Afraid of the Gospel
“[They] never preach the whole gospel because it is offensive to people.â€
This is a quote from Mike Ratliff’s latest blog on CRN entitled The Promise of the Holy Spirit. I hear this accusation so much from the discernment watchblogs. It is used as often as emergent and cult. But, just like those labels, the accusation is never backed up with any type of examples or proof. They simply say that the purpose driven and emergent movement is afraid of the gospel and not preaching the whole truth. What exactly do they feel is being left out.
A quick glance at Saddleback’s website on biblical truths should set this accusation straight. They address everything from abortion, homosexuality, evolution, salvation… even infant salvation! And all this from the grand pooh-Bah of the PD Ministry. I just don’t understand how Mike can say that purpose driven ministries are afraid of preaching the whole gospel. I can hardly find any other church that has such a thorough public forum on the doctrines they subscribe to. In fact, on Mike’s own website, there is a very sparse section on doctrine, most of which is dedicated to the theological system known as Calvinism.
The bigger more underlying problem was addressed by Chris L in an earlier post. There are way to many unsupported accusations made at CRN/Apprising. Terms and threats are thrown around with little thought or proof behind them. It usually boils down to “my theological nuances are different then your theological nuances.â€Â With that, these men and women feel it appropriate to attack others as heretics and cult leaders. What they fail to understand, in my opinion, is the gravity of these terms. Calling someone apostate is a serious offense, and should not be thrown around as a light insult.
April 10th, 2007 at 7:40 am
You said that “This is a quote from Mike Ratliff’s latest blog on CRN entitled The Promise of the Holy Spirit. I hear this accusation so much from the discernment watchblogs. It is used as often as emergent and cult. But, just like those labels, the accusation is never backed up with any type of examples or proof.”
I already did that. I wrote this piece several weeks ago on the Purpose Driven Deception: Should Your Church Implement the Purpose Driven Church Model Also, I have been a member of two churches that went Purpose Driven. I was a Deacon in both. I know more about Church Transitions than you are implying. In fact, I could tell you exactly how the PDC is brought in without anyone’s knowledge and sprung on the members after it is too late to stop it. I find it very hard to believe that that is how the Holy Spirit works.
In Christ
Mike Ratliff
April 10th, 2007 at 8:11 am
I find that some Christians take the fact the Gospel will offend some to mean that the Gospel must be offensive to all, which then quickly turns into a belief that says to truly preach the Gospel, you must actively try to offend people. This is what leads to the glorification of crazy street preachers in this brand of Christianity. The problem is that the Gospel isn’t offensive to everyone. It is offensive to the self-righteous, but the suffering and poor, it is the Good News. If we focus our efforts on trying to offend people, we will always miss the point.
I also agree that the words “apostate” and “heretic” get thrown around far too much on the internet. For one thing, in most instances the context in which those were used in the Bible was in the local church body. It had to with the health of the church in a city, rather than the church at large. I don’t think Paul envisioned that there needed to be some sort of gatekeeper or truth-checker for the worldwide church. I think he wanted local bodies to take that responsibility. I guess, in that sense, I don’t really have a problem with pastors of local churches guiding people in their churches by giving opinions on what books they think would be beneficial and which ones aren’t worth their time and such. I do have a problem with the hit-and-run attacks that are all over the internet, though.
April 10th, 2007 at 8:42 am
Did anyone else notice this “gospel”?
“The regenerate can repent, but the unregenerate (the lost) cannot.”
So we are to become regenerated to be able to repent? I think that this is the issue as it is backwards… one must repent to receive the Holy Spirit… Mike has it that we receive the Holy Spirit to repent…
I know this is part of Calvinism yet it is also the main issue as the Gospel we are faced with…Mike is preaching another gospel….
Romans 10: is clear…”That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.”
notice it is repentance then salvation… and one cannot be saved unless they have received the holy Spirit… Mike has place receiving the Holy Spirit before even belief!
We read in Acts that some believed without receiving the Holy Spirit… which means they had not received the whole of the Gospel…
Yep, they are right they are preaching “another” gospel.
Blessings,
iggy
April 10th, 2007 at 9:52 am
Mike, You miss the point…
Show us exactly where Rick Warren is not preaching the whole gospel and is an apostate or/and heretic?
