The heart of Christianity is redemption. It is what makes us Christian, and indeed it is what makes Christ God. When we cease to be redemptive, and as Merry noted when we cease to show unmerited love, we have become just members of another religion.

Jesus said we are to forgive 70 x 7 which even in its construct assumes that the person failed to live up to his end of the forgiveness at least 489 times, and yet Christ said “Forgive him”. The words on SoL continue to be unchristian and self righteous complete with a venum and acrimony that renders it void of even loving correction, much less prayerful grace.

As sad and disapponting as the Ted Haggard story was, it has been used of the Spirit as a test. Some do not even have to cast the first stone since they always have stones alreday in flight that can be redirected at any target that surfaces. Some showed forgiveness while others exhibited a judgmental glee that belies the Christ they say they proclaim.

We are left with this: Which Christ are we following? Is it the doctrinal Christ that has every systematic box checked with the coldness of an algebra test? Is it the platform Christ that we use as a launching point for our judgmental tirades that seem to please the self righteous masses? Is it the gay hating Christ that takes every opportunity to mock and deride them with entertaining and demeaning language that is filled with creative phrases that show linguistic talent without the Spirit of Christ?

Or are we called to follow the Christ to whom sinners were drawn? Why didn’t Jesus say to Peter after he had cursed and denied him to a little girl, “Peter, Peter, go away…”. Are we following a Christ who forgives you and me every day, every hour, and probably most times every moment?

The line has been crossed long agay and the language and judgment digs deeper and deeper into the abyss of self righteousness. This is apostacy! Not the normal understanding of apostacy which denies the deity of Christ, but this is the falling away from the true Christ and teaching others to do like wise. I am convinced that the deception from the evil one is not limited to parts of the emergent movement, or the liberal churches, or even the cults, this deception is brilliant and effective among the most ardent doctrinal students of the Word.

They have neglected the weightier matters of the Christ and have constructed a caricature that seems to have the approved doctrinal appearance by any standards, but inside are dead men’s bones. This is not the Christ and this is not Christianity. This is not some small fringe issue about the mellenium or women pastors or some other doctrinal dispute, this now has redefined the Person of Jesus Christ while still retaining the semblence of doctrinal orthodoxy.

This is apostate orthopraxy that not only acts outside the Spirit of Christ, it suggests that Christ is speaking through them. They have left Christ who is the faith, and that in my opinion is a subtle form of apostacy. It is entirely possible, and becoming more and more prevelant, to have all the necessary doctrinal accoutrements present and accounted for, and not have the Spirit of God in them.

And those who espouse such language and encourage people like Ingrid to continue are partakers of those evil deeds. But once a person is addicted to the exhilaration that comes from speaking from the judgment throne of God Himself, it is usually extremely difficult to see yourself as anything different, much less repent and begin again. Ask me, I know.

Pray that some who will hear Ted Haggard will find the forgiveness and mercy they are looking for in Christ.

Who among us has not had a dog that we loved, a dog that even became a part of the family? And when that dog chews up something, or makes a mistake on the carpet etc., what do we do? Do we toss him out of the family? Do we claim he isn’t ours? Do we tell all the neighbors what he did?

No, we chasten him for his behavior and not long after we cuddle him and pet him and love him, even if we are sure at some point he may duplicate the offense. That, my friends, is what we do with our dogs.

Why do we treat our Christian brothers and sisters worse than we treat our dogs?

The thing that’s amazing to me isn’t necessarily the reaction of people like Ingrid – it’s actually pretty typical of some. I’ve seen it all my life. But what’s amazing is the blindness to the actual results of this type of thinking.

In the HBO documentary, the filmmaker asked Haggard why he didn’t seek help earlier, and his answer was basically he knew that because of the nature of his struggle, he would basically be thrown under the bus. Well, now that his sin is known, that’s basically what has happened.

