From here:
The whore church that has no heart for holiness, that would rather sponsor dance contests than prayer meetings, that makes like Belshazzar’s Feast with the champagne flowing and voluptuous partying, instead of seeking God’s help to walk rightly in increasingly bleak times, is not the Bride of Christ.
The whore church? A comparison to Belshazzar? An accusation of “voluptuous partying”, and also a quick peek into the book of life to let us know that Mars Hill Church isn’t actually part of the church.
I guess we can add another name to the list of names I’ve called Ingrid: hypocrite.
.
This entry was posted
on Monday, December 24th, 2007 at 5:22 pm and is filed under Hypocrisy, Ingrid, ODM Responses, ODM Writers.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
![Image of The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31Jl6fhDLxL._SL75_.jpg "The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith")
144 Comments(+Add)
I thought Ingrid was going to “tone it down.”
Neil
I think the article is rediculous. However, I am not sure how the name “hypocrite” applies to Ingrid here.
Ok, Ingrid calls her thing a ministry. She acts religious. Jesus reserved his harshest criticism and meanest names for those people, right? At first I thought you were a little out of line, Tim. Then a friend pointed out all the things Jesus said about those people. So I am not sure how this all fits.
Why post this on Christmas Eve? (Her post)
OK, I just went and read the comment thread at Camp’s Blog (Jim is it OK, if I just use his last name? Michael Jordan never minds when I call him Jordan). Couple of things struck me as funny:
1. You were kind, not mean in any way.
2. Jim Burblitz acts like a two year old. “You’re breaking the rules. Steve, I sent you an email. I’m so super cool.”
That was honestly the most entertaining 10 comment thread I’ve ever read.
Tim, I’ll email you or IM my thoughts on the whole name thing.
The bit that I”m sure hasn’t escaped their notice on all this is all of my critiques of Ingrid can’t be reviewed since she’s pulled down all of the articles I responded to. Was she a jerkhole? Does she have an idiotic hermeneutic? Well, we can’t tell now.
I generally agree with the assessment except the last six words. To levy the unsaved title is the height of sanctimony, especially when blanketed upon an entire church. Spurgeon himself would include “infant baptismal regeneration” in his list of “not the Bride of Christ”.
There is a difference between my perception of “worldly” and “unsaved”. And that perception belongs exclusively to God Himself.
BTW – I disagree with some of Tim’s terminology (big surprise), but Ingrid’s “their not the Bride of Christ” phrase about the Mars Hill group trumps Tim’s epithets. “You are not saved” is more caustic than “retard”. One is adolescent the other is eternally damning and suggests divine insight into who are wheat and who are tares.
I believe Jesus mentioned something about that.
Um…jerkhole?
Ugh.
At the risk of sounding prissy or just repressed…please. Not jerkhole or retarded, or anything. Especially at Christmas. It’s just so unkind, no matter what has been thrown at you that you are responding to.
Peace.
Leave Ingrid alone in her self righteous swagger she calls faith…
Interesting though she has to state that it is ” that makes like Belshazzar’s Feast with the champagne flowing and voluptuous partying” as if the champagne was flowing free and the orgy is on the floor!
In fact champagne will be served I understand, but only at 11:30 till midnight and “enough” for toasting… which is much different than a drunken revelry… Ingrid is being quite slanderous here and is in fact misplacing the truth and promoting the righteousness of God with a lie…
In fact she even places a barrier in the way of ever having reconciliation with her words, “Anyone who challenges them biblically will only get howled down by the pleasure-mad evangelical mob.”
Now, the sick thing is she is suggesting more sexual and lascivious behavior in imagery in this post than what is going on at Mars Hill… in fact if one understands what she is stating…
Daniel 5: 1-4
It then goes into the hand that appears and writes on the walls that Belshazzar will be judged…
But, note the things Ingrid is implying is happening at Mars Hill.
1. They drank wine… and it was freely distributed throughout the nobles… not served between 11:30 tin midnight and only enough for a “toasting”.
2. he gave orders to bring in the gold and silver goblets… a display of his wealth and power. I do not see this in the advert for Mars Hill. Note also these were the temple goblets and cups that were for worship of YWHW…
3. Belshazzar had his and the nobles wives an concubine drink from these sanctified cups… to get them drunk… possibly for an orgy?
4. As they drank the wine, they praised the gods of gold and silver, of bronze, iron, wood and stone.
Now, tell me does anyone actually think Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill is going to do all that? Does Ingrid even understand the slander she is throwing out as an accusation against them? Does she really thing they are defiling the sanctified worship items of the Lord and worshiping them mockery of God Himself?
And she knows their hearts in this matter?
Good grief… I wonder if Ingrid has no shame?
Merry Christmas!
iggy
AMEN! Regardless of what one may think of her, if she can say that:
Not only is it not the way to address a lady no matter what she says or does, but it’s also just not the way of rebuking in love. Calling her a hypocrite is fine, the others are demeaning.
I could be wrong, but this site seems to revel in being posted about in a negative manner from CRN.
Revel? No. But it points out our differences. They’re busy being offended by PG level language, while mangling scripture. If they expected this to be some kind of enormous expose it says more about their priorities than it does anything about me.
I find it especially hilarious they pulled the “if I’m an embarressment, so be it” line out, as clearly Paul C understood what I meant. We’ve long since passed teh point where there’s misunderstanding to deliberate distortion. Then again Silva unashamedly lies, and Ingrid et al. refuses to call him to repentance, so I’m not sure why that would be a surprise.
