In a bizarre twist, which doesn’t surprise anyone actually, Ingrid criticizes a church for hiring a senior woman pastor. Issues aside, Ingrid often acts as an authority over Christian men. Before anyone points out that she only attacks “unregenerate”, let me remind us all that we don’t know the state of anyone’s soul, only God knows that.

Perhaps she should stay at home and consult her husband before she blogs.

You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. Now we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment? Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness leads you toward repentance?

As our executive pastor, Eric Bryant, spoke on this passage last night I began to think about how it applied to much of what we discuss here.  I don’t think people need to be reminded too often that God is wrathful.  In fact, I would say that the majority of people in this world think of God as an angry dictator in heaven, just waiting to strike someone down dead for their sins.  This is a huge reason why people do not get involved with spiritual life.  They are either too guilty or repelled with their notion of who God is.

However, the scriptures tell us that it is God’s kindness that leads people to repentance.  Paul actually is addressing people who dislike the notion that God is tolerant with people.  And yes, the scriptures say that God is t-o-l-e-r-a-n-t.  How much more should we be patient and tolerant of people who are not where we are on our spiritual journey?  If it is God’s kindness that leads us to repentance, than should we not be known for our love?  However, so often the Christian world is known for what we are against.  I wonder what would happen if we were known by our kindness, tolerance and patience rather than our hate, divisiveness and pride.

So often I hear that love is telling the whole truth, which includes that which hurts.  That is so true.  However, that kind of truth can only come in relationships, not machine gun style spreading of truth.  Could you imagine me walking up to a dangerously overweight stranger and saying, “You are really unhealthy, and it’s pretty socially awkward to have you in public.  And because I love you, I felt that I need to say that.”  I have to first bring that person into my life, and develop credibility and permission to speak this truth.  However, people on the watchdoggie blogs and elsewhere do this very thing everyday.  Does the whole truth need to be shared?  Yes!  But it is always done best in trusting relationships.

I dare all of us to allow the people that Christians love to hate into our lives.  What would happen if we, rather than writing hate truth blogs about people, we went out into our communities and actually befriended gays, Catholics, minorities, Muslims, and even Baptists.  And not befriending them as a “project”, but authentically loving them with the love of Christ.  If every follower of Christ did this, then a lot more people would see the kindness, tolerance and patience of our God, and be drawn to repentance.

shameless plug:  Eric Michael Bryant’s new book, Peppermint-Filled Piñatas (Zondervan) is out in stores everywhere.  It is an excellent resource on this topic.  You can check out some of it on his blog here, or purchase it here.

Ok people some ground rules: No bringing up the different sites.  No name calling, and no debating election/free will or any of that stuff. All such comments will be deleted with extreme prejudice. Now, that we have that out of the way, here’s the question:

Why is God so angry with Job’s friends. He says they did not speak what is right of him. But in your opinion what did they say that was wrong? I hear a lot of what they said from “good God fearing” people. In other words, give me your opinion or take on this whole  scenario.

Job 42

Ken Silva says we don’t need the teachings of Jesus today! Ken offers us this quote of one Rob Bell,

“What we need now more than ever is the teachings of Jesus.”

Ken follows this with this statement in response to Pastor Bell…

No Rob.

What kind of Bible is Ken teaching if he believes we don’t need to teachings of Jesus. What kind of morally bankrupt doctrine does he hold? Certainly a gospel which does not include the teachings of Jesus is no gospel I want to be apart of.

**Editors note*** This is an exact word for word quote of Ken’s. I even took a screen picture in case it changes. No, I don’t for a minute believe that Ken is espousing that we don’t need Jesus but I couldn’t pass up the opportunity to accurately misquote Ken as he done to many–be it Bell, McManus, or whoever. Now, whenever Ken says he believes we do need the teachings of Jesus we can pull this quote up and ask how the two can be true.

Jill Martin Rische, a substitute for Ingrid at Slice while she is away, is the eldest daughter of Walter Martin. She parts ways with Silva in this statement about the Catholic Church (and agrees with her father):

“I take the same position my father did on Catholicism. I strongly disagree with some of their doctrines, but they have the right Jesus, the right Trinity, the right God and Father of us all. There are believers within the Catholic Church and they are our brothers and sisters in Christ. This is what my father taught and after much thought and prayer, this is what Kevin and I believe.”

Go up the comments page and you have Silva’s thoughts on Catholicism:
“Apostate Roman Catholicism is actually bigger than a cult. As Dr. John MacArthur rightly says it is another religion entirely. So the RCC is not a cult but should be classified with false world religious systems such as Islam.”

