**UPDATED** Mr. Corley goes to Washington
Mike Corly, who I will call one of the few friendly ODMs, recently went to Seattle to find out more about Mars Hill Church. Now I know what you are thinking, “There’s a novel concept –actually going to meet with the people you have differences with before you criticize.” Here’s Mike’s thoughts on his trip. I think it would do the ODMs some good to follow Corley’s example and make an attempt to connect with the people they say are destined for hell.
**UPDATE**
Direct from Mike Corley:
I read your piece on the site and wanted to say thanks for the kind words.
There were a few points I have noticed have been mentioned in the comments that I wanted to respond to. I dont know if you would like to post them as an update or prefer that I post them as a comment, but you can let me know.
I made the trip to Seattle at my own expense for the sole purpose of meeting and interviewing Mark Driscoll, for a book I am writing on the Emergent Church, but also to see for myself what Mars Hills is all about and to try to understand Mark’s ministry. We visited for about 2 hours which included an interview that was video taped by the MHC staff. I will be given a copy of the footage and Mars Hill will keep a copy as well. We will release the video in DVD form when production is completed, and we will feature portions of the audio on the radio program and online. I have come to appreciate Mark’s ministry, although his methods may be unorthodox in some ways. After meeting him I realized we have a lot in common and I hope to work with him again one day.
One comment was made about my expectations of visiting Mars Hill, mentioning lack of scripture reading and sitting in the dark. These rumors were sent to me by readers and listeners, and were not my statements, nor did I believe them before attending the services at MHC.
There also statements attributed to me regarding Mark, taken from a post on my blog dated June 26, 2007. The quote is actually that of Phil Johnson and not myself. I simply posted the Johnson quote on my site.
Lastly, I am writing a reflective piece on my personal meeting with Mark now. But I wanted to share that I have been harsh in the past and jumped to conclusions in some instances when I should have been more compassionate and merciful, and patient perhaps, before making judgements. I have been convicted of this, repented and asked for forgiveness. I will be the first one to my feet in the defense of the Gospel, and sometimes with a assertive tone or posture. But God help me not to do so with a mean spirit or proud attitude.
I think we could all learn something from this ODM.
December 27th, 2007 at 1:50 am
Wow. Kudos to Mike for breaking ranks with his rabid pack. I was impressed.
December 27th, 2007 at 7:30 am
I likewise was impressed. More people should do that.
Look what happened when Chris L. and Chris P. got together for a meal…
December 27th, 2007 at 7:32 am
Yeah, Mike Corley seems to be a good odm. I took him to task for playing David Crowder and for quoting C.S. Lewis. He has always had a gracious response. Come to think of it, I probably should have been kinder to him. I really wish more of the odms were like him. There would be no reason for this site.
December 27th, 2007 at 8:17 am
When can we expect the “CRN.Info” goes to Grace Community Church”post…written by Iggy or Tim!? 8^)>
(Before anyone gets their BVDs in a wad, that’s HUMOR.)
December 27th, 2007 at 9:18 am
Ziing.
The extra i is for extra zing.
December 27th, 2007 at 10:51 am
Keith,
If they sent me a ticket and paid expenses I would go, yet since I have never written against GCC church I really do not think I will need to attend. I have run ins with the congregants and others on a regular basis to see what flavor I would expect and I most likely would not attend if i was just passing through on my own. Now, if I was making money by writing criticisms against people I would make a point to go…
Notice I have never stated that Ken teaches wrong things at his church? I only have interacted with him in the arena he is most vocal.
Now I also say Kudo’s to Mike Corely who has a radio show and regularly speaks out against others he sees are heretics or has people like Ken Silva on who are outright invited and turn it down, though they make money in their ministry by attacking said people.
My only issue with JM is that I see he adds works to salvation with adding “repentance” as part of salvation. The way he teaches it is not as a response to what God has done, but as a way to “get” what God has done… and that is dangerous and works salvation.
Repentance is a response of love to love that is given by God. It is the realization that “I am wrong and cannot do anything to change and am totally at God’s mercy.” It is not about confessing all my sin so that I CAN get saved…
The other thing is that his people seem to claim grace but show others very little of it.
be blessed,
iggy
I now feel better since I have unwad my BVDs…
December 27th, 2007 at 10:56 am
Russ,
Right afterward Chris P seemed changed…so Chris L and wife must be great people, but since it has turned rather ugly… like one Chris P left and 7 worse came back…
iggy
Now that was meant as humor… and I seek others to pray for Chris P. with me.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:00 am
Here’s my dirty little secret; I’ve already been. Twice. Met the Man, too.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:07 am
“Now, if I was making money by writing criticisms against people I would make a point to go… ”
Who’s making money? Follow your own advice. Come see how I live. Someone has yet to inform my banker, or Ken’s for that matter, that we are raking in the bucks.
iggy doesn’t mind judging the congregants at Grace without having gone there.
As for Driscoll, I do not have as much a problem with him as others.
This is amusing. No one can question another’s theology or methods based on what is publicly presented as their views?
IOW, Driscoll, McClaren, Bell etc. etc cannot be judged by their blogs. books, “tours”, but only if I attend their services. Since that is a virtual impossibility for most, then no one can say anything about anyone. This includes you. So until you attend Ken’s services or Ingrid’s church, you must also quit criticizing.
This gives an opening for the pious blether we see from many here.
I am glad Mike Corley went to Mars Hill, as I would also do if I was visiting Seattle again. It’s an interesting city btw.