If the lady acts like a jerkhole, calling her a jerkhole is hardly unfitting. If the watchdoggies had conducted themselves in a fitting way this site wouldn’t exist at all.
Also, please note, that these incidents are culled from a very large body of work. While I will refer to jerkholes as jerkholes, and idiotic hermeneutics as idiotic hermenutics its hardly a large part of what I’ve written.
Tim – personal and name calling invectives remove the eseence of what you are saying. I do not believe Ingrid is any of those names you’ve called her, however, I do believe she is prideful and out of her calling. She loves Christ and has some legitimate views concerning the church as a whole, but some of her verbiage clouds the issue as well.
I have been a strong critic of Ingrid’s methodology but I’ve never questioned her commitment to Christ and I do not recall calling her a personal name unless I was careless. You are well versed in many areas that should be shared without names and in that you present your case.
Idiotic hermeneutics may get by, by jerkhole is out of bounds.
Rick,
Jerkhole is no more out of bounds than big meanie, cranky pants, or nasty. Different terminology, same idea.
I think it’s ridiculous to say that someone’s gender protects them from rebuke.
Your plumbing doesn’t earn you a “lighter touch”.
A little girl throws a tantrum, kicks people in the shins, she gets rebuked.
Anybody who rises up to say, “Oh, you’re being mean to the little girl. Leave her alone…because she is a little girl. It doesn’ matter what she did…because she’s a “she”, is a great source of puzzlement to me.
I agree, gender is irrelevant. We should attempt to reel in our personal invectives in favor of strong and confrontational discourse that addresses issues not people.
Additionally, if you feel youare obeying Christ in your ministry you should not take offense when you are called names. “Rejoice when men shall say all manner of evil against you for my sake” Ingrid desires to speak strongly against the falling away of the church and then laments about persecution, even if it isn’t polite.
We American Christians are so soft.
1. Gender is irrelevant. You have my full agreement on this in all matters, including those you don’t want to acquiesce this point on.
2. We shouldn’t be calling anyone retarded, jerkhole, etc., male or female, Christian or non-Christian.
3. Persecution shouldn’t come from fellow brothers and sisters, even if they dish it out.
4. Being called names by fellow Christians is a questionable use of the concept of being persecuted, much less being persecuted for Christ.
5. Ingrid’s calling people names with Biblical origins (whore of Babylon, etc.) is not any better than jerkhole, et. al.
6. So what. Don’t return the favor.
7. What is a jerkhole? A combination of a**hole with the word “jerk” to soften it? Use the real word and quit pretending.
If you think I was saying to be nice to Ingrid because she’s female, I’ve not made myself clear. I’m saying: you don’t have to be nice, you don’t have to take gender into account, but you can treat all people with some sort of respect and barest courtesy whether you think they deserve it or not; and, if you find they really don’t deserve that kind of time or those kinds of replies, then just ignore them completely. This has more to do with your reflection than anything else.
I say this to myself, as well.
I agree, Julie.
To be fair to Tim he probably was treating her like he would any guy. I mean if he perceived a guy to be those things I suspect he would have said it. I know that misses the point of what you were saying Julie, and I did it on purpose. Don’t hate me.
(nefariously rubbing her hands together)
Julie (thinking): Hmmm. What name can I call Joe, out of hatred?
——-
No hate here.
“including those you don’t want to acquiesce this point on.”
Or you.
In agreement with Julie.
Where is that comment thread on Camp’s blog?
NC
Here
Now I’m a little confused. First I’m told not to be so harsh, now I’m being told I should be harsher?
I still haven’t received any guidance as to what words are acceptable to describe someone who is acting like, well, a jerkhole. Big meanie? Cranky pants? El Jerkola Numero Uno?
Rick, you said gender was irrelevant, not me. But, I’m not interested in talking about this off-topic throw-away point; I ought not have threw you the bone. My mistake.
Tim, I don’t think you should use a**hole, but by saying jerkhole, the same punch is there and the association is, too. So, if you’re going to say something, quit kidding around and pretending to be in the realm of not swearing but still getting the same benefits and say the real word, or find a way to communicate without using any words as “innocent” stand-ins for any other not-so-appropriate word at all. In no way do I think you should be harsher, and if my effort to contrast and cut to the chase truly confused you into thinking that is what I was suggesting, it is my fault for writing badly. My point was that the stand-in words have the same emotion behind them despite different letters. The gist is the same.
What should you call people? How about nothing? Their name? How to describe what someone is acting like — why not say “he is acting poorly” or “she is clearly being disingenuous” or “this is contrasting behavior considering her earlier words” or something, instead of just “jerkhole” and “moron”. The classic writers’ advice is to show, not tell. Show the readers what the person is saying or doing with good writing and a clearly presented case, and we can divine for ourselves that they are two-faced, back-peddling, or “jerkholes.” Why do we have to throw a name or descriptive like that at people? You don’t have to lie down and take it or become some kind of verbal doormat — that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying there is a middle ground, and a better way to present yourself and your case which will help your case. Jerkhole and nutjob may not be it.
Yep.
A compelling argument, if I thought words were ontologically evil or good. I don’t.
Because as long as watchdoggies have the megaphone they do, and because they are identified as Christians a failure to register moral disapproval becomes approval for what they do. By labeling unacceptable behavior what it is we avoid allowing them to set the tone for Christians online.