I totally agree is Rische on this point. I have serious issues with Catholic doctrine but I believe there are active, strong, growing, regenerate Christians within this denomination. And I would agree with Silva in that there aren’t Christians within Islam.

What do you think?

I am at the Willow Creek Arts Conference.  It is appropriately themed Hallelujah: What’s Right With the Word.  So many times as  followers of Christ we look at all the bad in the world.  We often fail to see the beauty and good that God is bringing to so much in the world around us.  I have had the opportunity to hang out with Donald Miller and Brian McLaren.  They are two incredible people.  I have to say that some of my opinions about McLaren have definately changed after this weekend.  it’s amazing how that happens when you actually have a conversation with the person.

I will write more when I return home.  Pray for us at Mosaic as we are communicating the truth of the scriptures on the main stage tomorrow with dance, poetry, drama and film.

Mike Corley interviewed Mark Driscoll last week and you can listen to the show here. It’s interesting that, for the most part, Corley and Driscoll agree. What is even more interesting is that CRN and Slice are silent in regards to this interview. Where is Ken and Ingrid?

Here’s part of Steve Camp’s response:

1. The issue with Mark’s scatological speech isn’t so much with cussing; but that it is what Paul refers to as being “unwholesome speech.” His humor even extends to using the Lord as a punch line for his jokes. THAT goes way beyond cussing…

2. Mark has recently shared the platform with T.D. Jakes – a known heretic due to his anti-Trinitarian beliefs. Jakes denies the One Triune God of the Bible and therefore worships a different god. Driscoll knows this and agrees that he is a heretic; but yet, still had no problem sharing the pulpit with him at a pastors conference held in Dallas, TX just a few months ago. There is no justification for this kind of partnership in ministry. Mark never even confronted the issue in his preachment.

Just a few years ago he went and ministered at Robert Schuller’s church as well and spoke glowingly of him and his ministry afterwards. If you have ever heard Michael Horton’s interview with Schuller, you will hear him clearly not understand the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Why would Mark knowingly partner with known heretics against the gospel he says he loves so very much?

3. Mark’s PR strategy is to position himself as being Reformed. That really isn’t the case. He is pragmatic to the core (his emerging missionality is nothing more than seeker-sensitivity with an edge–audience driven and contextualized); he is Amyraldian in his view of the atonement; and as MacArthur rightly labeled it – his kind of Christianity is grunge Christianity.

4. Lastly, Here is quote from Driscoll’s recent message at the C3 Conference where he shared the pulpit with heretic T.D. Jakes: “In that moment when God made Him who knew no sin to become sin, that though Jesus was sinless and pure a Lamb without spot or blemish, on Him was laid sin; He became a pedophile, a homosexual, a fornicator, a pervert, a thief, a liar, an alcoholic, a drug addict, He became that. He became the most despicable, ugly, disgusting, accursed thing in all creation—in that moment on the cross. Because He took our place and He became our sin; and He died to pay the penalty for our sins.”

That is blasphemy my brother and certainly is not representative of biblical Christianity or the Reformed faith.

These are issues that Mark should be required to answer at some point.

My response:

1. Camp is splitting hairs. Driscoll has sworn and has repented. His language is edgy at times but it doesn’t offend me and certainly wouldn’t offend any non believer. Just because it offends someone who has a bad haircut and wears homemade clothes and sings all four verses of the hymns doesn’t mean that it is in fact offensive to God.

2. Driscoll says that he is friends with heretics and wants to see them repent. He preaches anywhere and says that he doesn’t get asked back to speak at conferences because he isn’t afraid to preach the gospel. He doesn’t partner with those he considered heretics.

3. Ask any Arminian, Driscoll is reformed. He believes that many are a part of the elect in Seattle, they just need to hear the gospel.

4. Can someone explain why this is blasphemy?

What are your thoughts?

Julie has brought up a great question on a verse in I Samuel. She suggested that it would be good to have a thread where we could discuss a Bible verse. I have copied the format from her Blog. So have it people. She asks some great questions. Where it says, “My Thoughts” it should be understood that those are her thoughts.
Today’s Discussion: 1 Samuel 16:14:

Now the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD terrorized him.

My thoughts/questions:

• I understand the Spirit of the Lord departing from someone, and even hardening a heart (Pharaoh).
• I do not understand an evil spirit coming from the Lord.
• I was under the (evidently mistaken) impression from other verses in the Bible that nothing evil could come from God.

