Ingrid promoted the Huddersfield Choral Society recently on her site. Thanks to Ian, who actually lives in Huddersfield, he points out that this is not a Christian group. Here is his comment to Ingrid, which was not posted:

My goodness, how did my little town of Huddersfield get on this website! They are indeed an excellent choir, I saw them perform live recently in the town square and it was a fantastic performance.
One question though Ingrid, and I mean this in all sincerity: This choral society is a secular society – it is not associated with any church or ministry, its requirements for membership is based on musical skill not religious belief or lifestyle. I personally have no problem with this, they are a talented group and I enjoy listening to their performances, even more so if they are singing songs of worship to my God. However, I’m surprised at you promoting them after your recent post on Sinead ‘O Connar’s psalms set to music?”

Would Ingrid promote a cd done by the Mormon Tabernacle Choir? Even if they did the old hymns?

Personally, I love the old hymns and would love to see them brought back into worship.

The apostle Paul wrote, inspired by God,

For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

As many of you know, I am working this week on the Ute reservation in southwest Colorado with The Legacy, teaching art and music to Native American jr. and sr. high school students.  So, aside from this brief post, this is why you aren’t hearing anything from me this week.

Something you probably don’t know is that last night, my wife and I had a truly wonderful dinner with a Christian brother and sister here in the Four Corners area, Chris Pajak and his wife. 

Several weeks ago, Greg Boyd guest-preached at Mars Hill (Grand Rapids), and commented that ‘if something is made of flesh and blood, it is not our enemy’, hearkening back to the words of Paul.

I would like to report to you that Paul’s words, as reiterated by Dr. Boyd, are as true today as they were when they were written.  And in being so, I have experienced a deep lesson, I wish I could share with you.

As many of you know, I am a rather strong proponent for understanding the context of scripture when reading and interpreting it, for the very reason that without that context, we are only left to supply our own – which is likely very different from the culture and context in which it was written.

In the same way, I believe that when we tend to agree or disagree with someone, we supply a sympathetic or antagonistic context to their words when we read them – ESPECIALLY if we have never met them.  Having met Chris P, listening to him and experiencing his ‘context’, I realize that the context I have supplied has more often than not been wrong.

I am sorry for that Chris.

Please, please, please – let us keep Paul’s words in mind.  Our struggle is not with flesh and blood – but with principalities and powers – words and dominions of this world.  While we may disagree with a much of what is written on CRN, and probably more/most of what is on SoL/AM, our disagreement is not with Chris, Ken, Ingrid, Dwayna or others – it is with ideas on how to serve in the Kingdom of God.

If we are serious in our belief in balancing orthopraxy and orthodoxy, an independent brother or sister should be able to read this blog and see WHY it is different than those it criticizes.  A non-believer should read our disagreements and see a respectful disagreement unlike any experienced in the non-Christian blogs of this world.

We are not there yet.  I am not there yet.

But I hope that we would strive to move in that direction.

Ingrid takes aim at potty mouths everywhere, of course, with her track record it might be helpful if she applied the soap and water to her own mouth first.

What’s that you say? You’ve never seen or heard Ingrid say one of those naughty words we all know are on the “thou shalt not say” list that Jesus put together right after the sermon on the mount? Well, that’s very true, unfortunately, she, along with the writers at C?N have used the God given use of language in a much more destructive way, and in a way that is profoundly more anti-scriptural than any word George Carlin ever used.

Since most of the readership of this blog have been in the faith for quite some time most of you are probably familiar with the practice of fencing with the Law. This was where additional requirements were added to the law in order to be extra, extra, extra sure that no one accidently broke the Law. We see Jesus getting really… irritated over this practice in Matthew 15:

1Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2″Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!”
3Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?
Matthew 15:1-3

A bit further down Jesus gets even more pointed.

Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
8″ ‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
9They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men.’”
Matthew 15:6b-9

Let’s be clear: the words on the naughty list are tradition. They are “rules taught by men” and “traditions of the elders”just as much as the Pharisees’ rules about hand washing were. But, notice what Jesus gets upset about, its not about the mere existence of rules taught by men, or the tradition of the elders, he doesn’t have much to say about those all by themselves. What gets Jesus worked up is when those rules taught by men end up causing people to break the command of God. And that’s exactly what Ingrid, the folks over at C?N and, honestly, much of the church has done in the way they police language.
Check out Ingrid’s check list of mouthly sins here:

I frequently have to delete comments from Christian readers who use words like “su***”, and cr**. Christians are joining the great stampede toward Gomorrah, and they justify it every step of the way.

