First of all, go watch this message. I’ll wait. What I’ve got to say pales in comparison.
Very powerful stuff, IMHO.
One ancillary statement that Matt Chandler made, though, stuck out to me because of prior conversations here. Several pastors/teachers have been repeatedly thrown under the bus by ODMs and their ilk because they chose to speak at conferences or churches where the other speakers didn’t agree with them theologically — sometimes with significant differences.
The “unequally yoked” phrase from 2 Corinthians 6:14 gets hideously misappropriated and gross exaggerations like “partnering in ministry” get bandied about. Not surprisingly (and I say this with regret, because I are one), a lot of such silliness comes from those that would consider themselves to be of the Reformed community. I point that out because Chandler is a Reformed guy and this was at T4G, which was lousy with Reformed guys. So when he talked about the issue, this was not two hyper-Pelagians discussing it over a beer.
The embedded video below (in case you haven’t listened to the whole message yet — you heathen) kicks in at the start of the statement that’s relevant to this post. As background, he’s talking about the vision that he had for his church when he first started pastoring. The statement runs for about 1 minute, 25 seconds (you can quit listening when he says “I’ll be working”).
In a minute and a half, Chandler crystallizes what I’ve believed for some time. I don’t think I ever want to hear that “partnering in ministry” crap again.
36 Comments(+Add)
i suspect you will. the key is opening up the scriptures. there would be those who would be content to use any part of the scriptures, while the detractors would say one MUST present a certain aspect of it… or they would be guilty of missing an opportunity.
Had an interesting exchange with a friend on FB about this post:
Mike Ratliff’s latest
drive-bypost throws Piper, Driscoll, and Chandler under the bus with no specificity whatsoever as to why, except to say that these men “trouble” those luminaries like Mike “who take our theology seriously”. The closest he comes to an explanation is a reference to how Benny Hinn is also subjective (like these men apparently are).My apologies. My whole post is based on logic. And then I realize that I’m dealing with people who compare John Piper and Benny Hinn.
To riff off something Jerry once said, “spirit of a sound mind”, my ass.
Sometimes important issues are obscured by the obsession concerning points of doctrine. Where are the posts about the unvarnished adoration of the One we call Christ? But instead we claim to be the “ones” who are “serious” about theology, which we must assume means we are serious about Jesus?
The love of theology and the love of doctrine have become idols in many ways, and in some corners the love of changing doctrines have become idols as well. The endless doctrinal rants are hollow and only serve to increase the self righteousness of those who claim to have received nothing of themselves but speak as if they discovered the lost ark purely by their own Greek and Hebrew knowledge. “Please give to my ministry so I can preserve the faith for us all.” “Oh, just so you know, I am withstanding a blistering e-mail attack. The front lines are difficult.” Pitiful. The simple and demonstrative faith in Jesus Christ has been replaced by a western counterfeit.
The dog and pony shows of Benny Hinn are no more a “whipping up of the choir” carnival then are the conferences lead by MacArthur and White or Bell and McLaren. Little if anything is said about the sins and shortcomings of the present audience, but much is said about the shortcomings of others.
People leave uplifted and authenticated rather than deeply and uncomfortably challenged in their walk as well as their spiritual perspectives. The predominant feature seems to be the more one is drawn into a gertain evangelical “arena” the more we are convinced of how wrong others are. In fact, we are all wrong but unwilling to entertain any notion of that.
In short, the west has made Christianity akin to the side show at a circus with all the curiosities that attract our temporary interest, but these spiritual streams do precious little to change us or the world.
I have read the New Testament through in one week and I have come to the same conclusion:
I do not practice Christianity as exampled by the Author and as taught openly by those 27 books. And although I can now see that, I have a ways to go before I can even know what I should be practicing. I am uncertain as to my capacity or desire to pursue that goal.
It is obvious God has much more breaking to do of me before any real progress can be made. In fact, I am sure I must die.
Brendt,
Thanks for the reminder of my past wisdom.
jerry
Rick, have you ever been to a Rob Bell conference. I assure you, since I’ve been to two, that they are not focused outwardly, but very introspective, speaking of ones own shortcomings and failures, and of grace in spite of them.
I’ve never been to a Hinn or MacArthur or White (?) or McLaren conference. So I cannot speak for them.
Shalom
Shalom
You don’t have to actually have been to a conference to know what they are about. Why do you think God gave us the internet?
True. But Rick’s comment was specifically about conferences.
Joe – are any of Rob’s conferences available on-line? I’ve not seen anything from “Isn’t She Beautiful” or “Poets…” available on the ‘net (or even in DVD)…
#8. I was being sarcastic. I agree with you.
#9. Something happened that isn’t she beautiful couldn’t be recorded or some such. Poets is on the way is my understanding. By the by, my daughter was baptized yesterday and read her story to the church. I’ll be that dad, you should listen to the podcast.
Rob Bell’s stuff is fodder for the Biblically illiterate; He makes them feel introspective but the hope presented at the end is in a false Jesus that has cleansed the sins of the whole world not live in that reality. I hope he comes out with those conferences on dvd, because it will reveal him more fully for the wolf that he is.
Apparently John the Baptist was misleading people as well when he shouted, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!”. Who knew?
I miss the days when John actually made sense….oh wait…
Just kidding John, but I seriously wish you weren’t so terrified of that which you despise.
How dare he not just repeat the same old party interpretations! Who does he think he is bringing a fresh and real perspective to the scriptures? Making people think? Challenging their strongholds? How dare he!
Jerry, credit where credit is due.
Awesome!! I’ve gone from having lots of comments unapproved on Mike’s site to the “straight-to-the-bit-bucket” list.
