposition is inevitable) we should also:
Not do evangelism since the raod to destruction is broad.
Not help the poor since Jesus said they would always be with us.
Not pray (or work for) peace since nation will inevitable rise up against nation.
Etc
Etc.
Etc.
64.
No, Paul.
It’s the backhanded misogyny of your comment. That somehow no one should be bothered or take her comments with a pound of salt because she’s just a “she” after all.
Yikes.
The issue isn’t Ingrid. The issue is the behavior.
Her writing is not the only source of content here.
But your last couple comments are a nice attempt at some kind of rhetorical strategy.
The sad thing is that the clearly stated reasons for discussion here are, well, clearly stated.
The language here, grounded in the actual behavior and hypocritical deeds of the ADM culture, is quite distinct from the personalized tantrums and rants critiqued.
Those tantrums reveal the hand-wringing inner disposition of those evaluated here.
The clear and vigorous deeds focused critique in the articles on this site give you no basis to evaluate a disposition of “hand wringing” here.
It really doesn’t.
but again…nice rhetorical strategy.
have a lovely day…
Washer does employ an anxious bench.
I was part of an anxious bench once in High School and then again in college. I kept hoping the coach would put me in. He never did. One day, he sat me down and told me that I had potential but that I wouldn’t be playing much that year. Broke my heart…
The issue of Ingrid’s gender does have a place in my perspective. So Paul’s quip about a “woman” is also a point of contention as it applies to women elders.
Remember, Paul, there is a lot of sermon material on your website that addresses issues about which no one cares to reply – so why do it?
I personally don’t care if Ingrid responds here or not.
The simple point is that her site and others will always be google listed together with this one…meaning the lovely “market place of ideas” that some love so dearly will actually work, even if comments are disallowed on the sites.
Again.
Anyone…lurkers or commenting critics…who wants this site to “go away” can go first and then there’s no need for .info
It’s real simple.
Until then, welcome to the beauty of free speech the “godly” founders gave us for this “Christian Nation”.
72:
Rick, a reasoned complementarian position is not misogyny. (You are a stellar example of such).
But that’s clearly not the point being made…
And if the only point is a complementarian one then your longstanding position on Ingrid’s ministry comes into play and she “loses” again.
Yes, nc. You got me…
Neil – again, point missed.
You are lamenting the personal invectives and vitriol of a person who is directing their attacks against other churches. What is the response? Personal invectives and vitriol against said person.
To deny this, by the way, would be quite dishonest as it shines through fairly clearly. My point is that you can become side-tracked and so enmeshed in this web of tit-for-tat, back-and-forth, lobbing the stones back over the wall, that you become what you so sorely claim to dislike.
My argument is that, like Christ, just carry on about your business and you might find that what appears so glaring and damaging becomes small in the grand scheme. Not to mention, in a twisted way, have you considered that you lend credibility to things you hate with your incessant quibbling?
nc – Here is something that might interest you:
http://judahslion.blogspot.com/2008/06/message-charles-finney-would-have-loved.html
If a complementarian view is all that was meant by Paul, then it makes no sense that people shouldn’t be bothered by her ministry of anger.
They should be bothered even more.
It should be more offensive in light of the position.
Not sure what this comment means. Can you elaborate?
It means you guys deal with a lot of issues as well, and that is what we deal with about Ingrid, issues.
75:
Yep, I did.
Paul, go re-read the rest of the comment.
You’ll see that your tedious insistence that this place is just like others isn’t going to hold water.
You may take issue with the comments and commenters, but article to article this site is nothing like those critiqued.
sorry, just ain’t.
would you rather they shut down comments here?
probably…I don’t know.
A careful reading of comments here and you would see that invectives get rebuked here all the time.
Paul C,
Your complaints are beyond passe. The idea that this site and Ingrid are equal in their tactics is absurd and has been addressed ad nauseum. Your [midnight] crying on this point is over wrought to the point of absurdity. But to go over it again, when have any of the writers on this site taken the kind of personal shots that Ingrid has? Where are the declarations that she is bound for hell, or the evaluations of her intelligence, or the assertions about her motivation or repentance? Please use actual examples from the writers of this site, not general condemnations that are mostly your own opinions.