Why would anyone repent of any sin in a church when this is how churches treat someone who was supposedly “one of their own”. It’s no surprise that people don’t feel comfortable entering a church building – they’ll just be condemned.

I’m not saying that leaders don’t need disciplined when they fall or that we should ignore sin, but it’s not wrath that leads people to repentance. True repentance is a response to scandalous grace. The Church by in large has forgotten the subversiveness of the cross.

“The Church by in large has forgotten the subversiveness of the cross.”

Wow, what a statement. Is that yours, Phil, or did you hear it from someplace else? Can I use it for a post? An absolutely great thought!

Websters says this about subversiveness:

a systematic attempt to overthrow or undermine a government or political system by persons working secretly from within

Think about that definition as it applies to the church!

The fact is, though poorly communicated, that Ted Haggard is a hypocrite who has no right to point fingers about how he has been treated by the religious right (or anybody else)

I am the same hypocrite, btw, though not publicly, so I have no right to be treated any way but in justice. Thats why I need God’s grace so desperately.

The thing that gets me is that this guy didn’t just crawl into a hole and hide. This commentary at the Christian Post and all over the news screams arrogance, pride, self-justification. I know how I respond to that in my own children when they are caught and in the wrong. I love them, but I try my level best to remove any sense that they deserve anything but the full weight of the law until they repent.

I know you want to attack Ingrid, but what about the balance? Why is this guy standing in judgement? I will argue that it is because He has not experienced God’s grace. He has been forgiven much, but has come and beat up someone else who owed less than he. He deserves scorn and ridicule if for nothing else than for his self-serving press junket he has been on.

He has been forgiven much, but has come and beat up someone else who owed less than he.

I don’t see how he’s beating anyone up. Actually I was surprised that he didn’t seem more bitter towards the people who have basically disowned him.

To me, this whole thing is an example of what happens when we put agendas ahead of people. I think Haggard himself realizes he was guilty of that before, so he’s taking steps to rectify it. Whether they’re all correct I don’t know.

The fact of the matter is that in our zeal to defend our positions, we have hurt people. Even if we’re right, we need to ask forgiveness for our attempts at steamrolling people.

PB,

If your standard for whether someone has experienced God’s grace is whether they “beat up someone else who owed less than he,” then I suspect that none of those you defend on a regular basis have ever experienced God’s grace.

Mr. Haggard offered a (not that bad) critique of the so-called “Religious Right.” Ms. Schlueter called Mr. Haggard a “sociopath.”

Do your own math, PB, and I hope you come to the right result.

P.S. When were Christians ever called to heap “scorn and ridicule” on others?

MG

When were Christians ever called to heap “scorn and ridicule” on others?

Never. But that is not to say that we do not deserve it.

Dead Catcher:

Again, neither one is in my church. That is your own standard, stick to it.

The state of Christianity is pretty sick when the ability to launch a series of invectives, insults, and epithets behind the safety of a keyboard is taken to be some sign of “manliness.”

Ms. Schleuter has no business calling Ted Haggard a sociopath. Personality disorders are mental illnesses, not insults.

Why not just start calling people you disagree with “retards” and be done with it? Real manly, right?

Dead Catcher:

Again, neither one is in my church. That is your own standard, stick to it.

And the hypocrisy goes to new levels. True, they’re not in your church but their writings might be. Heck, his music might be.

So much for the “abundant life”…

Those posts only succeed in communicating that “The Gospel” really just amounts to a bourgeois obsession with genital management.

No thanks.

RE: Stick to your own standard…

PB,

you first.

Oh, and Joe…

There are no cheaters in my church either.

At least Marcus Borg’s writings are not in my church.

We’ve officially gone back to the play ground.

Here’s some stuff for you to exegete in relation to the sin you so love to defend, PB:

If someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual, restore them gently.

Matt. 18:19

19 “I also tell you this: If two of you agree here on earth concerning anything you ask, my Father in heaven will do it for you. 20 For where two or three gather together as my followers, I am there among them.”