What he wrote, confirmed what I had already learned about that church,…… gee, without even going there.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:07 am
Oh Joe… I am so sorry… we will pray for you also…
iggy
December 27th, 2007 at 11:11 am
Keith,
Been there more times than I can count. You show me an article where we question the practices of GCC and I will head out there to do an article. The funny thing is that we are not against the churches and theology if the ODMs (we disagree but are not violently opposed to it). That is what makes us different. It is not us against each other. It is them against others and us for the others.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:12 am
Chris P,
Your beef is with Ken not me… Ken stated that “God has blessed him” so he did not have to work a day job… so it seems at least he is benefiting from his hate blog. If you are not, then maybe you are a better fellow than him.
I have not judge anyone at GCC, other than the ones that have come and attacked me unprovoked. I have tried to talk to a few that “follow” JM… I do not know if they attend that church or not… so you are stating a lie and slander about me…
Please stop.
iggy
December 27th, 2007 at 11:13 am
ah iggy, show what you really are.
Chris L and his wife must be great people because they appeared to change me???
I hope everyone really reads what you wrote.
After having met Chris, I am even more astounded that he allows people like you and Tim Reed anywhere near this blog.
We are not here to change one another. My core beliefs remain unchanged.
God acknowledges prayers prayed in His will and in Jesus’ name, that would exclude yours.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:16 am
The test of our Christlikeness is not when we sit down over dinner, or when you are a one time visitor at a church, it is when in the midst of substantive and serious disagreement among brethren. Additionally, the individual sides seem reluctant to speak correction to their own.
How many ODMs address hyperbole and name calling in their midst? How many emergent/emerging types address doctrinal error in their midst? It seems that so many are engulfed in winning the truth war on several sides but are blind to being like Jesus which is primary truth.
I am still bewildred that men like Mike Corley/Chris P. don’t address men like Ken, and people like Bell do not address people like MacLaren. Whichever side you happen to espouse dictates the volume, power, and direction of your attacks.
Ingrid says MH Seattle are not the Bride of Christ and Mike Corely gives them a thumbs up. Am I the only one who is shaking my head? And I see pure venom coming from all sides, not just the ODMs. The issues have become casualties of the flesh.
I doubt we will ever unravel the mess.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:16 am
Chris P.
once again, the point of this blog is not to criticize the churches of the ODMs. The subject occasionally comes up (like when Ken boast about only having 4 people), but it is not, nor has it ever been the focus here.
Second, when you talk about how “new aged” and evil the services of these men are, you’d better check it out before you proclaim to the world what goes on. Corley said he had hear all types of rumors about the church…. none were true. Maybe the emerging churches are not all chanting, labyrinth walking hippies.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:17 am
You know, judging by New Truth’s Jim Bublitz’s response the watchdoggies’ version of the gospel is so fragile that PG language is enough to shatter it.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:19 am
“God acknowledges prayers prayed in His will and in Jesus’ name, that would exclude yours.”
Chris P., your vitriol now rivals Ken’s, which may be what you were looking to achieve.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:23 am
Chris P,
LOL! Chris, my prayers are with you that you can overcome this spirit of hate you have. Live by the higher law of Love my brother. This hate you have will not hurt anyone but yourself.
iggy
December 27th, 2007 at 11:26 am
For someone who tolerates Ken’s lies and fundraising, you have a funny way of talking about Chris L.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:31 am
Tim-
I thought Old Truth Jim’s comment was interesting and not in a good way. Can Jim name one disciple/apostle that was flawless in his ministry? Peter hung out with the circumcised group, Paul and Barnabas had a falling out.
Then look at the Old Testament. David, Solomon, Samuel, Noah, Samson all were human, filled with flaws. They sinned.
Anyway, here’s Jim’s comment:
I can’t think of one Christian I know who doesn’t have some sort of significant besetting sin (or a thorn in the flesh), if you will.
You can go down the list with the Reformers: Calvin and Luther come to mind. All had some sort of significant besetting sin.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:32 am
Has anyone seen this post from Jim? You’ll have to cut and paste it into your nav bar. He leaves out the part of the quote where Bill H agrees with Phil Miller. I wonder if Jim is purposely being dishonest? I hope not but they say birds of a feather…
http://www.oldtruth.com/blog.cfm/id.2.pid.881
Or just clicky clicky
December 27th, 2007 at 11:33 am
BTW Chris P,
My prayers have always been that the ODM’s be blessed…
Also, I might point out that in your own theology, sin keeps God from hearing your prayers… hating your brother in Christ is a sin… God has always heard my prayers and all I pray is that His will be done.
I do not or ever will hate you, in fact the only thing I have against you is your unchrist like behavior you often display here and your hatred against me.
You are not my enemy or Nemesis or whatever… and you were rather nice after your visit with Chris L… you turned nice for about a week… then you returned even nastier and angrier and meaner… and I believe all will affirm that.
Be blessed,
iggy
December 27th, 2007 at 11:37 am
Not only do they have their own copy of the Lamb’s Book of Life, they now know who’s prayers are answered and who’s are not. Shame on anyone for making such a statement.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:42 am
Regarding the post at Old Truth (which I hadn’t visited for a month, until now, so THANKS A LOT!): more dog graphics. Where are the cats? The way these discussions and comment sections get going, its more like a bunch of hissing, circling cats.
That’s about all I can say.
That, and that the comments selected were…selective. There have been times regular contributors to this blog have also voiced caution and such (recently, in fact, in regards to name-calling) but none of those comments were sampled because the point of Jim’s post was to say that the blog’s contributors were in need of the rebuke and were not capable of doing that amongst themselves. There are also times those commenters that were sampled have had decidedly different reactions to various topics and ODM sites.
But cats.