But that’s exactly my point, Tim. Jerkhole is no better than a**hole; it has nothing to do with the actual words, but the feeling or implication behind them. And that’s why we shouldn’t use them. The desire and emotion behind the use of those words is anything but Godly. I know it from my own usage and struggles with toning down language. It is less the words and more what you are using the words as a front for: anger, a desire to cut, strong dislike, a desire to hurt, or as a lazy way of swinging at an opponent. If you can’t write without using the words, perhaps it is best to wait a while until you can, because there is something else at work inside if those words absolutely must come out.
We can measure disapproval in other ways, as I suggested in my earlier comment. We can do it through good and measured writing, honest thought, and no low-blows. We can rise above that. Our readers aren’t dumb; they can see the contrasts without use resorting to name-calling. In no way, by suggesting a toning down of language, am I indicating that we say nothing at all.
OK, then. I label your use of names as unacceptable behavior.
I’m not looking for a fight, Tim. At this point, where you seem to be almost fisking my suggestion to tone down your language while simultaneously coming to a conclusion that it is necessary as an example for other Christians online, I need to bow out. There’s nothing else to add here.
Tim,
I agree – why sidetrack the discussion to something as stupid as this when there are so many bigger issues under discussion. Basically, you allow Ken to play holy and derail any discussion because of the language chosen. Why play into their playbook?
Most of our language should move forward the discussion. “Jerkhole” immobilizes the issue and gives ammunition to others who would contend you have made it personal.
Tim,
My friend, i don’t like “jerkhole” either… though I totally understand what you are saying. i would have called her other names more offensive like Calvinist or fundamentalist… but she would not get the joke.
iggy
Said this is no expression and completely dead pan….
I give my apologies to all my Calvinist friends that have a sense of humor…
Iggy: I am a “calvinist” and I accept your apology! 8^)>
Tim: You stated – “Jerkhole is no more out of bounds than big meanie, cranky pants, or nasty. Different terminology, same idea. “ I am hard pressed to accept that you really believe that What if the term “b**ch” were used to refer to your wife? Would you be just as willing to believe the person meant “meanie” or “cranky pants?” In this (albeit hypothetical) situation, do you still hold that “words [are not] ontologically evil or good”?
At this point we’re not arguing principle, we’re arguing what makes for an effective argument. Which is fine. ITs not as if the majority of my work has been to call the watchdoggies jerkholes when they’re being jerkholes. It represents a very small amount of what I’ve written.
So, Senator Clinton, are you refusing to answer the question?
cranky pants
I like that one! oooo use that one! Make that one be the major part of your work Tim…. Please?
The new official “code” for Ingrid is “Cranky Pants”. It sounds almost like a superhero’s enemy! LOL!
iggy
Cranky Pants
Sure, the severity of words differ (note: that doesn’t have anything to do with the ontological goodness of words, we’ve had that discussion a billion times here). But I’m having a tough time accepting asshole=jerkhole. I’ve heard lots of people scream “asshole” at each other when they’re genuinely angry and hate each other, I’ve never heard anyone scream jerkhole in the same situation. Likewise I understand that “meanie” and “crankiepants” is also different from jerkhole in that they’re not really used to condemn the behavior, they’re used to coddle and excuse the person acting in that manner.
Tim,
Are you online? IM me
Can you spell “mumbo jumbo?” Tim, that has to be some of the most convoluted, double-speak I’ve read in a while.
You said: I’m having a tough time accepting asshole=jerkhole. It sound like that’s only because you don’t want to. Why do you have to be so harsh to make a point? I don’t get it. Even Chris L and Julie think you’ve gone over the top on this one.
What difference does it make as far as the word used (jerkhole vs. a**hole vs. jackass vs. jackhole vs [fill in your own word here]) if [people are] genuinely angry and hate each other,”?
Because YOU’VE “never heard anyone scream jerkhole in the same situation,” that’s your defense? (Always remember: As long as YOU believe it’s true, it’s not a lie.)
I’ll write you in on the Ohio caucus ballot. With your ability to weave words, you’re a shoo-in.
“ITs not as if the majority of my work has been to call the watchdoggies jerkholes when they’re being jerkholes.”
Sure. But that is like a man who is aressted at age 40 ,for robbing a bank and says “For 40 years I didn’t rob a bank and just this one time and I’m arrested?”. If it needs adjusting, so be it.
Really. So calling a jerkhole a jerkhole is like a man robbing a bank?
Tim, you are more intelligent than that. Give up your foxhole and go defend a more defendible one.
No, but it’s not seasoning your speech with grace, either…
To Rick’s point – it immobilizes the conversation and it basically gives the person you’re criticizing a perfect “out” to change the topic…
It’s kind of like a lawyer who uses a brilliant summation but within it misses a technicality that allows the opposing counsel to raise an objection, which is upheld. No matter how brilliant the summation at that point, the jury will remember the objection and overruling…
Tim: If you’ll send me your address, I’ll mail you a pair of “happy pants;” you obviously got “crankie pants” for Christmas. 8^)>
That’s probably illegal since I’m not a resident.
Keith, this stance is teh direct opposite of the one you just took in asking about someone calling my wife a bitch. The way words are used and perceived do matter. Jerkhole is not used in the same way, context, or perceived in teh same way as asshole. What’s more, apparently it wasn’t considered harsh enough to respond to until teh New Truthers decided to do a giant “expose” on me complete with faux outrage.
I am a bit curious Keith, if you really believe what you’ve written here, why haven’t you written anything about it in response? Either in comments or in an email to me?