Rom 12:15

Mourn with those who mourn.

Col. 2:19

…..and they are not connected to Christ, the head of the body. For he holds the whole body together with its joints and ligaments, and it grows as God nourishes it.

Eph 4:16

He makes the whole body fit together perfectly. As each part does its own special work, it helps the other parts grow, so that the whole body is healthy and growing and full of love.

Gal. 6:2

Share each other’s burdens, and in this way obey the law of Christ.

I Thess. 5:11

So encourage each other and build each other up, just as you are already doing.

I Peter 4:8

Most important of all, continue to show deep love for each other, for love covers a multitude of sins

I Peter 4:10

God has given each of you a gift from his great variety of spiritual gifts. Use them well to serve one another.

I invite you to think about the ministers of anger to the glory of themselves in light of these texts.

#30 NC

I invite all of you to do so (practice the scripture you quoted) to the ADM’s that you use similar language towards as Ingrid did towards TH

#33

I was refering to steroid users who wear pinstripes.

None of those in our fellowship.

Um…

I’m tempted to just say, “you first”.

Instead I’ll ask a question:

PB, you actually think that the critiques of Ingrid’s behaviors here are the same thing as a personal attack on and name-calling of TH?

Really?
Really?

I feel an SNL skit coming on…

But, yeah…

you first.

David repented. They are living a blatant lifestyle of rebellion. HUGE difference.

As far as I know, Amy Grant and Sandi Patti have repented as well. Is there some sort of special penance required for CCM artists who fall into sin? If so, where is it described?

Joe,

At least Marcus Borg’s writings are not in my church.

And there are no divorcee’s music in our church. Sandi Patti, Amy Grant, and on down the line….nope.

And I do not use Slice as a reference in my church. I exegete the scripture.

But what about the people in your church who might be reading Ingrid and think they can get divorced b/c of it? Don’t you want to protect them too? Aren’t you afraid that they might see her lifestyle and embrace it for themselves?

“And there are no divorcee’s music in our church. Sandi Patti, Amy Grant, and on down the line….nope.”

Are they allowed to sing along with the songs to God? Are there divorcee’s in your congregation? Do you believe there are divorcee’s in God’s church? I would suggest that if you cleanse your church from all sinners you would have no church and ceratinly no pastor.

We’ve elevated music to a church office.

What name calling of Ken, Camp, et al?

What articles call them names?

Where has the articles here not focused on their actual deeds and solely on their personalities, etc?

I guess Steve Camp’s music would be verboten as well? No Ingrid singing special music either? I have a hard time believing your church is a MCA since the ones I have attended are much more gracious.

Every believer I know is an unrepentant sinner, since they all continue to sin.

In fact, you even link to CRN.com which Ingrid posts on. Clearly you are recommending the writings of an unrepentant divorcee.

Pull the plank out of your eye, boy.

Are they allowed to sing along with the songs to God? Are there divorcee’s in your congregation? Do you believe there are divorcee’s in God’s church? I would suggest that if you cleanse your church from all sinners you would have no church and ceratinly no pastor.
We’ve elevated music to a church office.

I don’t know what you mean Rick…

Our church is full of sinners, wretches saved by Grace. Their Pastor ( me ) is the worst one of all.

There is a HUGE difference between those who admit the fact that they are unworthy of the grace of God, and live in a life of repentance and a drive for Holiness motivated by God and those like Patti, Grant, et.al. who say that they have not sinned in their choices and demonstrate it by living in it.

And my denomination is CMA. And we do demonstrate grace. But we do not forget that grace TRANSFORMS on into the image of Christ, it is not a licesense to sin.

There is a HUGE difference between those who admit the fact that they are unworthy of the grace of God, and live in a life of repentance and a drive for Holiness motivated by God and those like Patti, Grant, et.al. who say that they have not sinned in their choices and demonstrate it by living in it.