Cats is the answer.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:47 am
Rick,
Hopefully Mike Corley will start to distance himself from some of the ODM’s… Mike if you read this have Matt Slick on your show… I don’t agree with him on a few things but he is a much better researcher than Ken has shown to be.
iggy
December 27th, 2007 at 11:51 am
His quotes were selective, and some of the people he quoted seem to post under different names but the same IP. He’s being dishonest, I hope not intentionally.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:57 am
I don’t think I’m going to add myself to the Mike Corely cheerleading squad just yet.
It was a good post, and even more so, a good effort at backing up words with first-hand knowledge. Ingrid has had some pretty good posts, too. Even Old Truth has had good posts. I can’t say that I’ve ever really seen a good post at The Blog of the Blogger that Does Not Exist.
But I just prefer to be Switzerland instead of saying “now he’s OK.” Really, none of these people were, or are, ever our enemy. It seems quite odd, now, to say “well, now so and so is one of the good ODMs” or “for a while, Chris L. got Chris P. to be nice to us” or whatever. Strange battle lines. Battle lines for a battle that is against flesh and blood, too often, instead of against concept or thought or theory or interpretation.
Admittedly, I, in moments sans control of my thoughts, envision letting the air out of certain bloggers car tires. But that’s just me.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:58 am
Joe,
Regardless of whether or not he knows those are teh same people writing under different names he was already dishonest by making a claim and then only quoting people who agreed with him when he had ready access to the other side of the issue, and likely had to actively sift through them in order to get the quotes he had.
His post was not the fruit of a researching looking for truth. It is the product of a propagandist creating a hit piece.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:01 pm
I read the article, and I’m glad Mr. Corley seems to have given them a fair shake. One thing that I noted at first reading was this, though:
Where in the world did he get an idea like that. If you’ve read anything by Driscoll or heard him speak at all, you would know he wouldn’t go for such a thing. Chanting? He really honestly thought MH was into that?
Now either that means that Driscoll just sucks at representing himself, or if there’s just a massive disinformation campaign by people. I suspect it’s the latter.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
Julie,
I think its important to give kudos when kudos are deserved perhaps more-so than to criticize when criticism is deserved
December 27th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
I doubt it’s intentional. I think of how, when I’m writing a blog post on a topic, I tend to go Google for the points I’m looking for to support the topic. I forget to get the information that would dispel my theory. It isn’t intentional, but in the end, I’ve selected information that supports and offered none that would say “here are examples that blow my cherry-picked research right out of the water.”
I remember a blog post on my first blog — political in nature — in which I did that in a really bad way. I have the text saved in a file as an example of what not to do.
I suspect that’s what has happened. It’s a natural thing for people to do, though it is laziness. “This is my theory. And these are the comments that prove it true.”
There are comments that suggest it untrue, particularly those written by blog writers, but that would change the main thrust of the original post.
It’s a good thing to remember for myself and anyone else writing: be as judicious in your research for things that do not support your theory. We’d probably have less of these inflammatory inferno blog posts and comments sections all over the internet if that were the case.
Cherry-picking is a special curse of blogging.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
There seems to be little reflection. I have gotten caught up in discourse which upon the next day’s reflection and in prayer I am convicted about what I said and the flesh that came with it. How can anyone with any devotional and prayer life never be convicted and reproved of the Spirit?
How can any of us continue unswervingly with our sometimes obvious verbal breaches and yet claim we do business in the Spirit with our Lord? We are all undone on some level and I continue to be pessimistic as to any healing in view of the verbal instruments we use. Venum flows in all directions and from all sources and yet there seems to be little effective spiritual alterations at the hands of repentance.
Is it possible to feel strongly about issues, complete with serious and even confrontational verbiage, while mainting an atmosphere of respect and even love, internally dwelling and externally exhibited? I pray Jesus will have more to work with in my own life in 2008, He had quite a challenge in 2007.
I press on…
December 27th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
That’s a good point, Tim, a very good point. Nathan’s original post did that well. I would love to see more such posts, pointing out the good things found. Perhaps I should start doing that myself, though I admit to no longer frequenting many of those blogs.
I’m just commenting on the comments which seems to say what I indicated. Which is fine. I’m just not interested in eating my words later, as would be the case suggested in comments of “Ingrid said MHC was not the bride of Christ but now her buddy Corely wen there and says otherwise” — I’m sure Corely will have things to say in the future that may not be such pleasant eating to some over here, and there are irritating people like me who will come back to this post, lift a “Corely is great” quote, and drop it in the mix, just to prove a point.
I should be a better person and not do that.
Tomorrow, maybe.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Julie,
I agree to a point.
Yet, having dealt with JB in the past, he is VERY selective and can change his story…
We debated whether one can judge some one’s salvation… I said no that is God’s job and JB stated it was our mandate to judge other’s fruit…
Toward the end he stated he never said we can judge someones salvation, he changed it to “eternal destiny”.
To me there is not much difference between the two, but he needed a way out so i let it go… yet as I have gone around the blogosphere, there seems to be those that follow me and tell JB that I am slandering him… and he mentions that at times… Funny how it seems he actually follows me around and then in the middle of a almost good conversation shows up and them lies about me and turns the person against me….
I see Jim and others as sincere, yet grossly ill informed and too drunk on their selfish ambition to really care if they are honest or dishonest.
But I do get your point and must admit I also do as you stated.
iggy
December 27th, 2007 at 12:23 pm
The larger point is this, even if Jim identifies some authentic areas that need correction on crn.info, how can he never speak correction to some of the quotes and comments from his inner circle blog mates and retain impartial credibility?