Keith, are you really claiming I’ve actually heard someone scream jerkhole during a domestic disturbance or something and now I’m lying about it? Really.
Alright I apologize for calling teh watchdoggies jerkholes. They’re crankypants, meanies, and any other synonomn you want to use. In the future I will be sure to label their sin in a way that doesn’t shock the sensibilities of my readers.
Keith just called me brilliant. Team Awesome continues its unabated wave of awesomeness.
Crap that was Chris L. Which is still cool, but not as cool as someone who disagrees with me constantly.
I’ve never heard anyone scream jerkhole in an argument because I’d not heard the word until now. I’m sure there are many variations of words I’ve not heard or considered. It really isn’t about pin-pointing all of them, I don’t think, but figuring out why we use any of them. Jerkhole, pie-hole, a**hole, doody-head, cranky-pants — subterfuge. All of it.
On a personal level, one thing I’ve been trying to do for a few months is not relegate a person to a rude name. Instead of saying “He’s a loser” or “Don’t be such a friggin’ moron” I am working at coming to another way of referencing people.
This is really difficult for me; I’d become quite lazy over the years and found it easier to use one of these kinds of pre-defined insults as a way of categorizing people that hurt me or that I didn’t like. The truth of the matter is, most people aren’t morons or losers, and those that actually might be are the ones least affected by the name-calling. They are the kind where you really do just have to walk away and ignore.
Using those words lets me off the hook as to why I disagree or dislike a person. I don’t have to think about it or be honest about myself and how I reacted or felt when a person said or did something; I merely have to think “Well, he’s a loser, that’s why.” It ends up being a way to easily dismiss people and never have to come to an understanding with them or with myself. It is laziness.
Sadly, I still catch myself doing it.
This is what I am trying to say. I’m not trying to reprimand as much as I’m wanting us to do the “job” we have on this site, and do it well. Not lazily.
“Goofball” is as far as I go and that is usually reserved for Fred Phelps and the like. I will use the adverb “goofy” when appropriate, and I have applied that to some of Ken and Ingrid’s logic sometimes.
In full disclosure, I have referred to myself as a goofball when I have allowed that aspect of myself to escape. Upon recapturing my “goofball”, I resume my Doctor of Theology status, usually only self acknowledged.
It is a shame that so many of you have to swear and use vulgar language. The Lord does not approve! Who’s approval do you look for when you swear God’s? Your flesh? or the World?
Well Merry Christmas to all of you! We had an actual white X-mas here, it snowed on X-mas day and I love.
SDG
Tim: I will attempt to respond to your post. Take a deep breath–you seem really tense this morning. I’m not attacking you.
1) re: the “Ohio caucus” comment. It was an obviously feeble attempt at humor. You do not appear to be in a humorous mood today, so I’ll not try that again. I was attempting to imply that your answer sounded like a sound bite from a political candidate–lots of words that (for me) were hard to follow and in the end, did not actually the question. Since I do not live in Ohio, I don’t think I will have the opportunity to write you in anyway.
2) Tim, YOU said you were having trouble accepting a**hole=jerkhole. I have no problem making the connection. Is there a definition of the word “jerkhole” that I (and others) are not understanding?
I’m not sure how this is “the direct opposite” of my previous comment. My original statement was/still is: What if the term “b**ch†were used to refer to your wife? Would you be just as willing to believe the person meant “meanie†or “cranky pants?†If someone referred to my wife as a “b**ch,” I would NOT equate that with a less harsh term such as “meanie.” I would assume the individual was using a stronger term for express purpose of expressing a stronger sentiment. Obviously, I was not the only one that made that connection. Julie stated: Jerkhole is no better than a**hole; it has nothing to do with the actual words, but the feeling or implication behind them.
3) Tim asked: …if you really believe what you’ve written here, why haven’t you written anything about it in response?” I’m usually not in the habit of saying things I don’t believe. I have been “writing about it,” right here on the CRN.Info site. Are my comments not showing up on your end?
4) Tim, I never claimed to know what you heard. My question/point was/still is (rephrased): Just because YOU’VE never heard anyone use the term (”jerkhole”) in the same or similar situation, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. You stated: I’ve never heard anyone scream jerkhole in the same situation. OK. I believe you. I HAVE heard someone use the same word, in the “same situation.” I apologize if you felt I was calling you a liar. The “quote” I included in my previous post from an episode of Seinfeld where…oh, just forget it. Sorry, I offend you. It wasn’t intentional and I wasn’t implying you are a liar.
5) Tim, I realize you and I are on opposite sides of the fence on multiple topics, but I still come around here to see what’s going on. I actually enjoy reading many of the posts, even the ones I don’t agree with. But you really are not helping your cause here. I’ve asked before and I’ll ask again: Why are you so mad and angry? There’s got to be a better way to state your case than resorting to harsh words. If the “other side” is guilty of the same thing, then so be it. Rise above that, brother, and take the high road. Rick’s right. You ARE more intelligent than that.
sorry about the previous post…forgot to close a tag.
Keith, I’m not sure what you were trying to Italicize so I made the entire comment standard. Otherwise, the rest of the comment thread would be that way.
Peace
Thanks, Joe. Again, sorry ’bout that.
First paragraph: sanctimonious.
Second paragraph: used “X” instead of “Christ” in two places.
Oh, my. Quandary!
Haha, Julie, I love it. Way to call him out.
How do you speel Christ in the greek? So using X-mas is not taking Christ out of Christmas. X-mas is just an O’Riely culture war victim.