I ROCK!!!!
Yes, you rock, Brendt.
Are you at all surprised? Mike has always been … fragile … don’t be surprised if you’re the topic of an “I’m being persecuted” post in the near future, you rabble-rousing emergo-Purpose-Driven-semi-Pelagian-neo-liberal wolf in sheep’s clothing…
Welcome to the club, Brendt!
Aren’t ODM sites fun?
Oh, I was already by the time I wrote that last comment.
Interestingly, he didn’t “name names”, so maybe it wasn’t really me. Which would explain why the article is wildly inaccurate in describing me — the guy actually states that I was mad about something Ken wrote — like I’d read anything Ken wrote — and was incredibly misrepresentative of the censored comments that I made — unless by “ugly and personal” he means “using Scripture to defend one’s point”.
Here’s the latest Mike-trick, though. On the OP (that I linked above) I wrote something somewhat obscure regarding what one of the commenters said. He let it through then responded “I don’t understand”. So I wrote a longer comment explaining. That comment never saw the light of day, but he responded to it, nonetheless, by commenting, then immediately deleting the comment. His comment lasted long enough for me to receive via my email subscription to that post. On the flip side, it doesn’t sit on his site as a flag that I must have replied and he must have deleted my reply.
So he got the “last word”, anyway. THEN he wrote that other post (that I just linked). With a persecution complex like that, does this guy even go out of the house? And does he expect to get to heaven and say to Saul of Tarsus, “What you went through? That’s nothing! Wait’ll you hear what my ‘ministry’ had to endure!!”
Hmmm, Chad. Maybe we should compare notes. On what site(s) are your comments not even sent to moderation for consideration of the site owner(s), but simply directly discarded?
Hmm, Brendt. You see, I’m in sort of a pickle here. Probably one you are not unaware of though and relate very well with every time you set out to place a comment on Mike’s site or with Ingrid or Silva or Chris R, etc. The pickle is this: Should I even bother answering your question or discussing this when I know you, or at least your ODM partner Chris L, will probably just delete this as they have all other comments? Or, will they edit it and/or distort what I say so that they can then say whatever they want about me?
Hmm. What is one of the favorite poems Chris L loves to use here at Political Propaganda for Patriots? Ah, yes: First, they censored our blog comments, and we said nothing…
So Brendt, I echo in #16: I ROCK!
Have a good day
One more thing (as I wait for my last comment to be either approved by this “Administration” or denied) – the comment allowed through above was the first of many over the last several months, which is my first clue that comments were not being automatically deleted but someone behind the curtain was making a conscious choice to do so.
Sort of ironic, isn’t it? For all the moaning about “nanny statism” that goes on by the Administration of this site it’s interesting to see it in practice here. Rather than letting your readers determine what is right , this Administration does it for them. Weird.
brendt,
reminds me of the rr-bb. they asked me a question, and when i answered it they censored me. fine process indeed.
at least we have finally convinced pastorboy of his erroneous assumption of n. t. wright.
I love Mike Ratliff’s blog. Here’s the formula for being allowed to comment.
1.Mike writes a self aggrandizing post about how he loves Jesus more than you. Yes he do.
2. Because of this, he is defending the world against the Apostates.
3. Various people get on and say, “wonderful post Mike.”
4. He says, Thank you and God Bless you.
If you vary from this at all, you will be banned. He’ll write an email to you and then he’ll post about you. I forget when my post happened. It was fun to watch him lie because make no mistake about it Mike Ratliffe lies in his posts.
Once he attributed a quote to Rob Bell, a local pastor here in Grand Rapids. I knew for a fact that the quote was a lie. I emailed him and asked him to cite his source. The source was someone else saying what pastor Bell had said.
Of course, on some level I guess I understand Mike. People will praise you for asking questions but if you say that you think they are wrong, they will almost always get angry and run away often telling lies to back up their point.
re 22 – i didn’t mean that to sound as condescending as it appears… my point is – recent posts and videos have proven that his fears are unfounded and his lack of response is hopefully a good sign.
#21 – Yep. 2 hours ago I answered Brendt’s question with 2 comments.
Crickets.
Ta da! Believe it or not I’m on that list too (I think, it’s been so long) for dare questioning
Calvinismbiblical truth as Mike sees it. Unfortunately, I believe Mike is truly delusional. When I followed years ago it became evident that Mike actually believes he hears from God in a “special” way. When he “prays” about an issue, he “hears” from God and it’s just as inerrant as if he read it in Scripture, (there are allusions to this even in the article linked by Brendt) and that is not exaggerating by much.I do believe Mike is a sincere individual, but that ex cathedra attitude (TM) can get inside one’s head after a while I guess.
I once got banned from my own blog. It was rather embarrassing.
#26 – but not surprising.
that is a truly baffling blog post. he affirms their theology, but questions their ministries… w/o citing any examples.
#26 You should not have talked to yourself the way you did. otherwise you wouldn’t have blocked you for it.
Neil (#28): that is a truly baffling blog post. he affirms their theology, but questions their ministries… w/o citing any examples.
He stated that he was trying to warn others of the dangers of Chandler’s actions/beliefs.
I noted to him that there were no examples in that post and that a search of his entire blog showed no other hits for Chandler (at that time, anyway) and advised that he complain to the people at WordPress for losing his writings.
Surprisingly, I got no response.
What would be the objections to Matt Chandler? He says he is a reformed charismatic…so what?
(I am closer to being charismatic than I am to being reformed.)
Rick, his mother’s childhood next-door neighbor’s dry-cleaner once had a customer named Rick Warren.
GBFA.
Regarding “Free Will”, here’s an article by Jack Cottrell that Christian forwarded to me…