I’m also a bit interested in your remark that this site is somehow lacking because Ingrid rarely directly responds. Does that apply to Ingrid as well? For example, because Rob Bell, Rick Warren, and the smaller churches who she attacks don’t directly respond to her is her blog then lacking and she should just give up? Or is this idea only applied to people you disagree with?
76:
Rick,
lovely.
#81 – Bullseye.
This convo is starting to remind me of my Dad’s defense of Fox News.
he said some independent group verified that Fox was 40% critical of liberals and 40% critical of conservatives.
But that misses the point. It’s not about equal quantity, but quality.
40% reasonable disagreement with variations in conservative/libertarian ideas is one thing.
40% of “terrorist fist bump” type b.s. is another thing altogether.
Fox News has become a cult, just like Hannity, Limbaugh, and others. I happen to be the only cult leader worth following!
Kool-aid please.
Bo -you might want to include Ingrid’s unsolicited attacks on Miley Cyrus – A TEENAGE WOMAN. And one who doesn’t reply to Ingrid.
Paul’s assertions are biased.
Bo, this is exactly what I was saying earlier. From what I’ve observed, these individuals don’t feel the need to attack back all the time … they just seem to leave it alone and carry on with their greater purpose. I suspect that if they lent credibility to all of their detractors, they’d quickly be bogged down and not be able to move.
This has been my point on this post – sorry if it hasn’t been communicated well enough.
Call me chauvanistic, but see a group of men nattering on ad nauseum about the comments a woman makes on her blog is a little sad, but that’s just my personal view.
Take a lesson from those attacked the most – you are doing more than you know to lend credence and validity when you carry on like this.
Biased in whose favor and for what reason?
(dang! submit button snafu)
If ADM’s were just making reasonable, vigorous arguments that would be one thing.
But as is constantly noted here the little bit of good they actually offer is obliterated by the “terrorist fist bump” style rhetoric–Inflammatory jargon.
As Rick once said: The rare nickel in the spitoon.
The sad thing is that the spitoon juice is being offered as a glass of fine wine.
That merits somebody saying: “No! That’s spitoon juice.”
Paul – the entire issue is not Ingrid Schlueter, it’s about CHRISTIANITY. Please e-mail the blogs that support her and give her the credibility you say we do if it’s credibility that concerns you.
BTW – blog credibility is an oxi-moron!
Not just biased, but he avoids the main thrust of his argument…. that this site is somehow the mirror image of Slice of Laodicea.
Which brings up the obvious point that several have already made (which Paul C ignores also), that this site is hardly only about SoL, yet the only point he continues to make is based on the assumed premise that it is.
Call me chauvanistic, but see a group of men nattering on ad nauseum about the comments a woman makes on her blog is a little sad, but that’s just my personal view.
Again, Paul. She’s not the only source of issues.
But repeating yourself doesn’t make your attempt more effective.
OK, that got me laughing out loud. It ranks with the “You’re a piece of crap evangelism” quip! Thanks!
Why, oh why, can’t Paul C, PB, et. al. just clearly condemn the tactics of the ADM’s?
If you did, then you’d actually have a hearing on the other points you’d like to make. really.
93.
I was debating between fine wine and a luscious glass of chocolate milk…
94:
Further…you’d then see that there is a lot of commonality of thought between a lot of us.
#38 – “I understand you angst at Ingrid, Rick, believe me.”
No, Paul, you do not. I strongly stand against Ingrid rebuking pastors and elders, and her voice is carried on her father’s radio station so she has a larger audience than most of us.
However the posts that make me extremely upset, are those that attack the fallen, the downtrodden, the fatherless, the depressed, the young, and all the rest that God tells us to minister to. That is not Christianity and that will continue to be exposed regardless of who gets upset about it. And Ingrid has responded in the past with force and personal sympathy.