If you are cursing or using foul language of any kind what are the motives. Yes I am holy, plus these are God’s standards not mine, so Julie is God sanctimonious?
Kyle,
I mean this kindly, but you consistently miss the trees from the forest. Seriously, your original comment was rather sweeping. Show me one place where Neil, Julie, or Chris L used foul language. You need to step back and look at what you wrote. Do you see how it might have been taken a little as being self-righteous? BTW, what does it matter how you spell Jesus in the Greek? How many here read or can spell Greek? For that matter, can you?
I know some greek, not very much the alphabet and some words, need to learn it more. The letter X in greek is Chi which as in Christ. She made fun of the fact that I used an “X” instead of Christ. Just trying to clarify why, sorry?
I was just commenting on swearing and the derivatives used in the blog. Not saying anyone in paticular, even Luther cursed. I was just asking who are you(in a genrally sense of everyone on the planet that every lived) trying to please the flesh, the world or God when foul language is used?
Sorry if I offened, it is just sad to see some christian use language so flippantly.
Matt 12
35 The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. 36I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, 37for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”
There is a gap between what everyone thinks they are communicating and what they are really communicating, I understand that. What you said was:
Surely, you can see how that implies that you never struggle with anything and that we (the so many of you) are the guilty parties. You made an accusation that I don’t think can be backed up. I appreciate your apology but I want to make sure you understand how this gets broken down.
Kyle, do you even understand the scripture you spew? Way to miss the point of Matt 12 v36. I speak for only myself and no one else but let me be the first and probably only to say that you are a sanctimonious asshat. Opps, did I hurt your feelings?
I am not sure why my statement implies that I do not struggle with anything? What accusation have I made that can not be backed up?
I don’t swear and I try not to use any derivatives of the words although I fail al ot like everyone. When it comes to my thoughts I find myself cursing in my head, which I hate!
I saw swearing in this blog and have seen it before. It is even worse becasue the words are premeditated, it can not just slip out in blogs or on paper, unlike hitting your thumb with a hammer and then cursing. This issues shows our hearts, and mine, are deflied by sin becasue all these words flow from our hearts.
I am not say Chri L., Julie or Neil swore at least that I saw on this blog. Sorry about the confusion, this is my fault for not communicating clearly.
I do not condmen, my goal is to edify and but forth a different view so we can all grow in the knowledge of the Lord.
I should have said this.
“It is a shame that some christians have to swear and use vulgar language. The Lord does not approve! Who’s approval are we looking for if we do use this type of language the world, our flesh or God?”
I am not throwing stones or casting the first stone, but the cold hard fact is that our words are extremely important and it is a scary and fearful thing that we will be judge for every “idle’ or “careless” words that we use. We must never forget that God is holy and we must never forget that this is why Christ died for us.
Excellent rewrite. Good Job.
Are you actually asking me how to spell something?
That’s rich.
lol
Recently I was counseling someone and shared with them the difference between being passive/aggresive and the more healthy balance of passive/assertive.
Both are based on communication. However aggresion is born out of resentment and assertiveness is born out of security. It’s a little hard to express this sentiment in totality on a blog but essentially aggression is a negative/reactive approach to a situation/problem and assertiveness is a positive/proactive approach to problem solving.
With all that said whenever you are engaged in fight/debate/discussion it is best (for dialogue to progress) to speak from an assertive position in the hopes of continuing dialogue. Whenever (right or wrong) you are viewed as being aggresive it will either shut down communication or elevate emotion and derail the main point in the discussion.
You see this dynamic very clearly in marriage relationships.
Now if you want to drop the “F” bomb to make a strong point that’s fine by me. But most people won’t view it as you making a stronger point they’ll view it as you being rude.
For the record I don’t swear very often (in a fit of anger/aggression I have) but in my experience it has always created a slippery slope.
I just thought “speel” was how they did in Wi.
Well acutally I from ND so there is their beauiful education system coming out again!(LOL)
I actually kind of agree with the original article by Ingrid. While I wouldn’t say it quite as harshly as she did, I do have to wonder how glorifying to God this event was. Now I have no problem with dancing, and I know other Christians have no problem with drinking (in moderation, just like everything). It’s just that people have a tendency to so easily forget about God and focus on ourselves. It’s normal human behavior to forget about God and focus on ourselves. But I have been thinking about this lately. The last couple of days I took some time off, away from the computer and really studied what Christ’s birth really means; what he really did for us. I searched the Bible and discovered some amazing things. It was really refreshing. So I guess I’m just wondering why we don’t focus on God more often?
Now I’m not saying that no one focused on God during this party. Hopefully they did. But I can see, just from the description, how it would be easy for them to get sidetracked.
Where do we draw the line? Can we host a wedding at a church?
Past myself I don’t spend a lot of time fretting over who and what is being glorifying to God. I’ll leave that to God.
Further proof the Notre Dame is a hack institution! *winks at Rick* ; )
BTW I do know you meant North Dakota.
chris,
Where in ND are you? I am in Billings MT… if you don’t want to say what city I understand… just email me.
Maybe if we are not too far apart, we can have coffee sometime?
iggy
I meant Kyle… errr yeah that’s it… Kyle.
iggy
Isn’t Julie from North Dakota too? My daughter asked me a question about ND the other day. I wish I could remember it. It was cute
ND is the part of Montana that we did not want…
hehe!
iggy
Iggy I’m from Michigan. Kyle is the one from ND.