That’s right, her check list of mouthly sins involve matching words to a list of naughty words. But is that what the scriptures command? I don’t think so. Check out just a few of these verses:

1Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good, 2to slander no one, to be peaceable and considerate, and to show true humility toward all men.
Titus 3:2

Only let your conversation be as it becomes the gospel of Christ…
Philippians 1:27

Brothers, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against his brother or judges him speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it.
James 4:11

Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind.
1 Peter 2:1

Let me ask you, friends, which of those verses have anything whatsoever with the actual words that are used? The answer is less than 1. But the real shame and tragedy of it all is that Ingrid, Ken, the other writers at C?N and, sadly, a whole lot of the church in general take these verses to mean if you don’t use naughty words then you’re good to go. Which is why we’ve got entire blogs that don’t use naughty language, but slander, deceive, and abuse their supposed brothers and sisters in Christ with nearly every post they put up . We’ve seen Ken making up silly names like “the hollow men of the emergent church” and The Ecumenical Church of Deceit”. Or we get nasty accusations that emergent pastors ”don’t care for kids” or if there isn’t a handy, catchy news story to riff on emergents with, why not just make something up?

So go ahead Ingrid, whine and complain that Christians are breaking the traditions of the elders, meanwhile you, Ken, C?N and the rest of the watchpoodles out there are breaking the commandments of God with every keystroke.

I found this to be pretty funny.  The “editor” over at C?N has once again tried to pin down Erwin McManus to the emergent movement.  And, once again he/she/it has failed.

The whole article is over Mosaic’s annual Origins Conference, held in the Los Angeles Area every year.  His opening line is as follows:

“Emerging Pastor David trotter blogs about the recent origins conference sponsored by Erwin McManus’ Mosaic Alliance.”  (emphasis mine)

Simply looking at the date would show the “editor” that the event in question was held in June of 2005.  Should three years ago be considered “recent”?  If they can’t even get the dates right, how is he/she/it going to get the content right?  Or maybe they are just running out of recent material.

The part that I found hilarious was this quote from the blogger about a session at the conference with Alex McManus that C?N took offence over

Alex asked us “how did you get here?” His main point was a reminder that no one (including ourselves) brought us to this point – God did. God has called us to do what we’re doing

Sound like a good ol’ reformed thought, right?  God had ordained and called to do what we are doing.  Ironically, the “editor” accuses Alex McManus of this

(editor’s note:  fatalism)

I pretty much laughed for the good part of three minutes.  Here is a man at a conference in 2005 who is not a reformed theologian.  He makes a statement about God calling us to do what we are doing, and he is suddenly teaching fatalism.

Of course when we point out that the majority of reformed theology is based on a fatalistic theology, we are accused of defecating on the blood of the reformers.  But, I guess when you gotta keep the tabloids coming, you will dig pretty deep for a story.

Over at Slice many panties were gotten into many bunches over the recent interview by Christianity Today of Sinead O’Connor. Lets go to the commentary.

Christianity Today is apparently convinced that Sinead O’Connor is someone that Christians need to listen to. Why else would they interview someone who is clearly a confused and make-it-up-as-you-go New Spirituality adherent/rock star?

Now why might Christians be interested in hearing an interview by Sinead O’Connor? Have Christians decided that bald chicks are just really fascinating? Maybe Bono has left Christians in general wanting more Irish musicians? Or, could it possibly be because she recently released a double CD entitled “Theology” which includes many songs that are straight scripture set to music, as well as traditional spirituals such as “the Rivers of Babylon”. Gee, I can’t imagine why Christians would be interested in that. But, naturally, Christianity’s blandest firebrand has an apoplectic fit over it.

Are Christians today that desperate for something new to listen to?

Well Inggy, not every Christian is trying to pour amber over our grandfather’s church and pretend like that pleases Christ. So yes, when an artist of considerable God-given talent produces a work rooted in the word of God, we are desperate to listen to it.

Note that CT never bothers to point out for readers her heresy that Jesus is just an energy force, that Buddhists can tap into Him as well and that God doesn’t judge people so you can live any way you want to.