I attempted to speak to Ken about some of his rhetoric for months before printing an open letter, even though I agree with many of his views and write about it myself. Are you telling me that Jim never sees any obvious demeaning and over the top verbiage from Ken or Ingrid or others?
We all must speak to those with whom we disagree, those with whom we agree, and mostly to ourselves.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:44 pm
I’m no stranger to that. (See the update at the bottom of this page.)
My thinking is this:
I can keep track of all these things (which I’ve apparently done, since I provided you a link) and sort of build this overwhelming case that gnaws at me and comes out in the way I respond and react to such people which lists all the history and says “see, this is how you are!”, or I can give them the benefit of the doubt (to the point of being naive, I know) and let it go and deal with the current hand instead of resurrecting the old ones.
I technically can’t know if someone did something intentionally or not — I’m not privy to what’s going on inside their mind — but I can affect the way I deal with it. Benefit of the doubt (and believe me, I seriously doubt the motives in many instances). This doesn’t mean I am some kind of Pollyanna. You know, walk softly, carry a big stick. A little Matthew 10:16, if you will.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:44 pm
For the record (as if my opinion actually counted), I thought the Mike Corley article was pretty well written.
===
Iggy:
1) I never accused you or anyone else here of writing ANYTHING “against GCC church.”
2) Was Mr. Corley’s only motivation in attending MH because he had previously written something against them? (You stated: “since I have never written against GCC church I really do not think I will need to attend”)
3) I wasn’t aware that MH paid Mr. Corley’s way to Seattle?
4) Where/how in the WORLD did you make a connection to Ken Silva based on my one sentence post??!!! You are AMAZING. Iggy’s “Six Degrees of Ken Silva” strikes again! Man, I don’t know what that guy did or didn’t do to you, but good grief…GIVE IT UP!!! It’s like a booger on your finger…wipe it flaming wood if you have to, but move on for crying out loud!
5) You’re a very “interesting” guy. I was encouraged to read one of your posts recently in which you alluded to holding to a preterist/amill escatology. I bet we’d be friends under different circumstances.
===
Nathan:
You’ve actually been to GCC more than a gajillion times? (You stated: “Been there more times than I can count”) You ought to be closing in on that perfect attendance pin by now. I’ve only been there two times–going back this Spring.
“It is not us against each other. It is them against others and us for the others.” Pa-ta-TOE, pa-TA-toe.
December 27th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
Julie,
Here’s the thing; I think that JB is probably of above average intelligence. As Tim pointed out he had to sift through the comments and the very next comment by Bill H agrees with Phil. I find it hard to believe that was an accident. I suppose it could have been
December 27th, 2007 at 1:13 pm
Keith,
GCC is about 30 minutes from my house. In my college days, I would drive out there every now-and-then over a four year period. Maybe not a agjillion times, but more than 100. it’s your typical traditional church.
As for Mike Corley… he obviously disagrees with us on many levels. However, I have had some conversations with Mike over the past few months. He seems to be looking for the truth about the modern movement of Jesus Christ (not just following mindless propaganda of his peers). he has toned down his harsh rhetoric, and seems to be more open and honest than others in his camp.
December 27th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
I have found that are enemies are never as bad as we think they are when we meet them face to face. Meeting someone face to face forces us to see their humanity. As they stand there with their wife/kids, we think “wow they are human”
Discussing and debating truth has never been the problem for me. It is when we attack the person that I have a problem with. That’s the reason I stopped blogging. I started with good intentions but with time I became just like those I oppose.
Any step towards a mutual understanding is a good step in my opinion.
Bruce
December 27th, 2007 at 1:32 pm
No but you humorously implied that an article should be written to refute an implied view of GCC.
According to the article it was:
As for writing stuff against Driscoll in the past the only thing I could find on Mikes blog was the following:
Found Here
December 27th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
Yup I think Ingard went a little overboard. From everything I have seen and heard Mark D. is a good pastor. I also like that the whole service according to Mike was gospel and preaching centered. AMEN!
Couple side notes to stir the pot a little.
Joe M.
We can know whose prayers are answered. The bible tells us. I would say yours from your profession are becasue you are IN Christ.
Also is it a sin to have the wrong theology??
Is it a sin to preach the wrong theology??
December 27th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Chris:
Key word= “humorously;”
adj.
1. Full of or characterized by humor; funny: i.e. a humorous story.
2. Employing or showing humor; witty: i.e. a humorous writer.
Yes, I “humorously” implied/inferred CRN.Info could write a nice review of GCC, just as Mike Corley had written a nice review of MH. You don’t have to if you don’t want to. Sheesh.
Every comment from someone other than a CRN.Info “regular” isn’t an attack. I try to balance my comments around here. I’m sure you’re all very nice people, that whole-heartedly believe the things you post. I don’t dislike or hate any of you. I was just trying to join in the conversation in a light-hearted way. If I’m not welcome to do that, just say so.
December 27th, 2007 at 1:51 pm
Which Theology Kyle? The wrong theology of Calvinism or Freewill? The wrong Theology of women being in ministry or not being in ministry? The wrong Theology that Ken Silva could possibly be right? The wrong Theology that it is OK to kill those who we deem heretics? Which Theology Kyle? How far up the Theological trail shall we go?
December 27th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
How about the wrong Theology of not proof reading your stuff? Who’s “Ingard?”
December 27th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Everybody Relax. This medium is a hard way to understand inflections and every thing else that is being communicated. SHEESH
December 27th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
Just a question. I never stated whose is right.
Just wondering if you guys think it a sin to have the wrong thoelogy and to preach the wrong theology?