So no, you do not feel as do I.
Rick – when I read a post about a man killing his family being contrasted with the ‘real men’ of the Great Depression, it bothers me deeply.
I have never once voiced support for posts that do this at all. In fact, I am not all that much an avid reader of SoL, truth be told.
If you go back to my original comments on this post, I was solely focused on posts about the tomfoolery in the church, but I mentioned that the tone and distasteful commentary on top of it, is not necessary. I also mentioned the greater danger of self-righteousness and pride.
In my reference to lending credibility, what I mean is that if a person is so convinced that what they are doing is right, and then they see that people are mounting an offensive against them (like .info does), it actually further convinces them the battle they are engaged in is correct.
This is why I suspect that many who are attacked simply don’t get engaged, but carry on in their calling. Perspective is important.
I’m just attempting to be a man’s man and speak out with boldness and clarity, not like those wimps that kill their families and themselves. That’s so gay.
Sometimes our responses (and more so the comments which we do not control) come to that – I’ll admit as much. And when it does we are usually pretty quick to police the personal invectives and vitriol.
That cannot be said of Ingrid and her every spiraling intensity with which she attacks and slanders.
As others have said – the “you’re just as bad” retort is asinine… and as others have said – all that needs happen for us to stop defending is for them to stop providing the need for a defense.
For the record, no one has yet seen the shocking invectives and vitriol of which my carnal nature is capable.
Be afraid…be very afraid.
Seriously Paul C, examples, lets see ‘em.
And so the battle continues to rage… from the comfort of living rooms, dens and office cubicles, men and women type vigorously in defense of truth, carefully crafting arguments, punctuated with smiley faces, dripping with sarcasm and sometimes good points… But the battle must be fought, and mouths stopped, lest evil get the upperhand. We boldly declare as we march, “We will stand on the side of right!”
And now for a little perspective.
But seriously Neil, I appreciate your honesty and I can say that I enjoy interacting with everyone here. As you admitted, things sometimes spiral here, but I don’t see it as a major issue and it is usually corrected or apologized for, which is good.
I also do recognize that rarely are mistakes, rushes to judgment, etc. apologized for publicly with SoL.
Well, while we’re waiting I’m going to go enjoy a nice warm mug of spiced spitoon juice. It’s cold here.
103:
I hear what you are trying to say, Paul.
For the record, I don’t think ADM’s are evil.
Well, I understand what you’re saying as well, but I guess we could endlessly engage in a back and forth about the rightness or wrongness of blogging. I will say, though, there is an inherent hypocrisy in condemning us for arguing our point while you are arguing yours.
In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the debate of ideas or the use of rhetoric to defend one’s position. Of course, we all can cross lines now and then, and I’m sure we do, but luckily for us, we are held by grace. We do try to keep things above-the-belt for the most part here.
Of course what the ADMs do to people doesn’t compare to Christians who are actually physically persecuted, but that doesn’t mean what they’re doing isn’t wrong. Both stealing a candy bar and murdering someone is wrong, and both can be condemned, but murder clearly has a greater consequence. But that doesn’t mean you simply neglect the lesser offenses.
Paul C.
RE #103… as much as I participate on the one hand, I completely agree with you on the other.
That’s why, if I use “persecution” when referring ADMdom, I always (unless I forget) put it in quotations… to distinguish it from real persecution.
Neil
Phil, I’m not condemning you at all. I hope you didn’t get that from me as that’s not my intent towards you.
True say.
No, but it calls for a little perspective, lest we get the sense we are on the ‘frontlines’ of some little jihad. For example, while we often quibble about tone and our feelings being hurt, it would do us well to remember that we are still on the soft road so-to-speak. I’m wondering if some of the people who are constantly lambasted have this in mind, and maybe it gives them the grace to continue without getting dragged into the weeds.
And let’s not forget that God is a living God. He observes all of us, hence the need for self-examination.
And if we go to far, He knows how to fix us.