Do you have any proof for what you’re saying, or are you continuing your standard practice of pulling stuff out of your butt? In every interview I have read with Amy Grant about this subject, she admits that she sinned. I can’t say I know as much as about Patti, but I would suspect it’s the same.

If you’re just going to spread lies about fellow Christians, please take your comments elsewhere.

Her divorce was also to protect her children…not to satisfy some unbridled lust.

Like I said, PB, do you have any real proof?

Hearsay is not proof. Especially when it’s from somewhere called “PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter”.

Hey, at least they got the “psycho” part right…

In conclusion, let me tell you of my opinion of Michael English and Sandy Patti. Both Michael English and Sandi Patty made headlines when they were found to have been involved in extra-marital affairs (Patti, on two occasions). Both English and Patty dropped out of the mainstream, though Michael English did make a secular album, following his returning of several Dove Awards when his affair with Marabeth Jordan, formerly of the Christian Group “First Call”, in which his songs (and a later interview) expressed anger at the way he felt he was treated by his fan base. However, sometime later, both Sandy Patti and Michael English made amends. They confessed their sins not only to God, but to their fans, asked for their fans’ forgiveness as well as from God, and have repented of their past, public sins. Both Michael English and Sandy Patti wrote books about their separate experiences of receiving her fans’ forgiveness, as well as from God, Patty’s titled Falling Forward… into His Arms of Grace (2007), and English’s titled The Prodigal Comes Home (2007). I, personally, continue to enjoy music by both. Why? These two have admitted their sin, sought forgiveness form God and from their fans, and have – despite their pasts – repented of their sins and scandals. This, too, is what Jesus does. Those who admit their sin, admit their failing, and come back to him he accepts with open arms. I further continue to listen to Sixpence None the Richer for the same reason that Leigh Nash did ask for forgiveness from her fan base in her blog.

Apparently, she has repented, and therefore I repent. I was wrong to accuse her. I have no idea how one could live in reconciliation to her husband once a divorce an remarriage has already happened. She has at least admitted she failed in her former marriage, and is under a church’s discipline and accountability.

I cannot throw stones.

But we also cannot say the same for Haggard. He is throwing stones to distract in my view from his sin.

No one setting a repentance bar, Rick.

But I have to ask: If one has repented, would he behave in such a way? Or would he be so filled with the Grace of God that he would extend that grace even to his critics (the wicked religious right)?

just wonderin’

And I could wonder the same the way some here treat Ingrid, Ken, and Camp….

#64
and some could wonder it about you and your friends the way certain people are treated….

But I have to ask: If one has repented, would he behave in such a way? Or would he be so filled with the Grace of God that he would extend that grace even to his critics (the wicked religious right)?

just wonderin’

And I could wonder the same the way some here treat Ingrid, Ken, and Camp….

Are you sure you aren’t a brilliant satirist. How could your write this with any seriousness?

King David’s personal life was an absolute mess from start to finish. The “Man After God’s Own Heart” is the epitome of a poster child for what NOT to do regarding interpersonal and familial relationships. Although David repented of his sins he **still** married and stayed married to Bathsheba. Though he repented and was forgiven for these sins the temporal consequences for those sins followed him all his life and even though a murderer and adulterer (who remained in the adulterous marriage BTW) he is one of the most respected and revered saints of all time. We sing his songs to this day.

You know this type of thing was debated and answered long ago. Song lyrics and writings stand on their own independent of their author, just as the Gospel stands on it’s own independent of the history of the person who is delivering it. **All** song writers are sinners, with both public and hidden sins. To base the use of a song on the behavior of the author is pointless as one cannot possibly see their heart.

Instead, one can only rightly judge the lyrics based on their Scriptural veracity. Any other measure is ultimately unviable as it would be practically impossible to investigate the personal life of the thousands of hymn and sacred song writers. And then what would be the demarcation point of the amount or type of sin that tipped the scale against using the musical piece? A total effort in futility and ultimately completely subjective.