I have been part of a PDC also… we we taught the full “gospel”… we had classes we had programs… all which in my own way I had issues with… but I would never call them apostate nor heretical…
In fact… I think you are teaching another gospel and should repent!
iggy
April 10th, 2007 at 10:30 am
iggy,
Read the Purpose Driven Church book. If you don’t want to take the time to do that then read my paper which is the post I linked to. I will agree with you that not all PDC churches fall into this error, however, the majority do. Also, my experience (and I have much more in this area than you) is that the PDC churches lighten up teaching the meat from the Word of God. Why?
I know you are going to protest that this is not the case, but when someone wanting to debate this comes to me they cannot do so from scripture. It is always on a philosophical basis, never according to scripture.
And, no, I don’t miss the point. Go read my other post.
In Christ
Mike Ratliff
April 10th, 2007 at 10:32 am
I found Mike’s article to be balanced and without any rancor which you and I abhor. It isn’t that Rick Warren doesn’t believe the gospel, it is that through the sales strategies that he freely admits he used to contour his presentation the gospel has been watered down. I too have read the book and heard it taught and it is extremely light on just about everything.
Very little focus on prayer and separation, and when I watched his personal videos there was almost no pathos or anything in his presentation that would lead someone to understand the gravity of the situation.
I am not a Calvinist and so Rick Warren and I would agree on that, but if you cannot see the continuing easy believism that is rampant throughout the evangelical world then we disagree. As a matter of fact, even the emergents criticize Warren for his seemingly cavalier presentation of the most serious issues of spiritual truth designed to easily gather converts.
And for you to pick out a post like Mike’s suggests that you hold it against him for CRN and that is guilt by association which many have accused some of you of. And to use the “you preach another gospel” card reduces the dialogue which is something you regularly accuse Ken of.
It grieves me that you will not make some discernment between some of the bloggers based on thier tone and humility, many lump you all together. It is my humble opinion that you are exhibiting some of the same traits that you rightly point out are self serving on some sites. Would you not prayerfully consider some more finely tuned discernment?
April 10th, 2007 at 11:16 am
“Also, my experience (and I have much more in this area than you) is that the PDC churches lighten up teaching the meat from the Word of God.”
How do you even know this? How can you assume to even know I am?
The weird thing is we might agree on many things… yet in this sentence you put me down?
Humility seems not to be your strong point Mike…
Yet… the one thing I will hold to is scripture over man’s teachings… even yours… I hold to Jesus Who is THE TRUTH.
In all your “knowledge” you miss this fine point… did you attend that church and serve as you said? Did you teach the Gospel and disciple others? Then with that being a supposed “yes” you nullify all your own arguments as you were doing all this as part of that PDC. Church is not the building… nor is it “the people” it is the Body of Christ and all its members working together… some plant some water (not water down) but it is God Who makes it grow…
You comments seem to ignore scripture at those very points.
Blessings,
iggy
Blessings,
iggy
April 10th, 2007 at 11:18 am
Henry, I think your friendship for Mike is clouding your view here. How can we not look at Mike with a little guilt by association, he is considered a contributor to a BLOG that we (I) believe is a blight on the bride of Christ.
Mike, Iggy’s question about how can you know how much experience he has is a good one. I’m looking forward to hearing your answer
April 10th, 2007 at 11:19 am
Rick…
Really I do not follow your logic…
1. You agree with Mike.
2. You agree with Rick Warren
3. You are not a Calvinist
4. The bible teaches we must repent TO BE SAVED
5. Mike teaches that we CANNOT repent until we are saved
I believe the Bible is right on this matter… do you? You sound a little tossed to and fro for me… maybe you need ot make a discision on something! (I am not saying you are not saved… just wishy washy.)
Blessings,
iggy
April 10th, 2007 at 11:35 am
Mike,
How did PDL sneak into to those two churches where you were a deacon? Was the pastor leading that change? If you consider this a sinful move by those leaders, did you not see any other evidence of them doing sinful or unbiblical things? Is their now fruit being produced from those churches.
The reason I am asking this because the examples of this I have personally witnessed were supported by the vast majority of the congregation. The few that opposed it, were the more traditional crowd that felt hearing their favorite hymns were more important than trying to get the lost in church.
I am sure there are churches with unbiblical pastors who have made massive changes for the wrong reason. I am sure that some of the more traditional crowed see biblical preaching missing. So I am suggesting that the bad side of PDL and the pastors doing this for the wrong reason are few and the good side of PDL that is the vast majority is genuinely reaching the lost and producing real fruit. By the way, when I say “PDL†I am referring to style of church just I use “traditional†as style of church. Style and method never saved anybody, only the Lord does that.