Recently I had the misfortune of watching a short video where a nice, clean cut gentleman told me that I can get “€œan idea of how sincere my love for Jesus is” by asking myself, “€œHow much do I love the Scriptures?”€ So far, we’€™re doing good. But then he goes one step further and equates Scripture with doctrine. He even goes so far to imply that if someone does not “€œpassionately defend” doctrinal truth they may not be sincere. He told me that doctrinal truth bears the image of Christ. He informed me that if I don’t defend doctrine I cannot love Christ. “€œThere is no room for personal interpretation,”€ he confidently informs his listeners and me. It was no surprise then when I found other videos that this gentleman did where he “solved” the age-old disagreement between Armenians and Calvinists. Think about the audacity of that statement. In yet another clip he tells me that God may not talk to me or anyone else anymore.
I’m sure this fellow is a good guy. I imagine that he is pretty devoted to his faith and in following Christ. I’€™m not here to attack him, but I do want to look at his assertion that Scripture equals doctrine.
We should first start with what the Bible tells us about what is truth. In John 14 Jesus tells us that he is “the way, the truth and the life.” Almost all of us would agree that God is truth. That is to say, that God is the embodiment of all truth. There can be no truth apart from God. God is truth. God is absolute truth. It is at this point that most conversations will usually turn a little “€œsnarky.”€
Is the Bible in your house truth? Is it pure truth? Are there any errors in it? At this point, I have to step back and ask you the reader to stay with me to the end. The truth is we have many translations of the Bible today and I believe what we have is the face of what God wants us to have, but there are errors in each translation. The original text that God gave us was perfect. We do not have that text any longer. What is amazing is you can take one copy of a passage and another copy both being hundreds of years apart in age and they are almost identical. This lends credence to their validity.
There was a guy named Erasmus who actually admitted to adding a few things when he made a copy because it helped explain the Trinity better. The Bible was originally written in languages other than English (Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic). Translating anything from one language to another is a difficult task. For one, the mindset of the hearer will almost certainly be different in the original language. This is why it is so important to understand how the original listeners would have understood whatever passage of Scripture you are looking at.
God is Truth. The Original text is perfect. The Bible(s) I have in my house and the one’s you have in your house are not perfect they are translations of copies.
Now, for years preachers and those in charge have tried to minimize or hide this truth. The fear is that it will open the door for us the simple to start questioning everything there is to know about God. A guy I really respect once related a story to me about how a young lady rejected all of Scripture because a well known preacher began “€œmonkeying”€ with the text.
As I have attempted to illustrate in my drawing by the time we get to doctrine we are a few steps away from absolute truth. Your doctrine is a result of interpretation of translations of copies of the original truth.
At this point you are faced with one of two choices (I hate that phrase because I am sure there is probably more choices out there but these are the most common choices). You can either end up in Peter Ruckman’s camp and spout something just short of insanity about how the KJV is the authoritative version or you have to be willing to wrestle with tension.
The great danger in Christianity has always been that we try to make everything manageable, we try to make incredibly complex things makes sense. Christianity, especially conservative, Calvinistic Christianity has attempted to reduce the Bible to something that is a compilation of logical, irrefutable arguments. The result has been a bastardized version of honest faith. We’ve compared having a relationship with God to sitting on a chair, we€™’ve created two diagnostic questions and done all sorts of stupid things. Worse, we have created our little doctrine clubs and call it church. We have elevated doctrine above God. We worship at the alter of doctrine and systematic theology. What other conclusion can be drawn when a man takes the time to make a movie where he compares love of Scripture with love of doctrine?
So you can chose the absolute way, where there is no room for discussion…or…you can chose the honest way. You can chose to admit that our doctrine is the best interpretation we have, but there is room for discussion. I believe that the Bible is the face of what God wants us to have. In other words the key doctrines are clearly in all of the copies.
We as a bride of Christ need to decide how many doctrines are we willing to die over. We need to decide as a Church where is the line between this is what I believe but I could be wrong.
I know there are those who fear this will open up all of the Scriptures to be questioned but is that bad? Didn’t™ Paul tell the Bereans to test everything? What is so bad if every doctrine we have is tested?
Most of the people I know who would oppose this idea are afraid. They are afraid of what might happen. You can “what if” yourself to death. If what we say we believe is true (and I believe it is) then it cannot be stopped. Truth always finds its way to the top.
I know for some of you that is a scary proposition and you may even be reacting with some anger for me right now,that’s ok. Embrace the tension; embrace the mystery. If you think your theology and doctrine is helping you explain the more difficult aspects of the gospel be cautious. Remember one ancient writer put it this way,

Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.”

How do you “€œprove”€ or explain something you cannot see?