December 27th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
Kyle,
I’m sure we all have wrong theology to some extent. There are some things that are non-negotiable, but on others there seems to be a lot of wiggle room.
If it’s a sin to preach wrong theology, Hell is going to be filled with a lot of pastors.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:57 pm
Jim has made an update to make the quote more accurate.
December 27th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
Keith,
Points 1,2,3,4, and whatever else…
You really put a lot of words in my mouth and seemed to only read and understand half of what I stated…
But I still see you as a good guy and a friend…
iggy
December 27th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Iggy:
Seriously, where did I put words in your mouth? How could/did I misunderstand what you wrote? My original post contained NOT ONE single ref to Ken Silva and yet you managed to bring him up in your response to me. Your problem with Ken Silva is your problem with Ken Silva. I do not personally know the man; I have corresponded with him via email or my blog a few times, but couldn’t pick him out of a line up if my life depended on it.
I guess I’m not following you. It’s very hard for me to see an understandable response in “Points 1, 2, 3, 4, and whatever else…” Please expound if you time.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
Kyle,
We all have wrong theology. We are all sinners. All preachers preach wrong theology. So what we have is sinners that preach wrong theology. Welcome to the human race.
Anyone who says their theology is absolutely right is an arrogant fool AND probably pretty ignorant.
At one time I preaches premil/pretrib/dispy eschatology. I now preach amil/post trib eschatology. At one time I was a Calvinist. Now I am not. And I could go on and on……..
My right theology turned out to be the wrong theology and I am sure that will happen again, and again, and again. Is it a sin to be wrong?
Bruce
December 27th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
Keith said,
.
There are some that would say that is because he and Curt Shillings blood on his sock have something in common. (Just adding a little humor)
December 27th, 2007 at 4:35 pm
Keith,
Now, let’s look at that “humorous” statement… which I took in that way.
1. You are stating there “humorously” I have written things against GCC which I have not. I only have spoken against JM’s theology…
2. As far as Mike Corley’s motive, as I can deduce from his own words, “We really didn’t know what to expect when we arrived. The stories of the services at MHC have varied from no scripture reading to the congregation sitting in the dark, chanting. So we were a wee bit anxious about what we would experience.” So I assume it was to see if anyone of those “stories” were true or not for himself… and to that I say “YEAH! KUDOS! GO MIKE! YIPPEEE! PRAISE GOD!!!” or something like that…. = )
3. I did not imply that MH paid for Mike to go there… but Ken has attacked viciously Tony Jones and was invited by Julie to have dinner… Ken has declined… I only stated that I would go if GCC paid my way to go… this does not mean the same thing that MH paid Mike… You seemed to read that in this yourself.
4. This must have been to my comment that stated,
JM makes money for his books and Ken makes money from his “ministry”… that was the connection. I stated if I made money that way I would make all the effort to go to the people and talk to them before I wrote things against them… Like Matt Slick does… check out how he does things… I do not agree with him on some things but I appreciate that he actually talks and discusses without PREJUDGING the person. As far as what Ken has done to me, I have earned my voice as I have gone to Ken in private and have been attacked publicly by him. Notice I never say he is not saved? Notice I often state pray for him and others? I have been mocked time and again for stating to pray for them and even earned a post by Ken stating I am his Nemesis… which is not true.
Now, I have even defended Ken here at times…. and once again I will… I think that you calling Ken a “booger” is uncalled for…
Keith, I consider us friends though I never met you… I take a lot of heat for my views, mostly because the other does not even take time to find out what I believe, such as Chris P. they just see some buzz words that they attached some bizarre definitions to and like a mad bull charge without a thought to the results… as long as they are right in their minds and can destroy the other they feel vindicated… and that is just sad.
I see Jesus as the Truth being my defender… He is God and defends me. I do not need to defend my defender and see that as saying God is not omnipotent and sovereign… I see many in the “Truth wars” actually stating things about God that makes Him less than God. They speak that He is sovereign, yet their “abstract detached truth” needs protecting from pagans and apostates… this demeans God for Who He is.
I stand that Truth is true… it needs no qualifier to be more true.. and to detach Truth from the Person of Jesus is to get really sick ideas of what our faith is about. That is what I stand against.
Apostates need fear God… heretics need to fear Truth… Truth will stand with or without me protecting it. There need be no war to protect truth for who can protect God? Can you?
be blessed,
iggy
December 27th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
Keith
I would say yes. It is a sin to be wrong. But then there is a disciction between purposefully misrepresenting the truth and a person with a heart for God that just misunderstanding the bible. Both is a sin, but one is worse than the other. Like the devil he used the bible and twisted it into a lie!
This is why it is a fearful thing to be a preach/teacher. This is why we must study to show ourselves to be approved.
Phil,
Heaven will be full of pastor that taught the wrong theology also.
Bruce
I would not say all preachers teach wrong theology. That means that the bible is not clear enough for us to rightly understand it. Althouhg becasue of sin there was only one preacher to ever teach correctly all the time, Jesus. I also think it is a sin to be wrong about the bible, when teaching, but there are varying levels of sin for this.
There is a lot of wiggley room for many issues, Revaltions, but there are some things that are too clear to have any wiggle room at all.
Sorry i do not know how any of this relates to the topic at hand. Well it kinda does since it centers around a church and the pastor teaching/preaching.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
Iggy,
You wrote a freaking novel and you didn’t once mention the brilliance that was my Shilling quote.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
Kudos to Mr. Corley, and not so much to Old Jim at New Truth…
December 27th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
Kyle-
There are different levels of sin? I don’t find this in my Bible.