If you move a rifle 1 degree it will miss the target by 30 feet each mile. The worse the world gets, your foundational view of Christianity and the Christ will determine how your spirituality is revealed. It will either be more redemptive in the midst of more sin, or it will be more judgmental.

Two shoe salesmen were sent to a country in Africa, after one week the first saleman got on a plane and came home because the natives didn’t even wear shoes. The other salesman called and tripled his order as he excitedly exclaimed, “No one here even owns any shoes!!”.

And so it is with humanity, you either see it as a redemptive gold mine and elaborate on Christ, or you see it as a lost cause and you eloborate on their sin. It all depends on how you see Jesus.

Demeaning dismissiveness is unbecoming a follower of Jesus Christ and represents a caricature of Christ and not the Redeemer Himself.

I too, when I read the post, thought it was extremely un-Christlike and dripping with anger. This is simply not the way to deal with any person. God only knows his motives. We venture onto thin ice when we try to draw conclusions as to one’s motives. As Jesus said, “With what measure we judge, we will be judged by the same measure.”

I guess then, since you are only naming Ingrid, that pastorswho use abusive language and threaten people are okay, as long as they are seeker sensitive or emergent and really do not care about standing up for morality or the scripture.

just sayin’

80

Yikes!

I don’t even know who that guy is. But that’s totally wrong too.

Somehow, PB, it seems like you think that all the “emerging” types all get together/know each other (same for the “seeker sensitive” crowd)

People can’t be held responsible for not “critiquing” bad behavior that we don’t know about.

That being said, thanks for the link. That guy’s a real tool.

What his views on morality/scripture are, I know not…or even know how it is germaine to the actual issue-i.e “personal attacks.”

Then again…someone needs to show me how his sinful remarks characterize the whole his ministry…that’s where the bigger picture difference may be:

i.e. A guy who sinfully “goes off” or a group of people who make a whole ministry out of just “going off”.

It’s all wrong, but there is a difference.

and if he was, is that clear?

btw, where do people get these clips?

Well, I have to assume that if the guy’s still a pastor after however many years that he hasn’t taken baseball bats to parishioners.

As a person who has spent a lot of times around pastors, I have to say, it’s not uncommon for certain members to inspire these revenge fantasies. Certainly there are people who take it upon themselves to make pastors’ lives a living hell.

The irony to me is that ADMs put pastors in a position where they are literally damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Struggling with a certain sin? Well don’t let us hear about it, you pervert. Confessing something? Well, let us just throw you under the bus.

That’s why when I had to give advice to students who felt a call into ministry, I always encouraged them get some other skill. Being beholden to church members for a salary sucks, and ultimately I think it has caused many pastors to lose their prophetic authority.

People who spend their times digging up these clips don’t want real pastors – they want men without backbones who will cater to their every whim. They want yes men to reaffirm their theology. They don’t anyone who dares challenge their little worldview.

The guy was kidding, obviously. Over the top, of course, but many of us pastors have some of that frustration.

But the same Chris R. that presented that clip, unconditioanlly approves of Ingrid’s unchristian rants.

Her rants are unchristian. I have no idea concerning her spiritual status, however she frequently expresses certainty about different pastor’s unsaved status.

I do not espouse her brand of Christianity.

As long as the pastor is emergent I will excuse any offensive behavior. That’s just the way I am.

Phil – most of the time when someone says something that is just absurd, I put up the force field of humor and sarcasm. I get aggravated just like you, but it is usually unproductive. John has seen you chastise emergent guys so his comment is ridiculous.

Anyone who cannot see the unchristian writings of Ingrid is blind, either purposely or subconsciously. It’s the “man convinced against his will” theory in action.

Check out “pastor” boys history in this thread. He won’t actually address any of the issues on the thread itself. Instead he dodges and airs dirty laundry of others, points the finger to try to obfuscate the issue.

