Ingrid continues on her nit-picking campaign. This one is just as outrageous as the last. She begins her post with the following statement,

If you wonder why the church is such a carnal mess these days, looking at the pastors will provide some clues.

What is the carnality that these men have brought into the church you ask!?! Is it sexual misconduct? Is it heresy? Is it new age practices? No, it’s Superman!

Thant’s right these men have been accused of answering the following question on their church website: Who would win in a fight, Superman and Batman. Senior pastor Lance Hahn answers, “Hands down Superman because he really has powers. Batman’s a regular dude. Although in my book, Batman’s way more interesting.”

Their other big offense that proves why the church is a carnal mess? The executive Pastor’s favorite movie is Snatch. Which he acknowledges is a “Great film if you can get past the 493 F-bombs! (This film is rated R and neither endorsed nor sanctioned by Bridgeway Christian Church or its corporate officers).” This doesn’t exactly sound like a carnal mess to me, especially when they are speaking out against profanity.

My bigger problem? In my early one on one discussions with several members of CRN and other watchdog sites, they stressed the fact that they were exposing these men and women because they were influencing people on a national / global level. That it was no longer a local church issue because it has now come to their front door. But, has anyone heard of Bridgeway Christian Church in Rockin, CA? How bout Late Night Healing Place? Maybe South Hills Church in Corona, CA rings a bell… anyone?

>

anyone?

The fact is that this site has now become a doctrinal Gestapo, roaming through the internet looking for any picture, blog or comment on a church’s site that they disagree with. They are no longer just going after the big guys, but are attacking even the small unknown ministries in America. Either Ingrid has just gone crazy, or she is running out of material.

So it seems that Ken needs to further validate his position that Rick Warren isn’t a Chrsitian.  He calls in his international friends for spiritual backup.  Apparently his post attacking Warren’s salvation wasn’t enough.  This is a classic case of “SEE!  He thinks so toooo!”  Read the article here.   

Just when you thought the level of nit-picking at Slice 2.0 couldn’t go much lower, Ingrid proves that maybe there is no limit as to “how low can you go”…

And today’s persnickety gripe exposé of abject spiritual poverty in modern churches all centers around the ’staff’ page of a college church, where each member has a ’serious photo’ and a ‘not-so-serious photo’ side-by-side right above their bio.  And the problem with this?  Ingrid writes:

But what are these photos saying about the maturity level of ministry workers today?

I think that these photos would tell most college students and young professionals (the demographic of their community) that the folks who work and/or volunteer at Late Nite Church are down-to-earth folks who aren’t so full of themselves that they need to put on a “business-like air” or that they should look like they’ve eaten a diet of sour apples for the past upteen years.

Ingrid concludes by asking:

How do pig noses comport with the teaching of eternal truth? Would you take any of these people seriously?

The first question is (per the Ingrid standard) a false dichotomy, similar to ‘why should Christians have a dance festival when 400,000 babies were aborted last year’.  (In similar fashion, I suppose one could ask ‘how does complaining about someone making a pig-nose comport with the teaching of eternal truth?’)

As for taking these folks seriously, I’m pretty certain I’d take any one of them more seriously than any bitter watchdawggie who would be so shallow as to only focus on petty externals (dress or no)…

In this post from Apprising / CRN, Ken Silva officially comes out and says it: Rick Warren may not be Christian. Yes, it is true folks. Apparently Ken has accomplished the highest rank in discernment wizardry: being able to discern the hearts and salvation of men. I know many of you would like to take this at face value, but let’s look into his logic before we run away to alert the press.

Warren did an interview with beliefnet.com, in which he was asked what were the top five things that Jesus did on Earth, His response:

He planted a church

He quipped leaders

He cared for the poor

He healed the sick

He taught.

Now, the fact that he left out the cross might alarm some people. However, what A Little Leaven left out was the context in which this statement was made. In fact, in the audio clip they have, they provided just the answer, not even the question asked to Warren.

They were discussing Rick Warren’s “second reformation” or his new peace plan. It was an interview over Rick’s work in the social realm, and so these answers would be very fitting. In a discussion concerning what Jesus did on Earth in that context, this answer makes complete sense. When you are dealing with social aspects of ministry, you are going to focus on the social aspects of Jesus’ work here on earth.