Similarly, most traditional churches are reaching the lost and producing real fruit, while a few have abandoning the great commission to preserve their traditions that are man-centered.
Darren
April 10th, 2007 at 11:51 am
Rick (and Mike),
I have attended three churches which have gone through the PDC/PDL materials, all of which made some changes based upon suggestions from Warren, but not trying to shoehorn what was good in Orange County California into north/central Indiana. All of these churches preach a whole gospel, without “watering it down”. [I'm not saying this is you, Mike, but in my experience the old adage "yes, the gospel message is offensive, but its delivery need not be so" tends to get ignored by those looking for 'whole gospel' teaching.]
Every church recognized that parts of the PDL were weakly supported (in the minutae), and supplemented those. I found PDC to be helpful giving some ideas around church structure/aligment. I found PDL to be rather weak and basic (milk but not meat), but I don’t think it was intended to be more than a starting point. I think it goes too far, though, to call it anti-Biblical.
Of these three churches, the first I left when I moved 60+ miles away. Were we still living there, I would still attend. There was/is Biblically sound leadership there, both before and after the “40 days”.
the second one had good, solid preaching, but lacked any real leadership. When they went through “40 days”, it seemed for that month and a half like they actually had their act together, but once it was done, it was back to being a ‘country club’ church, uninterested/unprepared in reaching the world - literally - right outside its doors.
Our church which (if God is willing) we will attend the rest of our lives, is growing fast and, in my estimation, doing so through a good balance of internal focus (spiritual growth of the flock) and external focus (being salt and light).
Mike - I was with you in your article until you went off on your PDL-church tangent (which by your definition, I guess I would have more experience than you). I don’t know why your old church felt you were acting the part of a ‘hyper-Calvinist’ (I have tended to stay out of that discussion, though I have written one article on the subject, claiming neither Calvin nor Arminius, for which Jim Bublitz had some words), but I wonder whether the concept of ‘election’ is what has opposed you to PDL, rather than other reasons. Regardless, I think that your bad experience with a specific church may have jaded you to the entire thing (the same way I cannot be objective when discussing church #2 above).
In your article, you said:
I would suggest that this is a false dichotomy - it is to be both. If we follow the thread from Abraham through Paul in the Bible, we find that the first purpose of God blessing Abraham:
Then, Peter tells us:
We know that the greatest two commandments are 1) to love God and 2) to love our neighbor. It’s not an either-or, it is BOTH. To emphasize either to the full detriment of the other is idocy. I wouldn’t think that you would advocate this, REALLY, though your article suggests differently. In the same way that I give you the benefit of the doubt, I would also assume that the churches you refer to would not make the opposite advocation.
I think that it is this level of broad-brush condemnation/invective, that many find unhelpful…
April 10th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
Iggy,
I can know that because of what you say. I challenge you to read the post I linked to. It is the result of my own experiences plus several weeks of research. I said what I said because you are insinuating that I know nothing about the PDC. I know it inside out, top to bottom, and I know what is behind it. That isn’t pride or arrogance, simply the facts. Read my post then we’ll talk.
Chris L.
First, if a church’s way of operation is to appeal to the flesh then it is not a New Testament Church. I am not saying that all PDC churches go overboard in this area, but I have been part of two that did. I have also heard the sermons of the “pastors’ of many others who wouldn’t know the gospel if it hit them in the face.
Second No it is not a false dichotomy. The Church is to be the family unit of the local body of believers who are discipled and taught and who will work to bring others into the Kingdom. What the PDC model does is short-circuit this by simply being an outreach ministry rather than a true church. What happens to the sheep in those “churches?” They starve. The majority of those I minister to are those who have had to leave these churches because of the secularization of what used to be New Testament Church that has become nothing more than a fleshly entertainment venue.
You are suggesting that to reject the PDC is to reject evangelism. What? I can’t believe you believe that. The PDC is not loving your neighbor. It is a means of organizing a church to get as big as possible. It is all about church growth not making disciples which is what we are to be about.
In Christ
Mike Ratliff
April 10th, 2007 at 12:39 pm
Mike,
You said:
No - I took a quote from your article, which if taken literally, would indicate that you see that a church exists solely for its members and that PDL sees it as just the opposite. What I then suggested was that, in the same way I doubt you would agree that the church exists solely for its members, that many churches who use (in some form or fashion) PDC methodologies would doubt the way you have characterized them.