This is your “truth” warrior, a pathetic boy who can’t seem to actually face the truth.

Gary Lamb = joking

Ingrid = serious

it’s an attempt to sound cool and to really relate with the flock (coming from the same pastor who advocates UFC fighting shouldn’t surprise us).

No Eric, as I said in #88 it was over the top. I’ll take over the top kidding rather than the “bath house deviants” type of invectives.

Rick,

Over the top = not Christlike?

You certainly offer a different brand of grace to Gary Lamb than you do to Ingrid.

Phil,

Whether or not Jesus had a sense of humor is not the point. Since Jesus was fully human it is hard to imagine that he did not have a sense of humor. It is equally as hard to imagine that he joked publicly at the Sermon on the Mount about beating up fellow believers. While you may find it a “lame excuse to get one’s panties all up in a bunch”, others find it rather inappropriate and downright unChristlike. By defending or at least minimizing Gary Lamb’s actions you have simply proved PB’s point in bringing it up in the first place. Besides, there are certainly things on this site that equally qualify as a “lame excuse to get one’s panties all up in a bunch”, if you want to start applying that standard.

So…

Lying = Christlike?

Really if you understand the people Gary is reaching… deep south folk big into wrestling.

My wife worked at a place that sold old wrestling tapes… Andre the Giant… even before Hulk Hogan… the oldies… many would call and order and did not even know how to spell their own name… somehow they had credit cards though….

So to judge these men who are really speaking to their congregation… and in this case state they are joking (maybe to make a point and contrast how they were and how Christ has changed them?) then to say their statement which is taken out of context and used dishonestly seems rather unchristlike to me.

iggy

Iggy,

Here is the sermon in its entirety.

http://www.piratechristianradio.com/fftf/AllInLiving.mp3

Lamb took it off the web but I kept a copy for just such an occasion. Could it have been because it was too embarrassing?

See if you can point us to the part in the sermon where he says he was joking.

Pastors Conference to counteract all the garbage people will be listening to with the likes of McLaren and Claibourne there

Knowing Shane personally, and with your track record on factual research, I’m pretty confident that you have no idea what you are talking about. Yet again.

What a sad sad thing it is to see people threatened so deeply by such things.

very, very, very sad.

Eirc,

No you did sort of defend lyin by making the issue about Garly Lambs statements which are taken out of context and stating he has the real problem.

So, how can you judge himwith someone who has lied about him… how do you justify that?

Again, justifying a lie so that you can agree with it seems to validate the lie.

iggy

You all have created as many arbitrary lines in defining Christlike or Christian behavior (which is what this post Neil was originally about), so if you want to excuse behavior based on that standard, why pile on Ingrid with the rest.

Sigh…

It’s like talking to a wall. No one is “piling on” Ingrid. If anything, we’re attempting to stop her from attacking others. It’s simply amazing the lengths that people go to excuse an obvious and blatant attack on another Christian – and yes, in my eyes, Haggard is still a Christian.

By the way, I had never even heard of Gary Lamb prior to seeing that clip, so to suggest he’s on “my team” is news to me. I am against random idiots on the internet carrying out with hunts against pastors they have no relationship with though.

Man… I just listened to this sermon in context and it is a great sermon… And it is obvious he is joking about doing the violent things…

Now… this is the same guy that does not put up with guys who beat their wives… so I am sure he is not an advocate for violence…

I think the main point is being missed… that we should not fear and step out and do something than play church.

Again… listen to the whole sermon… and you will get that this is the point…

Good grief… there is nothing wrong with someone writing a book that declares a Truth War… but there is something wrong with someone that takes a stand and boldly tells people to do the works of God…

There is a major disconnect!

And here Chris R wants this man’s minstry to go under instead of seeing the point of the sermon.

So we should attack gays and tell them to “go away” from our churches… yep, keep the sinners out.