However, Ken Silva affirms the statement “Warren isn’t willing to affirm Jesus’ death and resurrection.” For the life of me I cannot see where they are getting this from. Are they actually suggesting that Rick Warren is denying the death and resurrection of Jesus? Because I did not see any links on Silva’s blog to the hundreds of sermons/statements/books/resources in which Warren affirms that very thing. It seems like someone is being quite selective in the things that they are discerning.

Context, context, context people! Say you overheard a heated discussion between and husband and wife saying “Divorce is the answer to nothing!” Would it be fair of you to publish an article saying the couple said “Divorce is the answer!” Or better yet, if someone says in one conversation “I have intense arguments with my wife all the time” and later that day he says “I love the fact that we have such different views on things in life, but always manage to love each other deeply.” Would it be fair to say that this person has a bad marriage because they argue all the time? No. But, I see CRN / Apprising do this all the time. Just because Rick or Erwin or Rob don’t mention something in one interview they give, doesn’t mean that they don’t affirm or believe it.

And, I think we all need to be careful when “discerning” if someone is or isn’t a Christian.

so I have re-written this post about five times already. This may sound shallow, but all I have to say is that I really don’t like this post / video on Mike Corley’s site. I am neither calvinist nor arminian, but far too often CRN and others make this a dividing line between heresy and orthodoxy. Anyone who doesn’t subscribe to the five points of tulip is seen as attacking the doctrines of Grace. I have never understood that, as both theological systems are completely reliant on the grace of God. One system says that grace is available to all, another says that grace is given to some. But I digress.

I think this is the ugly side of doctrine. Having graduated with my M.A. in theology and continuing now with an M.T.S., I see far too many people that create huge dividing lines out of insignificant doctrinal differences. It becomes a competition of who has the superior doctrinal understanding, rather than who is putting their doctrine to work. I think we need to understand that no matter where you stand, both sides are using scripture and have strong evidence for both systems. To make this a line of heresy and orthodoxy is a mistake.

But, watch the video and let me know. Maybe it was just the fact that it was set in a submarine that weirded me out

It would appear that CRN/Slice 2.0 is in cahoots with ABC. In this article the ubiquitous “editor” uses innuendo to imply that the SBC is hiding behind anonymity to “cover up” sex abuse by Pastors. I find it interesting that someone not even willing to put their own name to an article is attempting call anyone out. I sent them a note expressing my concern over this seeming contradiction. I have included that below: You can read CRN/Slice 2.0 article here. You can read the article they cite here. 

 

I find it interesting that an article written by “editor”–a rather anonymous title accuses the SBC of hiding behind anonymity. I saw Frank Pages name. Who’s the one doing the hiding? 

Ken, I hope you’re having a great day! 

Joe 

***UPDATE*** 

It would appear the last word on the past has been changed to autonomy. I may have missed that earlier but I don’t think so.  If I did,  I apologize

This article on CRN from the Watcher’s Lamp is all about the dangers and evils of Mega churches.  You can read the article.

I have just one question for the editors of CRN and Watcher’s Lamp.  Does John MacArthur’s mega church, Grace Community, get pinned with this rather all-inclusive statement?
It’s all fun and games to paint with a large brush until someone loses an eye.

Apparently unable to find anything else of Rob Bell’s to critique today, Ken decided to pull out a sermon from Mars Hill two years ago that wrongly cited Nelson Mandela with a quote (ironically used by Nathan in the article below, and wrongly attributed there, as well).  SHAME ON YOU NATHAN (and Rob) – don’t you triple-check your quotes?

Apparently, Ken does, as he notes from another site that:

This quote is often found on the Internet incorrectly credited to Nelson Mandela from his Inauguration Speech, 1994, especially the last sentence of that quote, “As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.” (emphasis his)

So let me get this straight – Rob Bell (and our own beloved Nathan) mis-attributed a quote (two years ago) that Ken’s own research shows that people often mis-attribute to Nelson Mandela.