BTW Joe Martino the family and I are coming to Mars Hill on Sunday for Church. Wanna get together for Lunch afterwards?
Iggy if I’m ever in Montana I’ll be sure to look you up!
Sorry about the multiple posts.
Iggy,
I’m planning a ski trip to Big Sky next year. How close are you to that?
LOL, I would love to but sadly I will be plugged into the Matrix at a church in Ohio. Visiting the in laws.
Don’t live there anymore, sorry. I do love coffee! I used to live in Powers Lake, ND. Don’t know if you’ve heard of it, really really small town. North of Minot about 70 miles or so. 20 miles from Canda and 60 miles from Montana. I am always thanking God that He delivered me from there(LOL)!!!
Right now I live in Eau Claire, WI.
Quick question about MH and there party for the New Year. Could you imagine any of the saints throughout history that would of done that?
The only one I could think of would be Luther, he loved his beer! Others wise I can’t think of many. Moody, Spurgeon ect… seem like they are the all night pray and bible type of people instead of the all night party people. Not saying that what they are doing is sinful or wrong. But Hebrew tells us to lay aside anything, not just sin, that ways us down. So there are somethings that are not sin that hold us back.
Hebrews 12
1Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, 2looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.
I may even where my best Sunday suit. Of course I will still take my man purse!
Well Joe…that sucks!
Oh well I’ll have to enjoy my burger at that place in the parking lot all by myself (sans my family being with me).
Do you know if Rob is in town for this Sunday?
Trying to find it? LOL
LOL, I can’t believe I spelled that like that. I promise I know it’s supposed to be wear. IDK about Rob
I think Steve Carter is preaching.
Chris,
Big Sky is over by Bozeman… but to get to Bozeman you will go through Billings… email me and i will get you my phone number so when you hit the town we can go get coffee… or a micro brew if you prefer… but coffee is fine…
Blessings,
iggy
iggy@wwdb.org
Tim Reed wrote:
“A compelling argument, if I thought words were ontologically evil or good. I don’t.”
I don’t normally post here, though I love reading this blog and listening to the podcasts. I have to say, though, that the posts/casts here, while important responses to some very disturbing posts by others, can sometimes walk very, very close to that fine line themselves.
Words are, in fact, very important. How do I know that?
A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver.†– Proverbs 25:11
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless. Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world. – James 1:26-27
Now, we know that Christ and his NT followers (Paul being a prime example) called others out for how they were behaving. “Hypocrites”, “white washed tombs”, etc. And, at times, perhaps, strong words are warranted.
But note that, when used, strong words MEAN something related to the described offense. Strong words that are meant merely to attack are of no use and in no way edifying.
In general, this blog would benefit from gentle, reasoned rebuke directed precisely (and Scripturally) at the issues at hand. Generally that’s what I see here, which is why I appreciate coming here. But at times, some posts skate very close to the edge and, I might say, sometimes do cross onto the thin ice.
Spurgeon drank red wine… and smoked cigars… Spurgeon did though become a teatoller toward the end of his life.
I think from what I have read of Spurgeon he was also rather sickly… and he drank to help relieve some of the symptoms of his ailments.
It also seems becuase of these ailments, he also gave up smoking later in his life.
iggy
Yup there is a good story about Spurgeon and Moody.
Moody was visiting England and Spurgeon also. He was rebuking Spurgeon about his cigar smoking or something along those lines. Finally Spurgeon got up and pocked him in the belly and said something to the effect of “What about gluttony?”
I kinda screwed up that story but for some reason I can not get on google and find the original story.
So the MH party. I would say this, it is christian liberty as long as you do not violate any of the direct commands of God. Drunkness ect….But could this cause people to stumble in the faith? I would say yes.
So should a church host an event that does not go against any direct command of God even though it may cause those who are weaker to stumble? Just throwin out some question.
Has a church ever hosted a New Year’s party with beverages like this before? I can’t think of one.
Kyle,
I have gone to at least two that have done something like this and think like this….
It is like a very nice office party w/o the drunks and cussing and stupid things… it is polite and usually great music and a great time. I see no sin unless toasting to the New Year is a sin.
Again, I saw no one getting drunk or acting in anyway inappropriate, let alone being close to what Ingrid stated about MH being a modern day Belshazzar’s party.
iggy
Kyle said,
With respect, so what? Who cares? How many churches do you and I know of collectively? 75? 100? 150? That church is doing something that they think is appropriate. To a large degree, this has to be an issue of to him who it is sin, don’t go. (JPMPV)
Maybe she should be invited to give a first had account of the events that transpirer?!?!?!
So should a church host an event that does not go against any direct command of God even though it may cause those who are weaker to stumble? Just throwin out some question.
Well, I take a view on those verses that is unpopular with many. Because someone thinks that something may be wrong (drinking or dancing) doesn’t mean if someone else engages in those activities that they are causing the weaker brother to stumble. That’s not what that verse means. For instance, I know a guy who thinks that women shouldn’t wear pants. My wife wearing pants isn’t causing him to stumble no matter how much he wants me to think it is. Now, I suppose you could say “what if a former drunk went there?” to which I’d have to respond I don’t know because I don’t know how they’re handling the libations. But I think too many people have caused me to stumble by mangling the interpretation and application of those verses.
To sum all of that up: the verses mean cause a brother to sin. What sin is that church causing someone to commit by having this party?
“Has a church ever hosted a New Year’s party with beverages like this before? I can’t think of one.”