I resolve this day to make the ADMs my life. I will investigate each infraction, regardless of degree, as if it were the Council of Trent. I will read and reread every post with an eye for the smallest inuendo, the slightest hint of unpleasantness and I will latch onto it like a pit bull on steroids. I will obsess on each issue, treating it like it is the last straw before the faith is gone. And I will pursue the offenders with a relentless energy that knows no day or night, no rest or sleep, and I will consider each of their attack posts as a personal attack on my own grandchildren.
Today I begin my never ending journey!
Ya know what…I’ll wait till tomorrow…I think.
http://www.founders.org/blog/2009/02/what-will-we-be-in-sbc.html
Interesting little exchange between KS and Timmy Brister in the comments.
Slice has a good article about Facebook.
Yes, I read it as well. Very relevant, well-written, and easily digestible for tenderfoots.
It reads more like covering your tracks since it has become apparent how parts this Facebook really are. Who cares?
I love these articles about “Today I went to the store yada, yada…and then I joined Facebook yada, yada…now I’ve unjoined Facebook yada, yada.”
“Yawn”
Ummm Rick… perhaps that’s why it was entitled “Facebook: Some Thoughts” – not a treatise, not a “council” decision, not a rally to boycott. Just “some thoughts”, and valid ones at that.
Ahh yes, the internet is a big, scary place…it’s good nanny Ingrid can guide us along the way…
Honestly, I think if other articles on Slice carried that kind of tone and rhetorical stance, we might see less concern over the effects of Slice and more engagement to real mutual submission, wisdom and constructive critique.
Ugh. Just went over to her Hope Blog (which I had been told was more devotional, and Christ-like in tone) and its just more of the same.
She re-iterates her disdain for the victims of the men who committed suicide due to hopelessness there. There’s something seriously stomach churning about a woman who is employed by her father’s business lecturing everyone about how they just need to quit being such cry babies.
*Errrr, wrote too quickly, not victims of the men, the men themselves.
I’m not sure what the point of her Facebook post was… was it to show how she mismanaged her account as a warning to others?
I suppose that’s a good warning.
Her most recent post, Faith-filled Thoughts, is really quite nice. It’s nice glimpse of the “man behind the curtain” –
It’s almost surreal compared to hate, rage, condescension, vitriol, etc… at slice.
Makes me think Wizard of Oz, and Hyde and Jekyll.
I think her main point about “time wasting” is well made.
Back to the OP, some of the greatest examples of buffoonery are the talk shows of Hannity and Limbaugh. I believe that goofy video is much less of a revelation of the believer’s intellect than is those who listen to a multi-millionaire incessently spout off about everything negative (as he sees it) in the wonderful world of politics.
You see, God’s command about murmering and complaining doesn’t apply in the world of conservative talk shows.
I think we **all** have our heads in the sand. Fortunately, the majority of us can breath out the other end.
just watched the video.
The OP said “purposely acting a certain way to reach a certain audience” – what do you think the certain audience was here? Friends/Drew Carey/Seinfeld audience or kids? it was quite a spirited video and well produced, and obviously someone has thought long and hard about the content. Just curious to know what you mean by “reach”, and how this video does that.
This video would have taken about 15 hours to complete + (rehearsal hours * no. of people). These things take a lot of time. So i’m trying identify what the value in all this time spent in producing what could possibly be the ultimate “identify their felt need and you can win anyone to Christ” video.
#22. Neil said “Not to mention taking on Veggie Tales – that’s just not right.”
Veggie Tales have a Nativity Set in which the baby Jesus, the creator and savior of the world, is represented by a tiny piece of plastic vegetable.
http://ccparent.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/veggietales-nativity.jpg
I hope you’re joking. I wish I was.
Are you serious? You’re offended by this?
I’m pretty sure the creators of Veggie Tales do not think Jesus was an actual vegetable…
i’m pretty sure they don’t think he was.