Why spread lies about someone and distort what they are saying? Oh to protect this fragile truth and god they serve…

how sad.

iggy

BTW, the Peasant Revolt of 1525 was inspired by Martin Luther’s words… then when he spoke against the peasants, 10,000 were killed.

iggy

Interesting how the point Gary Lamb was making has been entirely lost. He was speaking of defending his marriage.

We’ve already seen what little value the ADMs put on marriage, we shouldn’t be surprised that ADMs attack anyone who does.

91
Neil, I was not addressing you, I was addressing the commenters.

However, I find it strange that there seems to be a fair amount of outrage against Ingrid, Ken, LR, campie, and others while circus church goat herders seem to get a pass by and large

And, after all, Haggard was a mega church seeker sensitive pastor.

coincidence?

However, I find it strange that there seems to be a fair amount of outrage against Driscoll, Bell, and others while ADM goat herders seem to get a pass by and large

Fixed it.

Lamb took it off the web but I kept a copy for just such an occasion.

That sounds just like I Peter 4:8 and I am sure that is something both Jesus and the Apostles would have done. I mean, hey the guy took it down, but you saved a copy. Never mind the fact that maybe he took them down because he thought it was best. Maybe he does think that he shouldn’t have done that but hey he hasn’t gotten the ADM/ODM approved repentance checklist done yet.

Way to look like Satan.

8 Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins.

I Peter 4:8

I guess it should read:

Keep a copy of your brother’s sin that way you’ll always have it for just such an occasion so you can bash him over the head with it.

Sounds great, Rick.

Can I post my past ones and win, or do we need to be current?

Does it have to be OPS? (Other people’s sins?)

Too late Rick, that site exists already.

Just check out sliceoflaodicea.com, extremetheology.com, christianresearchnetwork.com, and thedowngrade2007.blogspot.com.

fightingforthefaith.com, defendingcontending.com, apprising.com, truthwarcentral.com, and the list goes

I hear some guy named Ken Silva actually has a list of these sites on one of his blogs, but as of now that is unconfirmed.

Doesn’t the little leaven site have some of these awards already? Especially, the last one?

And this from the current post at SoL:

“Truly, the Lord has given today’s fake churches over to a form of Nebuchadnezzar-style insanity. These people are on all fours, eating grass.”

Another award!!

Funny how Chris R will not respond that it is fine to attack Gary Lamb who is using hyperbole while the person that founded the denomination he is part of condoned and expressed that it was a good thing that 10,000 peasants were murdered.

Again though it seems that Chris R sees the dishonest misrepresentation of another in the name of protecting truth is also good.

Sometimes I am soooo glad to be emergent! I don’t have to seek out ways to twist Truth to my own benefit I can rest in it and trust truth to protect me.

iggy

The reason I kept the entire sermon was so that when someone like Iggy says something IDIOTIC like “Lamb was just joking” and “Chris was just engaging in selective editing”… I could then defend myself against FALSE and IDIOTIC claims.

Again that doesn’t fall under fair use claims.

It makes you a thief as well as a liar.

Sometimes I am soooo glad to be emergent! I don’t have to seek out ways to twist Truth to my own benefit I can rest in it and trust truth to protect me.

Thats because emergents don’t believe in objective truth, it is just subjective truth, what they feel at the time, and indeed what is true for them.

I thought Bo Diaz was a dead catcher, not a ignorant lawyer. Your interpretation of the Fair Use law is irrelevant, Bo. And it is incorrect.

#147

Are you saying his sermon was a joke?

Sounds like most other seeker sensitive sermons.

PB,

The sermon was excellent and his point on how King David did not let fear stop him… and how he depended on God to face his fears was something that need be taught in more churches… the part about the beating of the couple who were out to harm Gary and his family was a joke…

I hope you do not see exhorting your congregation to do more than sitting in their pews as a joke?