Where I disagree most with the PDC model is that it has an emphasis to bring the community into the church rather than the church into the community. The whole ‘fleshly’ vs. ’spiritual’ argument is just dressed up gnosticism, though, when it is applied to neutral elements such as worship style, service times, dress and other externals. It is the message that is important, not the method. As I noted above, the message of the gospel is offensive, but its delivery need not compound the offense.
April 10th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
Chris,
Well brother, I see we agree on something. My passion is for the Gospel and having it preached to all, but not watered down in any way.
In Christ
Mike Ratliff
April 10th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
Joe, if CRN asked me to post on their blog I would without restrictions I would, wouldn’t you? How many times have I heard you guys say for example that just because you may read or link to MacLaren or others doesn’t mean you agree with everything. Well you are being much more inflexible in the association game than you seem to apply to yourselves. Let us all hope that friendship doesn’t cloud but brings understanding even in disagreement.
If your stance means that if a person is humble and attempts to treat people with respect they still must be treated with the same disdain as others simply because he is allowed to post on disagreeable posts, well then you have removed the nature of Christian dialogue. That policy would be agreement or no dialogue.
Iggy, you are looking to win an argument against me rather than discuss some legitimate concerns about some of the presentations of the gospel. There are many Christian leaders who are humble and respected who have serious disagreements with Rick Warren’s system. Even some emergents find fault with the Purpose Driven approach. My comment about Warren and I not being Calvinists was meant to disarm the argument that people disgree with him due to their Calvinist view. The chronology of the born again experience visa vie believe, repent, justified, and the rest is a useless argument and many have different views. Only God knows for sure. To me that is micro managing some mysteries.
I would hope that you guys would not paint with a careless and arbitrary brush all who in sincerety and humility speak some words of warning and possible correction to the body, including and especially we ourselves. Do you not desire a full compliment of respectfull perspectives on this blog or not? I have never deleted a comment of disagreement on my blog and I welcome all who would enter with humility and respect no matter how deep our disagreement. That should be one area that every perspective should find universal agreement, no?
April 10th, 2007 at 1:14 pm
Mke,
Point out to me where is insinuated, ” I said what I said because you are insinuating that I know nothing about the PDC. ”
I never did that at all… I asked a queetion you have avoided….
“Show us exactly where Rick Warren is not preaching the whole gospel and is an apostate or/and heretic?”
that is your accusation and of that of CRN… show me how this is true…
I read way too much in my comments.
Blessings,
iggy
April 10th, 2007 at 1:15 pm
Henry,
I would agree with your comments… I would hope that we would not paint with a careless and arbitrary brush, as well… I like having different perspectives here, especially when they respectfully disagree, as it gives a chance for all of those involved to learn and (potentially) grow closer to what it is God desires of us.
To this point, we’ve not had to delete any comments (other than those that were duplicate or announced beforehand on a broad thread).
Grace and peace,
Chris
April 10th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Iggy, did you mean that “he read way too much into..” or is it printed correctly?
April 10th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
Rick,
I will post more later. But, did you pick up from my post that I was addressing this issue because he was a CRN writer? that was not the issue here. The issue was Mike painting a huge broad stroke on Purpose Driven Churches as watering down the gospel because of a bad experience with two churches. It was also about attacking PD ministries as being afraid of the gospel when the Saddleback website has one of the most unashamed doctrinal Q&As I have seen.
April 10th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
Nathan, That was succinct and to the point. Well done.
***Am I am Amen corner now?***
April 10th, 2007 at 1:23 pm
Rick,
“you are looking to win an argument against me rather than discuss some legitimate concerns about some of the presentations of the gospel. There are many Christian leaders who are humble and respected who have serious disagreements with Rick Warren’s system.”
No, I pointed out I could not see WHERE your are coming from… You say one thing then you say the other and then you never state you real position…
“The chronology of the born again experience visa vie believe, repent, justified, and the rest is a useless argument and many have different views. Only God knows for sure. To me that is micro managing some mysteries.”