Is adultery worse then lying? Not in God’s eyes.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
I might have been writing the nove at that point… it took some time to compose… = )
I had to look this all up so honestly I am missing the brilliance that I am sure is there…
So fake blood on Shillings socks is like picking Ken Silva out of a lineup…
Joe… let me in on the secret… I am stumped… LOL!
iggy
December 27th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
Sure look at the punishments in the OT. There are worse sins than others, now they all brings death the punishments where different. Just like rewards in heaven, so is punishment in hell.
It all goes back to intent, look at killing someone in the OT and the punishment for the intent of the person comminting the sin.
Sin is sin, if you broke one part of the law you have broken the entire law but I believe that there will be different punishments, as was in the OT, in hell just as there will be different rewards for believers in heaven.
What do you guys think about this? Are the different levels of sin and punishment or am I total of base on this one??
December 27th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
“Is adultery worse then lying? Not in God’s eyes.”
Yes and no.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
Kyle,
If you think it’s a sin to be wrong, all I can say is that I’m glad you weren’t my calculus teacher. I don’t think being wrong in and of itself is a sin. We will all hold some wrong thinking this side of eternity and probably won’t even realize most of it. Thankfully, God’s grace covers us.
I don’t being a Christian automatically make one correct. Actually, I think this is a common misunderstanding of a lot of Christians that just because they’re saved it means their opinions are correct.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:11 pm
It is not a sin to be wrong, it is a sin to disagree with me.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
Sin is sin, but consequences of sins can vary. Actually, I think probably, though, the sins we consider “small” may end up being bigger than we think.
I think the idea of different types of punishment in Hell is not Biblical, though. That seems like a holdover from the Catholic idea of purgatory.
Also, I don’t really like the idea of presenting heaven as a system of rewards. In the end, isn’t that still a self-serving thing? If we’re serving God just for a reward, it seems to miss the point of a lot of what Jesus said.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
Well in genrally being wrong is not a sin, but I was more refering to handling God’s word, so it is a sin to be wrong. Again we only see in a mirror only deemly right now, but also God’s truth is understandable by us. That is where a genorous(loving) orthdox comes in and most understand this, there are a few that seem to think they have ever jot of the of God’s truth perfectly known by them but in reality there are so many secondary issues that we all miss. That is why God’ grace is amazing because it even covers this sin for all thos who believe in Christ.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Well Jesus told us to store up for oursleves treaure in heaven. So he is saying that there is rewards for us in heaven and there are varying levels of reward as Paul said our works will be put through the fire and purified. Now i have no clue how this works and it has always confused me. We all are justified by Christ and have His perfect life imputed to us, so how can there be different rewards in heaven?!?
Also the idea of varying levels of punishment in hell is nothing like pugatory, but you already know that. Here is some of Jesus teaching on His judgment. Notice some people will be able to bear His judgment better than others.
Matt
21″Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. 23And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths.[a] If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. 24But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.”
I agree there is no “small” sin. All sin leads to death! How is it that christian recieve different rewards in heaven? This has always preplexed me.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Expert wordsmithing.
I didn’t catch that the first couple of reads.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
Julie,
I agree.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:55 pm
Iggy: It is near quitting time here, so I’ll respond when I get home. Didn’t want you to think I was ignoring your “novel.” (Joe said that, not me.)
December 27th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
Iggy,
There are some that say Curt Shilling put Ketch-up on his sock and said that it was his ankle bleeding to “rally the troops.” There are some who believe that it was all a fabrication of Mr. Shilling and Mr. Epstein to whip the other Red Sox players into a frenzy. There are also some who believe that Mr. Silva is an amalgamation of writers who are hoping to whip the troops into a frenzy to take America back for God. I personally thought the correlation was beautiful and humorous all at once. My wife’s always telling me I’m not as funny as I think I am.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
It was brilliant… but lost on one who is “Red Sox’s” impaired let alone sports impaired….
I had not heard that Ken was not real… that he was a bunch of different writers… boy that does explain a lot… like who the editor is and why there is no picture of Ken. (And my dart board needs a new center! j/k… )
I do think he is a real person… just highly motivated by things not so godly.
iggy
December 27th, 2007 at 6:29 pm
Keith,
I would never think that you would be ignoring me… I mean how could you? LOL!
i am not sure there is much more to say really…
So pray for me if you see a weakness and I will also for you… and let us all pray for Ken and Chris P and whoever else is caught up in all this nonsense of protecting God.. OK?
be blessed my friend,
iggy
December 27th, 2007 at 6:53 pm
I can’t claim it originally - I believe it was Tim’s…
December 27th, 2007 at 7:47 pm
“I stand that Truth is true… it needs no qualifier to be more true.. and to detach Truth from the Person of Jesus is to get really sick ideas of what our faith is about. That is what I stand against.”
I here that same concept spoken of in different forms:
The Reformers claim Sola Scriptura (Word alone).
Emergents say the Word of God has truth in it, but other religions have truth also. (Elephant analogy). You just can’t know the truth for sure.
Catholics say the Word of God is true, you just can’t personally interpet it. The Church has the final say so in the correct interpetation.
All these statments have some “truth”.
What did Jesus (the Word of God, Word made Flesh, Word of Truth) have to say about “Word alone”, Iggy?
If I bear witness of myself, my witness IS NOT TRUE. There is ANOTHER that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true (John 5:31,32 KJV).
Who was that other “witness”?
And GOD, which knoweth the hearts, BARE THEM WITNESS, giving them the HOLY GHOST, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith (Acts 15:8,9 KJV).