If the veggie tales nativity scene is offensive then using kids in a play or those precious second figurines are just as offensive…
These are just representatives… and if you have ever watched VT they are retelling the stories so that kids can relate… keeping the core value of the story in tact…
I am more offended by the bible action heroes like Samson who was strong but not stated as built like a pro wrestler… But still if my kids were into them I would get them so they could play.
To me to be offended enough to write a hit peice against these things is as silly as “Testamints gum” itself.
Well, there goes all the variations on Nativity sets that are out there.
I wish you were as well…
I am not partial the Veggie Tales, however I also find that characterizing Christ as a conservative Republican or an American capitalist is deeply offensive as well. And I find that representing Christ by complaining about the mission field in which we live is as much a distortion as Veggie Tales.
Haha! The things people say.
Are people seriously taking issue with Veggie Tales because they’re…well…vegetables?
Really?
Well, there goes Aslan…
It would be good for us to remember this again.
I thought you would have understood my point after Chris L posted the ‘De-Sanitizing Christmas’ series last year – in particular, but not limited to, this post:
http://christianresearchnetwork.info/2008/12/02/de-sanitizing-christmas-4-away-in-a-manger-2008-update/
…but this isn’t really the point of the thread. Sorry.
More shots from the Slice camp. Saddening. What’s more saddening is that then people do what they do – start chopping up ill-made comments and the cycle grows more and more vicious. Sometimes ignoring one’s foolishness is the best form of condemnation.
What does it say about the lethargy of our culture when we cannot even summon the energy to write “with” but can just muster enough energy to print w/ ?
Vitamins, Chris.
From today’s Slice files:
and
Even when she points to an article which makes some valid points she can’t help but vaunt her own self. And how much mileage (pardon the pun) is she going to get from a guy riding a motorcycle on the stage? You would think from reading the SoL it happens every week in half of all of the churches. Maybe we should have an over/under pool each week.
And she throws everything under the bus:
Right after I was saved in 1975 I made my own “One Way” bumper sticker and matching T-shirt, which I would wear in the bars I once frequented and would sit and drink soda and answer questions about my shirt. Remember, I used to be a motorcycle riding bar bouncer and had a connection with that crowd.
Ingrid is just a pathetic, self righteous prophetess wanna be. There are tens of thousands of men and women who are serving Christ this very day who were saved by some of the methods she disdains.
Amen Rick. I agree with the phrase “methods change but the message never does”.
Don’t take this correction wrong, Rick….But none of us were saved by any method. We were saved from sin and from death by the shed blood of Christ. We could not even respond to or receive that gift if God had not drawn us to Christ. It is by grace we have been saved, this is through faith, which is not of ourselves it is the gift of GOD!
So these silly methods are simply window dressing that people use thinking that they are drawing people to Christ. In reality, people are drawn by God, not by any method silly or otherwise. They respond to the Gospel because of God, even if an ass is delivering the message.
I am glad to hear your testimony, and I still use the type of ice breakers and conversation starters you describe. They do not draw anyone to Christ, but they do start a conversation.
If God does not use “methods” why criticize them? And if methods cannot help draw people to Christ, can they hinder?
Ya can’t have it both/all ways.
#144 The promise in John 6 is that all that the Father teaches, all that the Father draws will come to Christ and Christ will save them.
OK, John, so why all the hoopla over Bell and others, they cannot subvert the will of God, can they? BTW, if every Christian on earth stopped witnessing, stopped preaching, stopped passing out tracts, stopped sending missionaries, stopped evangelizing, and just let the Father draw them and save them all by Himself without those human methods, how many would be saved?
#146
If every Christian quit witnessing etc., they wouldn’t be Christians, for they would not be being obedient to the will of God for them.
I am afraid 98% of professing ‘christians’ are already living in disobedience. (this according to Bill Bright)
God mercifully gave us a task when he saved us, that is why we are still here~ not to build a new heaven and a new earth but to make disciples.
PastorBoy said,
I dunno but this sounds kind of like methods to me. Just let God get the convo started…………..