Uh… well, I guess in the sense that the writer doesn’t commentate on O’Connor’s views, yeah CT never bothers to point those things out. Probably because it’s a straight interview in which O’Connor herself says these things. There’s no commentary or analysis on anything by CT, its all O’Connor who says all of those things herself. What does the Big I want here? For CT to simply repeat what O’Connor had just said? Have I mentioned that in many languages the word “Ingrid” can be directly translated as “absurd”?

Come to think of it, Sinead sounds a lot like the New Pastors of today. Her theology is the same as what we’re getting from emerging church gurus nationwide. Now we know why CT billboards her. She is the face of the new evangelical. With her social gospel, her twisted definition of Jesus, her foul mouth and her embrace of the New Age cosmic christ, she could start a church and have a guaranteed membership in days.

Ah, a classic of the watchbloggies everywhere, the outright slander. How is O’Connor associated with the emergent/emerging church again? Her background is Roman Catholic, CT is by no means an emergent/emerging publications… so where’s the connection? What’s even funnier is no where in the entire interview does O’Connor make reference to the “social gospel” or even doing good works at all. Did Ingrid even bother to read the interview, or was her outrage alone good enough for this post? Oh right, stupid question, this is just another outrageous post, filled with outrage for the sake of outrage.

“The organ in the worship service is a sign of Baal.”

Realencyklopadie Fur Protestantische Theologie und Kirche, Bd, 14, s.433 cited in Instrumental Music and New Testament Worship, James D. Bales, p. 130.

How long till that one shows up on Slice?

There’s a provocative piece over at C?N filed in “abominations by the ever mysterious editor.” You can imagine the church they are referring to is  teaching heresy, perhaps, they are saying that abusing women is just part of the cultural norm? Nope. What they are doing is a series called “Super Hero Parables.” From this title the clairvoyant writer at a little self righteousness leaven says that the pastor of that church has

He traded in preaching from the Bible to preaching from comic book stories

I wonder how he knows that? Has he heard the guy preach? How many times when Jesus was asked about the Kingdom did he reply with stories? I mean even in the picture that our friend at a little self righteousness leaven has so conveniently posted for us the church gives us a definition of a parable.

“Parable”= a story with a spiritual point

Perhaps, even Jesus wouldn’t have been spiritual enough for these people? I read this in Mark,

He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said:…

I mean why not just use the O.T.? Isn’t that inspired? Wasn’t that good enough for this friend of sinners who hung out, eating and drinking with sinners. You know, some even said that he was a drunkard and a bastard. After all, they knew who their father was.

Abominations indeed.

For those that have followed the various conversations I’ve been involved in here, it may come as a surprise that everything I’ve written on my blog about emergents have been less than overwhelmingly positive.

What happened? Why have I been forced to defend Rob Bell, Tony Jones and even Brian McLaren? How did I end up in Bizarro World?

The short answer to that is Ken Silva, the slightly longer answer is the arrogant, unloving, deceitful people like Ken Silva who have seen fit to vent their spleens and their terribly mistaken theology on the web. You see, while they are right, that doctrine matters, and it should be guarded carefully they’ve never learned that the way we go about doing that is just as much a matter of doctrine as the gospel itself.

Paul commands in Colossians 3:12: “Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.” Contrast that command with the various posts we’ve seen condemning Perry Noble, Rick Warren, Rob Bell, Tony Jones and others. For example, here Ken Silva, in reference to Brian McLaren says, “Frankly I am astonished that evangelical leaders even listen to this fool and accept him as brother in Christ.” Or consider this post in which Ingrid takes a story in which a church is opening an outreach center and uses that as a jumping off point to accuse this church in particular and emergents in general of being confused as to what the gospel is. Check out this line, “But with so many emerging churches denying the existence of hell, what sort of message do they bring?” Other than the guy she reported earlier who was run out of his church for saying hell doesn’t exist (which kind of gives you an indication how well this teaching is tolerated) how many emerging churches do you think Ingrid is familiar with, much less “many” emerging churches that teach hell doesn’t exist? As usual when these kinds of accusations are made no specific examples are cited.

But, let’s get back to the weaknesses seen in many emergent voices today. As much I like Rob Bell, and enjoy reading and listening to him, there are weaknesses in either his theology or the way he presents his theology. Ironically enough Ken links to an excellent breakdown of those weaknesses by Ben Witherington (BW3). If you read through that post you’ll notice a marked difference in the style of BW3 and the people we discussed earlier. Notice there’s no condescending tone, there’s no name calling, and perhaps most importantly, there’s no questioning of motives or salvation. Instead it is simply a gracious critique of Bell.