Yes Iggy, you can have the truth in Jesus, but without the “spiritual newbirth” you can never personally “know” that Truth! And all the other religions that Emergents look to for “truth” do not believe in the “spiritual newbirth”! Some religions believe that everyone is born with “a spark of divinity” but just need come in contact with it through some religion, spiritual leader, or mystic practice. The Bible plainly states that man is NOT born with a “spark of divinity”!
That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and WITHOUT GOD in the world: (Ephesians 2:12 KJV)
Natural man (in Adam) does not become “spiritual” (in Christ) until the Holy Spirit indwells them (i.e. born of the Spirit). That is why Jesus said, You must be born again!
F Whittenburg
December 27th, 2007 at 8:22 pm
Iggy:
Here’s how I see/understand things at this point:
1) I am not that familiar with Mike Corley, other than to know that he has a radio show, and according to this site, he has previously not spoken favorably re: Mars Hill or Mark Driscoll–don’t ask for quotes, I’m speaking in generalities here. In recent days, Mr. Corley wrote the review which sparked this current post/thread. Nathan liked what Mr. Corley wrote; you liked it; Robbymac and Matt liked it; all God’s chirren liked it.
I read this post; I then read Mike Corley’s review. I thought both were “good,” for lack of a better word. I made a simple statement/asked a simple question–tongue-in-cheek and you were ready to charge hell with a squirt gun!
2) I used yours and Tim’s names in my original post because you both write passionately about what you believe. I know–at least I think I do–that you do not agree with some of John MacArthur’s teachings, but I never intended to suggest that either of you had spoken ill of the man or Grace Community Church. IT WAS A JOKE!!!!!
3) I don’t know where Mike Corley lives, but I doubt he travelled across the entire United States at his own expense simply to write a review of a church or pastor he may or may not agree with. That was my point. YOU are the one that brought up the idea of someone else paying your way–why that matters is beyond me. I didn’t read anywhere that MH had invited Mike Corley to come to Seattle. I just assumed he had some other business there or was close enough and he dropped in.
4) I’m STILL not making the connection between this post, Mike Corley, Mars Hill AND KEN SILVA or TONY JONES! And I didn’t call Ken Silva anything!!! Good grief! It was an analogy based on the FACT that you always seem to bring the conversation back to this “feud” between you and Mr. Silva.
Iggy, my “point” was if Ken is that repulsive, annoying or whatever to you (like a booger on your finger would be), just get rid of the thing! MOVE ON! PLEASE, MOOOVVVVVEEEEE OOOOOONNNNNNNNN!
Wrapping things up:
You probably wouldn’t take so much “heat for [your] views” if you didn’t approach most conversations as a personal attack.
No, I can’t protect God—but then, I didn’t ask a question related to that topic. Where did that one come from?
Iggy, Chris L., Tim, Nathan, Julie, Matt, Joe and anyone else I may have offended with my “Grace Community Church” comment-I’M SORRY!!!!! I repent in sackcloth and ashes. I don’t deserve to live
…and I’m not implying that ALL of you were offended; just making sure I cover my bases.
December 27th, 2007 at 8:24 pm
Actually… I’ve always wondered this. There appear to be different judgments according to what we’ve done, so I wonder if there isn’t something I’m missing here.
We started to talk about this at Sunday School this past Sunday, but class ended and I don’t recall feeling resolved about the discussion.
My first response would be “sin is sin — all bad” to which I now wonder if it isn’t “sin is sin — all bad, but different sin offering different judgment” which then indicates, to me at least, that if all sin isn’t judged exactly the same, there are worse sins. Of course, blasphemy of the Holy Spirit (which I don’t get the definition of) is apparently the ultimate sin, again indicating a hierarchy of sin.
I’m actually annoyed with myself for now pondering this, since I often grow tired of Christians seemingly placing some sins on a “that’s way worse!” kind of pedestal and ignoring “lesser” sins.
Someone take this and explain it for me, if they have time, and if you understand what I’m clumsily trying to get at here.
December 27th, 2007 at 8:26 pm
Keith, no offense here. I’ve been quite open about my feelings in regards to this gentleman. And as I’ve already stated, been there.
December 27th, 2007 at 8:30 pm
Thanks, Joe. Not attempting to jack the thread here, but one thing I know you and I DO agree on is Pensacola CC is CRAZY!!!
December 27th, 2007 at 8:35 pm
Any sin makes us a sinner, and in that it is equal. Line up every person on the California coast and command them to swim to Hawaii and everyone drowns regardless how far they get. In that, sin is equal.
But even in the OT God had different punishments for different sins, and God lists certain sins in the NT as ones that should be avoided. And there is one unpardonable sin.
December 27th, 2007 at 8:43 pm
Keith,
LOL!
I have so moved on… oh by the way Ken Silva made a comment on my blog today stating more lies about me… funny huh?
LOL!
And it’s true!
iggy
December 27th, 2007 at 8:51 pm
Iggy, you and Ken need to go to “time out.” I have a brother-in-law that, for whatever reason, says stuff to me/about me all the time just to get a rise out of me. Mostly lies and dumb accusations. Don’t ask me why.
I just smile and thank him for his input. Just don’t acknowledge it. I usually return his comments by doing something nice for him. “Heap burning coals.”
December 27th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
That is why I asked you to pray for me Keith… I need friends like you.
iggy
December 27th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
Keith I didn’t mean anything negative about what you wrote. I very much appreciate your comments and the dialogue here. I was merely trying to clarify. My apologies for the misunderstanding.
Peace and blessings
December 27th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
“I would not say all preachers teach wrong theology. That means that the bible is not clear enough for us to rightly understand it. Althouhg becasue of sin there was only one preacher to ever teach correctly all the time, Jesus.”