I think scripture is very clear on this… you seem to be using what is often called the “postmodern” argument here… which confuses me even more… if I said this I would be hogtied and dragged down the street! So, I ask again… and this is a very crucial part of the discussion. If I spoke of mystery, then I am painted as an evil “Christian mystic”…meaning I am a Gnostic heretic…
Is Rick warren right and though he may only plant the seed, or if he only watered thee seed… again… why stand by and let someone like Mike cast judgment on Rick Warren if he plant or water? It is God who makes things grow… that is the teaching of scripture…
Again… I can’t tell by your words where you stand, so how can I win an argument with you? I need to know where you stand to even know if we do agree on anything at all…
How about calling your friend Mike on the carpet for not looking for common ground and to stop addressing me as someone unworthy of his time… How about letting your yes be yes and your no be no…
Blessings,
iggy
April 10th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
Joe,
it may be both… he may be putting into my comments is own words and how he “feels” about me… and he may be putting in my comments other things that are not part of this discussion in other words adding to my very words.
Mostly I don’t have a very good spell check here at work and I am typing too fast to double check my spelling… sorry
Blessings,
iggy
April 10th, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Iggy, I completely understand. I type as fast as I can at work on a desktop keyboard which is awful, because I am way too used to a laptop keyboard.
April 10th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
Iggy,
This is getting tedious. I have already told you that I have done this. Read the post I linked to. Here it is again. Click here to read it You read that and then get back with me.
In Christ
Mike Ratliff
April 10th, 2007 at 1:45 pm
Ok, I read it. I love the book 9 marks of a healthy church. I only saw two types of problems listed. Methodolocical and Interpretive. I don’t agree with your interpretive problems. Does that make me heretical? Does that make me apostate? That article points our stylistic problems, it does not point out heresy. I think because you will be hard pressed to find heresy. At the risk of becoming tedious, I’m curious which of the five purposes do you believe to be heretical?
April 10th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Mike,
I will write another blog about this article tonight. I think you are missing a huge part of the purpose driven model. You are looking only at the Sunday Morning experience. You fail to look at their ministry teams, small groups and discipleship teams. Sunday morning is not “the sabbath” or “church”. It is a small part of what a church is about (hopefully). I think this is a HUGE problem overall with watchdog blogs. I know at my church, the Sunday morning experience is more geared towards the unbeleiver. Our small groups is where the true discipleship and spiritual formation happens. I am in a small group where we are going verse by verse thru the book of James. Isn’t that what the early church did anyhow… house churches?
Again, Purpose Driven looks VERY different from church to church. To paint all/the majority/most of them as bad is really unmerited (in my opinion).
April 10th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
Joe and Iggy and everyone else,
I don’t recall ever calling Rick Warren a heretic or the PDC heresy. I have called it deceptive because it is. I have been on the inside of transitioning a Church to this. I have seen the deception of not telling the people that this is coming because they try to stop it. I have seen devout pillars of those churches have to leave because they want a biblical church. Now would God do things this way? No, of course not. This is a man-made deception.
The fact that you don’t agree with the analysis does not mean the analysis is wrong.
Did you see in my post where I ever referred to heresy? It isn’t there.
In Christ
Mike Ratliff
April 10th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
Mike,
Thank you for being willing to come into ‘hostile’ territory today - I will check out your articles tonight and tho tomorrow is very busy, I will respond, if need be.
Grace and peace,
Chris
April 10th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
“maybe you need ot make a discision on something! (I am not saying you are not saved… just wishy washy.)”
I have never labeled you as you have me. Where do I stand I guess means where do I stand on what is the gospel. The gospel is that Christ died for the sins of the world and that on the third day He rose from the dead. As I said before, When the Holy Spirit opens a person’s eyes to who Christ is and who he is, and that sinner places his God given faith solely upon the Lord Jesus for his salvation, that person becomes born again. You may have the chronology figured out, I do not and I certainly did not have a clue when I was born again in 1975.
Here is the difference between what others present. If a person comes to Christ for some personal, earthly benefit as in money, marriage, success, and anything else he is responding to a message of lust rather than the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Christ Himself dissuaded many would be followers by pointing to his impoverished dwelling place, the lust after miracles, the allurement of riches, and other earthly things that compromise the essence of true faith. Do we EVER dissuade a person from making a “decision” for Christ in a well meaning attempt to purify his motives?
The seriousness of the present situation is belied by the casualness of the presentation. If a friend came into your home and sat down to watch TV with you and as he grabbed some chips he remarked,”By the way, your back bedroom is engulfed in flames”, would you believe him So while the Biblically warned wrath of Almighty God is headed for this planet and people teach that like it was an algebra lesson, doesn’t the lack of tears, and passion, and sacrifice, and uncomfortable boldness contribute to the fact that the world doesn’t believe it because they do not see much emotion and sacrifice that would necessarily correspond with such an astounding claim?