And, that, ladies and gentlemen makes BW3 a far more effective counterweight to Bell’s teachings. Because when Silva, Ingrid, and the rest of the folks at the “Christian” “Research” Network show up, it makes the dirty, dirty hippies of the emergent/emerging church look like the best thing going. It’s kind of like trying to pick up carnie chicks: sure the Lobster Woman may not be the one you actually want to ask out, but when the bearded lady shows up suddenly those lobster claws seem more quirky than disgusting (my apologies to carnies, lobster women, and bearded ladies).

I don’t want to sink to an extreme level of self-promotion, but my recent sermon covered this topic (not in response to these people, this series had been planned for several months) and there’s movie clips from Employee of the Month that accompany it. If you’re interested its right here.

I was at Mosaic’s annual men’s advance, Highlander, this last week. Erwin McManus was the speaker on Saturday night, and with him was the energy coach, Jon Gordon. You may have recognized that name from earlier comment threads brought up by several of our readers. Many watchdoggies criticized McManus for his involvement with this new-age leader. They said it was shameful and an abomination that Erwin would associate himself with such an unbiblical personality.

Jon spoke this weekend, explaining that when he met Erwin for the first time, they began a conversation about Jesus Christ and spirituality. As Gordon continued this conversation via email and radio broadcasts, he began to wrestle with the ideas found in the scriptures. It was when Jon recently went to a Buddhist healer that his struggles came to a head. The healer explained that you could work your whole life at Buddhism and not arrive to enlightenment. The healer went on to explain that Christianity was “spiritual cheating.” In essence, Jesus Christ comes down to us, so that we might become Children of God thru him. It was at that point where this new-aged Jewish man became a follower of Christ. He was baptized in the Atlantic Ocean a few months ago.

Jon said that he had seen all the websites criticizing Erwin for his relationship; he was worried about how Erwin would respond. Tonight during our gathering at the Mayan Nightclub in downtown Los Angeles, Erwin told the crowd that he would take all the heat from those websites if it meant that Jon would come into a relationship with Christ.

As I heard this story unfold over the weekend, I was amazed. Amazed at how God works. Amazed with the irony of it all. I read over this article written a few months ago by Ken Silva, and could only smile. Here is a guy who spends his time criticizing Erwin McManus for involvement with Gordon (not to mention trashing his own denomination in the process). Around the same time, Erwin was helping Gordon find his way to Christ. On top of all of that… Gordon made his final decision for Christ through the influence of a Buddhist healer. Isn’t it funny how God works?

I guess some sit back and criticize. Others are too busy doing the work of their Father, even when they are being pounded for it. And God often uses very unconventional methods to accomplish His will.

Watchdoggie Blogger, Mike Corley, recently wrote a post entitles Why I Have Left the SBC.  His reasons listed were everything from embracing Arminianism, accepting Purpose Driven churches into their fold and the growth of women in “ministry leadership.”  While I could not find a single disagreement that I actually agreed with, I have tremendous respect for Corley.  You see, he actually had the backbone to leave an organization that he disagrees with.

There is this guy that I went to college with who constantly complained about the Christian institution of higher learning.  He even went as far as starting an anonymous monthly newsletter that talked about everything wrong with the school.  Campus Life, Residence Life, Campus Ministries, the food… you name it, he hated it.  So one day I sat down with him and asked him one question.  Why on earth would he spend over 20,000 dollars a year to an institution he didn’t agree with?  His answer – He knew that the school’s reputation would give him some credibility in the future.

Sometimes I wonder why men like Ken Silva remain within the camp of the SBC when they say things like the SBC is filling up with dead churches and that the SBC stands for slowly becoming catholic.  Is it because the community actually validates who they are?  Maybe if they left, they would simply be self-proclaimed pastor/teachers.  And maybe they are really just apathetic to the situation.

Don’t get me wrong, I see tons of flaws with the SBC (ironically they are almost the exact opposite of Mike Corley’s).  However, I hope to be a part of the solution, or get off the ship.  Some might think that writing hateful blogs or open letters ranting to the president is helpful.  But let’s be real.  That’s not affecting any change, but is adding to the problem.  It’s not fair to the institution or yourself when you just stick around and scream in inconsiderate ways about the issues.  Maybe it’s time time get off the ship or affect some positive change.