That’s the kind of good Christian research we need, right?  Right?  (Right now, I am recollecting someone’s words about ’straining gnats…’)

Or, maybe this was to also set up Ken to take the quote, then, out of the context of the remainder of the sermon and slander Bell by twisting its meaning to be something other than what it was.

Sure enough.

Ken quotes 2 Timothy 3:2

But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come. For men will be lovers of self. (emphasis his)

So here, the point Ken tries to make is that Rob is trying to talk about the love of man and the underpinnings of abject humanism.  The problem is, though, that Bell is actually talking about God giving us all a purpose in being here, a mission to accomplish with HIS aid and HIS Spirit, and that we often sell God short in what can be accomplished, via our own fears and insecurities.

So, Ken, once again has set up a straw man, and burned himself down…

Ingrid makes a pretty harsh stab at American Idol contestant Phil Stacey. Phil is a Top 7 finalist on American Idol. He is a devout Christian, family man, Navy vocalist, Christian songwriter, and a worship leader in his local church. After his father-in-law writes a letter to the media about Phil’s Christian music, many in the discernment camp fire out insults. This is a dissection of Ingrid’s letter back to Phil Stacey’s father-in-law.

What’s a “devout Christian” doing attempting to become an “American idol?” Is this what Jesus did when he came 2000 years ago? Was he interested in winning a popularity contest by the world, or was He going about His Father’s business here on earth?

This coming from a woman who speaks on a radio show that airs around the world and promotes her show when ever she gets an opportunity. Today they talked about the issues of tax reform in America, specifically attacking the Democratic Party. What exactly is she doing becoming a political activist/analyst? Is this what Jesus did when he came 2000 years ago? Did he want us to be radio talk show hosts or to go about our Father’s business?

Only in America do Christians believe they can have the applause of the world while still obtaining the blessing of God. Christians in North Korea and China and other nations around the world know that following Jesus will cost them everything. Not so, in America. Our American idol (the god of evangelicalism) calls us to be personally successful, popular and all that we can be. The true Jesus calls us to die to ourselves, take up our crosses and follow Him.

Probably one of the most twisted teachings of the discernment party is this concept that is you are not suffering horribly then you are out of God’s will. There is no room to be a successful artist, a influential doctor or anything other than a distressed human being. Here Ingrid basically says that American Christians should not pursue the dreams and plans that God has for us because the church is suffering in North Korea and China. When Jesus calls us to “die to ourselves”, he is not asking us to live some impoverished simple life, but to lay down our own plans and ambitions for His.

So what would that look like with and American Idol? Well, right now American Idol is the most watched television program on the air. Basically Phil Stacy has the largest platform in all of America. He has openly said that he is a believer, and is now interested in sharing his music with the world that shares the truth of the gospel. He has authorized this open letter to the press. I cannot speak for the man, but it would be easy for him to just be an idol… to just soak in the glory and make it all about him. But, he has died to self and is making this a ministry opportunity.

Two things… Why is it not ok for Phil Stacey to pursue this dream, but men like David Crowder, Chris Tomlin and Steven Curtis Chapman pursue it? The music of these men is played all over Mike Corley’s show each week. Is this not a double standard? Also, why are they not attacking anyone in a prominent position in the world… Christian doctors, politicians, lawyers, authors, media personality… why now attack a man who is interested in using the largest public platform in the world to share the gospel.

Ingrid ends with this

When you do that, you will lose the applause of the world, period.

Maybe if you taught the GOOD NEWS of Jesus Christ and not the idea that to follow Christ means to be impoverished, persecuted and tormented, we would not lose so much of the applause of the world.

This quote by Marianne Williamson sums things up for us as Christians

Our deepest fear is not that we are in adequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond all measure. It is our light, not our darkness, that frightens us the most. We ask ourselves, “who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, and famous?” Actually, who are you not to be? You are a child of God. Your playing small does not serve the world.

There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that people won’t feel insecure around you. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. It’s not just some of us; it’s in all of us. And, when we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberated others.

PLEASE NOTE:  The author or this blog does not support all of the ideas, philosophies, writings or theologies from Williamson.  All I am saying is that this quote sums up my thoughts.  The end.

I think this video, The Inquisition, speaks for itself (specifically the music). I would love to hear your thoughts.