Roman Catholic, Episcapal, but I have never seen an evangelical church up to now.
hypothetical:
What if at the Midnight hour they all hoist their glasses and toast the one “from whom all blessings flow”?
“What if at the Midnight hour they all hoist their glasses and toast the one “from whom all blessings flowâ€? ”
That happens many times during the year.
We have often toasted: “To the King and His Kingdom — on earth as it is in heaven.”
I just re-read the post again…
I still tell you, the way Ingrid describes it… it is as if she has been reading some nasty romance novels and is burning to be there and partake in the “voluptuous partying”…
I bet anyone that reads her description and attends it because of that, will be majorly disappointed.
Truly the post Ingrid did suggests what resides in her own heart… and does not reflect much in reality…
iggy
“it is as if she has been reading some nasty romance novels and is burning to be there and partake in the “voluptuous partyingâ€â€¦”
I would think that is a stretch of your own making. I would never believe Ingrid would desire to be there. The “voluptuous” reference was hyperbolic, but I do not get that she desires to be there. Just like I do not.
Whether those who agree with her want to admit it or not, her accusation is the same that those who opposed Jesus leveled against him, time and time again. It amazes me, 2000 years and the religious leaders of the day still don’t get it.
Jesus attended parties held by others, I do not recall Him hosting one at the Temple.
As a matter of fact, I think He was famous for other things at the Temple.
These people have been accused of debauchery, gluttony and drunkenness sans any proof. It’s the same tactics employed by those of Jesus’ day. And the argument that he didn’t host any parties doesn’t really work here as he didn’t own any land or a house to do such a thing.
We know he turned water into real wine. We know he was at enough parties to allow the more religious of his day to level these accusations. History is repeating itself. I am certainly not saying that Driscoll is Jesus. I am saying that those who find Grace scandalous and look to oppress people with heavy burdens have not found any new material.
Many like Driscoll when he throws church parties but criticise him when he publicly reproves Bell for things. He must find grace scandalous as well.
OK, Rick go back and show me what he “reproved Bell” for. I don’t like Driscoll, but I can separate that from what he’s doing here. I’ve said repeatedly in this discussion I’m no fan of Driscoll, so let’s talk plain. I think you are using the same arguments used against Jesus, you think I’m…changing my loyalties b/c I like this event?
And by the way, excellent use of smoke and cover there. Changing the subject. I’m impressed.
My point is that Jesus went to the sinners, He did not conform the Temple to attract party goers. It is just symptomatic of the current trend to draw unbelievers by conforming the church to what they like. That isn’t the same thing that Jesus did.
If Driscoll’s church members went into a bar party to interact with unbelievers I would applaud them, but I do not see the church as an office party alternative. Of course it is as you have said, I will not go while reserving the right to disapprove. That is part of this scandalous grace as well.
The issue that produced my original comment was Iggy’s insinuation that Ingrid secretly desired to go to the party. I would hope that you do not agree with that.
I cannot in good conscience equate the Temple to the Church. Two totally different things. If those people go to a bar they are taking the Temple of God to that bar, if they are believers so I would think that should be a problem. I personally do not believe that is a problem and to clarify an earlier comment I do not believe you accused them of being drunks, but others have.
Rick,
I am talking about her choice of words that seem…. erotic. It seems she can use word images that can be almost pornographic and condemn someone else for perceived impurity…
I see that as sick.
iggy
She did paint a graphic picture of what I hope isn’t going to be anything like a “kill the keg” party (my old days). I objected to you insinuation that she desired in her heart to be there. Ingrid may be a lot of things, but I believe her to be consistent with her views.
Every time that I go back and read that post it offends me more and more. When she says that they are not the true church, what is she saying? Is she not saying the same exact things the religious leaders of the day said to Jesus?
Yes, Joe, that line is pure Ingrid. It is what I objected to also. I know many, MANY, baptists who wouldn’t consider Ingrid’s church as part of the Bride as well.
Tsk, tsk. I am from, and currently living in, North Dakota. Now, what were you saying about the education system that educated me?
Well Julie, now that you bring it up…
I am offended that Ingrid would use words like “Whore” the whole post is gossip, offensive , judgmental, and self-righteous. It amazes me she can use the word “whore” but Tim can not use words like Jerk-hole.( find the words he uses wrong as well) But you have to be consistent. She can not go after him and than use foul language herself. Plus, Joe is right. She would have fit in well with the religious leaders in Jesus’s day!
“She would have fit in well with the religious leaders in Jesus’s day!”
In many ways, yes. Except the gender. (I couldn’t help it, it’s my New Years resolution!)
A couple of additional things of note:
1. No more North Dakota jokes. This is a fabulous state. I love it. I hear enough North Dakota jokes and actually have gazillions of blog posts about the stupid things people say about North Dakota.
2. I did blog on this very same Slice post a few days ago here at CRN.info, in which there was discussion on the party aspect, as well as touching on gluttony and Christians…this is almost a weird repeat experience.
I just know that the Eternal Order of Raccoons (Ralph Kramden) have their cemetary in Bismark, North Dakota.
Holy ground. You may be too young for the honeymooners, Julie. Maybe you’ve seen reruns.
Harumph.
Yeah, it was interesting to watch this thread turn from Tim to the party. I think it was Kyle from ND now living in Wi that did it.
Incidentally, in keeping with the “can anyone from North Dakota spell” theme…Bismarck has a “c” in it.
JUST SO YOU KNOW. (pause) Rick.