And although a person is saved by faith alone, doesn’t the anemic or absent call to sacrificial followship cheapen the gospel so almost no one “counts the cost” anymore. That is my concern, and it doesn’t mean that no one gets saved at Saddleback, but in my opinion it calls into question the purity of the gospel, and I happen to like Rick Warren as a person and do not question his motives, just his methods. And I am an unprofitable servant.
April 10th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
Mike, I too apreciate you coming here and dialoging.
Having said that, I must take issue with your statement. You said, “I have seen devout pillars of those churches have to leave because they want a biblical church.” That assumed value in that statement is that a PDL church cannot be Biblical. That is just too broad. I know PDL churches that are Biblical.
April 10th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Rick-
I am sorry that you were labeled. I appreaciate your discussion here and hope that this will not turn into a mud slinging blog with one another. I do however feel that while there are “health and wealth” ministries that are doctrinally incorrect, PD ministry is not one. Rick does preach topical sermons on how to make your marriage better thru Christ, how to biblically manager your money, etc. But, I wouldn’t say that he waters down the gospel or that the majority of people are saved at Saddleback because of that. I also don’t think it is fair to brush all PD ministries as growth focused, wishy washy or all evangelism. I have yet to hear someone properly explain how implementing evangelism, worship, discipleship, ministry and fellowship is a bad thing for their ministry.
Mike-
But, it sounds like you had some bad experiences with two churches and are painting the whole movement out to be so. I personally know of the top of my head 12 churches who became PD. Yes, some left and disagreed, but others in the community came and found Christ. To say that it is all deception and that God wouldn’t do something like this because you and some people you are close to disagree with it is not a very good argument.
I will write more later (like I said earlier
I think that alot of churches who sing hymns, sit on pews and read the King James are out of date and just pleasing the sheep. I know people who have been kicked out of these churches for wearing jeans and piercings to church! Would God allow this to happen? No! Do I then say that this movement is deceptive and self-centered? No. I think that God is moving through these churches still. Just because my personal experience is negative doesn’t mean I throw out the baby with the bath water.
I think it would be great for you or Silva to go to Saddleback and tell these people that the majority of them are not Christians. That they are following a deceptive religion. I think you would see a whole different picture.
April 10th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
Mike,
OK I concede that YOU personally have not called Rick Warren a heretic or whatever… deceptive is still a it too much as I do not see Rick sneaking around…
I did note you said that he was NOT a heretic… but that runs in the face of what others say at CRN…
If one understands that a seeker/purpose driven model is to plant and water… I think one can step back and realize that often other churches in the area benefit from these mega churches…
How?
We often get to disciple if there is not a good program set up… yet I have been involved in at least three PDC that had very good follow through as far as discipleship… one that had a bit of a hiccup as it was also a new church plant that grew from 200 to 5000 in less than 3 years…
Yet still, how do you justify that others at CRN do call Rick names and do regard him as an apostate or heretic? These are your friends…
To me no matter who it is, if was involved in a “discernment” group, I would make sure that the others are not shooting inappropriate potshots at people as far as calling them heretics.
Again, you have in the past called me one then retracted and said I have poor discernment… and even have gone as far as saying I do not have the light of Christ in me or I would see the heresy around me… all very judgment and condemning for a person who has never met me nor spent time getting to know me…
In that I have no problem with someone saying that we need to take care that the Gospel is preached… and be alert as to if it is being watered down… and I have voice my concerns also about mega PDL churches… in fact the emerging church have a running joke about the WIillowback or Saddlecreek churches…
I do thank you Mike… and I know I am being a bit hard on you… but I hope you realize that I am openly rebuking you for the purpose that you see that to be associated with a “discernment group” carries great responsibility… and that is to be will to face you friends when they are not being truthful and are bearing false witness against others… and hiding behind the transparent wall of “I did not say that” does not remove that responsibility form you…
Remember that after the taking of Jericho there was one in the camp that took a bit of armor from the ruins after they were instructed not to… and the whole camp suffered from that one person’s sin… that is what the case is at a discernment group… if one in your camp is sinning… then it will affect your ministry no matter how hard you try to compartmentalize it…
Blessings,
iggy