But even Jesus left the “deeper” teaching’s of God’s truth to another source. Jesus said we need a “Spirit guide (Holy Spirit)”.
I have many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of Truth, is come, HE WILL GUIDE you into all truth; for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come (John 16:12,13 KJV).
A pastor or teacher can speak the “words of truth” to you from scripture, but only the Holy Spirit can give you understanding of that truth.
And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may KNOW him that IS TRUE, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This IS THE TRUE GOD, and eternal life (1 John 5:20 KJV).
Paul taught the same thing in 1 Corinthians 2:9-16 KJV.
F Whittenburg
December 27th, 2007 at 9:53 pm
Salvation theology is paramount. “No one comes to the Father but by me”. There are many important issues that are not directly germaine to salvation, but some issues if left to their own devices seem to chamge salvation theology.
Theology is interconnected, and some doctrines impact basic salvation doctrines. That is why all Scripture is given by inspiration and is beneficial for Spiritual growth. If we relegate some Scriptures as irrelevant, we run the risk of eventually considering all Scripture as ambiguous.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:54 pm
I will not tolerate the blatant heresy coming from the mouth of Yankee fan about my beloved Red Sox.
LOL…Joe I’m still really upset that we have failed to get together.
If I put a gift in one of the boxes would you get it?
December 27th, 2007 at 10:08 pm
Chris, I don’t know. Probably, if it had my name on it. You might be able to leave it with Security. Or I could have a friend meet you, or we’ll hit up next time your in town. Probably the best bet would be to leave it in the prayer room. If you want to do that, I’ll let my friend Dan know.
BTW, you gotta admit that comparison was beautiful.
December 27th, 2007 at 10:16 pm
Yes Joe it was a brilliant!
Okay I’ll leave it with Dan.
Have a safe trip to Ohio!
December 27th, 2007 at 10:19 pm
He’ll be in the prayer room at the back of the shed.
December 27th, 2007 at 10:24 pm
“Salvation theology is paramount. “No one comes to the Father but by meâ€. ”
Paul expounds on that even further in his letter to the Ephesians. It’s still takes the Trinity, not just Father and Son.
For thru him (Jesus) we both have access by ONE SPIRIT (Holy Spirit) unto the Father. Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God (Ephesians 2:18,19 KJV).
Notice how this verse says we have access to God thru Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, and not thru a Pope, apostle, prohpet, Levitical prest, senior pastor, cell / small group leader, etc. That is why you cannot be kicked out or excommunicted out of the true church. The “roll” of the church is written in Heaven (Hebrews 12:22-24 KJV)! If a church on the earth was to strike my name from their roll, I tell you most assuredly, WHEN THE ROLL IS CALLED UP YONDER I”LL BE THERE
Halleljuah
December 27th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
I like Keith. He doesn’t pull punches but he doesn’t hit below the belt. We probably agree more than we disagree, if we were to compare notes more extensively.
Glad you’re stickin’ around, Keith, and while I can’t speak for anyone but myself, I find your comments interesting and intelligent, whether or not we’re 100% on the same page.
December 27th, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Iggy (and Ken if you’re reading this) to clarify: I am not implying anything about Ken in my comments. As I’ve previously stated, I don’t know Ken personally. We have communicated via internet/email. In my experience, he has always been cordial toward me. Iggy, your experience — sounds like — has been different. I cannot and will not speak to that. I’m sorry if that is the case. I will pray for you and for Ken. We better ALL start trying to get along around here—we’ve got an eternity of being neighbors headed our way.
===
Chris: Thanks for the clarification and apology.
December 28th, 2007 at 1:13 am
I’m offended that you thought I was offended.
(bwahahahaha)
December 28th, 2007 at 10:33 am
Julie. Here is alittle explaniation about varying degrees of punishment in hell. This is a possiblity, nowhere does it state it word for word in the bible. There are sundry rewards in heaven for our “works” on earth. There are lots of passages that refer to people’s being able to bear punishment(judgment) better than others. Also the different punishments in the OT would leave on to believe this also. So will Hitler recieve great punishment than say a great catholic saint like Mother Teresa?
This is not a debate about if Mother Teresa is saved or not just using here as an example of a great life that can still end up in hell despite all the “good works.”
Here is a little quote from gotquestion.org
“Although it does not specifically say so, the Bible does seem to indicate that there might be different levels of punishment in Hell. In Revelation 20:11-15, the people are judged “according to what they had done as recorded in the books†(Revelation 20:12). All the people at this judgment, though, are thrown into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:13-15). So, perhaps, the purpose of the judgment is to determine how severe the punishment in Hell. Whatever the case, being thrown into a slightly less hot portion of the lake of fire is not consolation to those who are still doomed for eternity.”
Here is a book on hell also. I love these books, there is a whole series on sundy topics, because they give sundry views on a given christian topic.
http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/product?event=AFF&p=1011693&item_no=21268
December 28th, 2007 at 10:36 am
Thanks, Kyle. I would submit, though, that the different levels in hell will be a small comfort to any who end up there regardless which depth of torure they warrant.
December 28th, 2007 at 10:50 am
Kyle,
I would also note that, according to Rev 20:14-15, “Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.”, which could be an indication of a cessation of existence for those souls.
The bottom line is: we don’t know, and apparently knowing about how it works isn’t all that important in the grand scheme of things.
December 28th, 2007 at 10:54 am
Yup that is a possibility of God crushing use into non-exsitence. I really do not belieive in this one, cessastionisn, I think it is evdient through the bible that it is a enternal never ending punishment. These are secondary issues, I agree, but they are better conversations and i able to learn more from this stuff than all the bickering about the bickers.:)