Source: Musings from Two-Sheds Gomer

Comments: Brendt comes up with a new acronym (QR) to go alongside the TR-label.  While he doesn’t name names (he’s most often too polite for that), it is rather obvious who some of the folks are being skewered…
Memorable Quotes:

“QR” is short for “Quote Reformed”, i.e. those who claim to be theologically reformed, but (by any honest definition) aren’t really. While there is a great overlap between TRs and QRs, I think it’s necessary to better define QRs, as they are the Rs with which I am most concerned.

—

QRs often run watch-blogs. While I have come to the conclusion that watch-blogging is — in one sense — pointess, I also have to re-iterate that incessant focus on the problems of the church (which is all that watch-blogging is about) “belies a fatalism which, in turn, belies a very low view of God and His power“.

—

Also tied into the GBA idea is that QRs often put many humans above God. Implicit to GBA is the assumption that (the afore-mentioned) person A is 100% reliable and everything he says or writes should be taken as gospel. (That is, until he quotes person B and the QRs throw him under the bus. Then mysteriously, he somehow goes from demi-god to persona non grata in 3 seconds). But until he messes up in the QRs’ eyes, they see no need to be Acts 17:10-11" href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2017%20:10-11;&version=50;">Berean about person A’s statements or writings. This is — quite simply — idolatry. Last time I checked, that was a bad thing.

—

Partially in response to Michael’s post, Glenn Lucke notes another fallacy/irony among TRs that is just as applicable among QRs. Many QRs see epistemological humility as a lack of faith or simply down-right relativistic and heretical. As Glenn hints at (and Michael very plainly says), there is significant irony in this idea. QRs claim to ascribe to the total depravity of man, yet somehow believe that they can totally understand all truth on this side of heaven. In a sense, QRs are even exalting themselves to be (at least) equal with God. And we all know Isaiah 14:12-14" target="_blank" href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2014:12-14;&version=50;">how well that worked out for Lucifer.

(Did I just equate QRs with Lucifer? Out loud, even? Oh, that’s gonna get me in trouble.)

—

Earlier, I implied that QRs at least buy into God’s sovereignty when it comes to salvific ramifications. In retrospect, I have to back off of that implication. Whether it’s the watch-blogs’ snarky addition of quotation marks around the word Christian or simply outright denial of the salvation of others, many QRs claim to have a divine knowledge of who God has saved. This is nothing short of putting oneself on an equal plane with God.

(Did I just equate QRs with Lucifer again? I’d better quit while I’m ahead. There’s a part of my flesh that longs to be reviled by the QRs as much as Michael is reviled by the TRs. But that’s pretty high aspirations for a mere tavern lackey.)

—

Source: Musings from Two-Sheds Gomer

Comments: Brendt writes about Mark Driscoll’s speaking appearance at John Piper’s desiring God conference, and Steve Camp’s ungenerous response to the appearance.
Memorable Quotes:

Driscoll had to leave shortly after his message, and so he wasn’t present when Dr Piper later issued a caution to him (and, ostensibly, those like him). This absolutely set the blogosphere on fire as Driscoll-supporters wondered aloud about Piper’s method and venue and Driscoll-bashers smugly gave the Sunday-school equivalent of “Nyah, nyah. Told you so.” Case in point from one commenter:

Many of us who were concerned about Piper having Driscoll in at this conference, it now sounds like those concerns were justified . . .

Well no, Steve, actually they weren’t even close to being justified. Not only did Driscoll take the admonishment in the spirit in which it was intended, but when Piper found out that some online might read way too much into the situation, he encouraged Driscoll to make it clear that he (Piper):

. . . would not have .001 seconds hesitation in having Mark Driscoll come back tomorrow to our church or our conference.

—

Source: Musings from Two-Sheds Gomer

Comments: Brendt notes that when the Church Report came out with the list of the Top 50 Most Influential Christians in America, some folks disagreed with the ‘influence’ of some on the list.  However, it seems Steve Camp didn’t question whether a number of them were influential, but whether a number of them were even saved in the first place.  And here I thought separating the wheat from the tares was a job of the Almighty…
Memorable Quotes:

To his credit, Steve Camp did not confuse the definition of the word “influential”. Rather, he has declared this:

According to my review of the list, 14 of the fifty listed by CR you couldn’t even consider as truly regenerated.

That’s right, boys and girls. Camp doesn’t call into question their influence as good or bad. He doesn’t even call into question their spiritual state. According to Camp, TD Jakes and 13 others are going straight to hell, not passing Go, and not collecting $200.

Am I the only one who finds it odd that someone who claims to be Reformed would make such statements about God’s election?

—

Source: Musings from Two-Sheds Gomer

Comments: Brendt attended an incredibly worshipful night with Michael W. Smith, Third Day and others.   The sin?  It was sponsored by Chevy.  Therefore, according to I Hezekiah (or at least Steve Camp), worship could not have happened there.  Brendt takes issue with this assessment.
Memorable Quotes:

Not content to simply allow something like this to happen, there were voices of dissent because (in an uncommon move) the tour was sponsored by Chevrolet. No voice was louder than that of Steve Camp. In his analysis of the situation, Camp begins by stating that “I want to affirm my love and prayers for Michael W. Smith, Third Day, and Max Lucado”, then proceeds to cruficy them. (See also, “with friends like these…”) This tactic does not seem to be uncommon for Camp, who also will make self-effacing remarks about his past, and then rip someone else’s present. I guess that Camp considers himself to have arrived and that Galatians 6:1 is not applicable.

… if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness …

This, of course, assumes that Camp is one of the “you who are spiritual”. But I digress.

—

Camp’s polemic is filled with strawmen, largely based (apparently) on some divine knowledge of others’ attitudes, thoughts, and feelings. Where non-existent (and therefore, very easily refuted) issues are not employed, mischaracterizations of situations and misinterpretations (or, at least, misapplication) of Scripture is used. One example would be the statement:

The fact that this is an “evening of worship and evangelism” — their language, not mine -means that we have now actually digressed to charging people money to worship the Lord.

Uh, no, Steve. “We” are charging people money to be a part of a particular event during which there is the hope and prayer that worship will take place. Just like I was charged money for your concerts back in the 80s. Even if this is dismissed as Camp’s past, he is alleging that I was incapable of achieving genuine worship at his concerts. I’m not sure who this insults the most — me, Camp, or God. And lest we classify this as solely the past, please be aware that Camp participated in a cruise earlier this year, for which people were charged a lot more than my ticket to that concert cost. By Camp’s argument, no worship must have occured on that ship either.

—

Camp quotes these verses…

1 Corinthians 1:18
For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

John 15:18-19
18 If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you.
19 If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you.

…and then uses them to claim that any level of acceptability in the world means that the Christian is doing something wrong. The converse to this argument is that disfavor by the world indicates that you’re doing something right. But it could just mean that you’re a booger-head

—

But, let’s not rely on my interpretation. I’ll close with one more Scripture.

Isaiah 55:11
So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void, But it shall accomplish what I please, And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it.

In short, you can’t get in God’s way, even if you try.

—