(Yes, Joe, this post has had quite a few turns in the comments section…)
Bismarck.
Fargo, the largest city in ND, is currently estimated at 100,000 people. Brooklyn, one of five boroughs in NYC, has 3 million people. I am from there but would rather live in Fargo.
In Brooklyn there is always someone flushing a toilet either above or below you. Crunch.
Yeah but Brooklyn has canoli’s. I’m just saying…
Fargo has lefse.
Julie, I’m a fat Italian guy. Although I would love to try the lefse and I love living country (I’d like to move way way way out) I gotta give Brooklyn the nod here. Sorry.
Hah! I used to live in Winnipeg, which is even more north than ND, and what I remember most about the occassional visit to Fargo, Grand Forks, etc. is that the people are really nice. And it flat, has mosquitos the size of small farm animals, and tends to flood along the Red River, just like Winnipeg, so we shared a “misery loves company” moment about our shared geography.
Sorry about that Julie, the town I went to did not have any math classes for me after 10th grade it was a pretty power education system. But what do you expect with only 13 in your class.
I loved ND, all that cold kept the riff raff out. Hey ND is always better than Montana, right?:)
What’ s a “pretty power education system?”
sorry “poor”, its to early don’t have all the coffe in me yet.
Oh, come one… right now it is 25 degrees in Bismarck ND and 28 degrees here in Billings… we are just a warmer state… at least in Billings.
ND in the highline is rather beautiful in the spring and the winter… the rest the time it seems rather bleak.
My brother was born in Jamestown… so I do have some roots in ND myself.
be blessed,
iggy
Personally, I think we should have a CRN.info party at Julie’s house. We can try that lefte stuff.
Winnipeg — drove me crazy; didn’t really number their streets. But they have a lot of used book stores.
Lefse — a tasty potato-based Norwegian food, despite me being one of eight people in the state of North Dakota without a bit of Norwegian in me.
Math — had a class of 16, had three years algebra, geometry, and pre-calculs “senior math”; your school ripped you off.
This is an officially completely way-off completely hijacked and sidetracked comment’s section.
Yeah but its fun, and probably somewhat productive.
*an attempt to put it back on track*
Did anyone else notice that Ingrid, who uses the word “whore” in this post, also raked Driscoll over the coals about using the same word?
Anything other than talking about Ingrid is probably more productive… OOOOOOOOO!
iggy
Yup I had “senoir math” also, but at my pervious school I had taken the other math classes in 8th grade, so I left me with extra time everyday. In fact I washed dishes after lunch because I had no class to take, I least i made 5.00 each day at school!
Can we eat some lutefisk also!! UmmUmm;)
Chris,
Yeah, I thought about that. Is she a prurient poster now?
Julie,
I recall a FARK photoshop contest several years ago for fake state tourism advertising. The winning entry has a picture of Mount Rushmore along with a bright friendly banner saying:
VISIT NORTH DAKOTA*
At the bottom was this disclaimer:
“*Yes, we know Mt. Rushmore is in South Dakota, but work with us here, people!”
Comedy gold…
The bit that Iâ€m sure hasn’t escaped their notice on all this is all of my critiques of Ingrid can’t be reviewed since she’s pulled down all of the articles I responded to. Was she a jerkhole? Does she have an idiotic hermeneutic? Well, we can’t tell now.
Tim, you sure have mastered the fine art of the pot calling the kettle black. Then again, this is not surprising, considering that this sort of vitriolic and un-Christian rhetoric is coming from a Campbellite.
OMDB – perhaps you missed it, but Tim apologized for the ‘jerkhole’ terminology.
As for “Cambellite”, I don’t know anyone who goes by that moniker, certainly nobody here…
I think we all need to take a second and thank Ingrid for her consistent wackyness. She’s been a source of amusement for several years now. I even find myself trying to view the world through Ingrid’s eyes. And quite frankly, its rather exhausting. Every day must be one trauma after the other. Go to the mall, and you’re senses are assaulted by rock and roll music played through the sound systems. Listen…there’s a Beatles song…those evil “moptops that spoiled everything”. I must cover my ears. Look over there, in that store window…a mannequin in a bathing suit. More Lustful fleshly carnality. Quick, cover the kid’s eyes. And those teenagers…why aren’t they wearing nice tastefull granny gowns, or shapeless jumpers that cover them from neck to ankle. Oh the immodesty of it all. Don’t even think about going in that book store, I can see the magazine covers from here. And there’s that terrible Merlin Muffler repair shop down the street. As everone knows, magicians and the devil go hand in hand with sorcery, Black Magic and witchcraft. I’m not letting Satan anywhere near my minivan! And he looks so innocent on the logo. But who knows what evil lurks under that pointed hat. It looks like something out of Harry Potter, but don’t even get me started on that.
A church that brings people together for good, healthy fellowship, and a toast to the New Year. In Ingrid’s wacky world of over the top hyperbole, it can never be just that. It has to become an event of such decadent proportions that it makes the Ten Commandments scene of Moses hurling the tablets into the revelers look like a quilting bee.
All you can really count on is that somebody, somewhere, is doing something Ingrid doesn’t approve of, and in some weird way, that makes life even more interesting.
Not everything is a stumbling block. Sometimes, all you have to do is step around it. Its not that difficult. You do have some control over the things you respond to, don’t you?
Anyway. I hope Ingrid stays slightly crazy. Her website and radio show would become very boring if she were to lose her very special form of intolerance.