If you do that explains a lot about you….

But knowing how you cannot understand just basic things you read I guess you might also have the same cognitive impairment in your hearing.

Are you saying his sermon was a joke?

No, I’m saying that the parts that are obviously jokes are jokes. He doesn’t obviously believe that satan was a married woman who was a member of his church in Iowa, just as he wasn’t actually regretful of taking a ball bat to Satan’s head. It was all hyperbole in the service of making a point.

At least its obvious to non-ADMs.

Sounds like most other seeker sensitive sermons.

You are the most ignorant person I’ve ever seen. And this is the internet, there are a lot of stupid and ignorant people out there.

You don’t know what an emergent is, you don’t know what seeker sensitive is, and you have no ability to discern anything.

PB,

You are like the guy who wears his mommas skirts… and then attacks others for doing so.

iggy

“Pastor” boy,
You continue to demonstrate your ignorance.

“Seeker emergent”. What a ridiculous joke. You demonstrate with every post that only the last half of your name is true.

You have no idea what those you criticize believe.
You have no idea what the church has historically believed.
You have no idea what the scriptures say.
You have no substance to any of your posts, demonstrated by your frequent attacks of the person.

You are unfit to lead a church in any capacity.

Iggy,

Why am I not surprised that you are defending Lamb’s indefensible statements? I don’t care how much lipstick you put on that pig you’ll never convince me that it was a joke or hyperbole.

BTW, did you catch Lamb’s letter to people who stole the church’s trailer? Here is some of the most loving pastorly poetry that you will ever lay eyes on. Written through the love of Christ by “Pastor” Gary Lamb:

I want you to know that I think you are scum bags. I think you are lowlife degenerates who need a good butt kicking. Matter of fact I feel so strongly about the fact that you need a good butt kicking that I am volunteering to do it. I hope you believe in God because you should get on your knees and cry out to Him like never before because if we find you, I can promise we will kick the crap out of you. It won’t be pretty, it won’t be over quickly, and it will be very painful…. We are probably the only church you have ever heard of that will honestly break your legs once you are found.

You can read the rest of this mercy filled Christ exalting epistle at http://www.garylamb.org/2008/07/03/trailer-stolen/

Go ahead Iggy and tell us all how its was just a joke and hyperbole and that I am the sick one who needs help and how Pastor Lamb is an innocent victim of a mean ODM smear campaign.

Isaiah 6:9-10

PB,

You will be the one in your momma’s skirt then?

I will be looking for you. But really I still will not sit with you as I do not care to hang with someone of your character or lack of it.

iggy

Figures.

When confronted with the truth of what was said there’s not an actual response on the issue. Only misdirection.

Well, if that IS really what Mr. Lamb wrote…then he’s being a really big tool.

Then again, I’ve never heard of the guy until now…so so much for the “emergent subjectivist conspiracy”.

Actually, as a person who loves that conversation and has many friends who participate in it, I’ve yet to meet someone who doesn’t believe there is truth or acquiesces to a “relativistic” stance on things.

Then again, if all I did was drink from the toilet of ADM’s and other self-appointed gatekeepers who feel threatened by other people’s overshadowing book sales then I might have that POV.

just say’n…

Despite the idiocy of Mr. Lamb, it’s still nice to know that we can still count Mr. R as among those who see themselves as the new magisterium.

How very Popish of them all.

NC,

In the ODM glossary, “subjectivism” just means “disagrees with me.”

PB,

I hold two propositions to be true and I think they will blow your mind.

1.) ODMs are right. Much of evangelicalism today is silly, self-centered, self-help pop psychology.

2.) Ingrid Schleuter needs serious help. Christians should never call sinners “monsters” or “sociopaths.”

On a personal note: A friend of mine suffered from a personality disorder. She had been molested by her brother at a young age and her life was never the same again. So when Christians like Ingrid lob verbal hand grenades and make light of real mental illnesses, it pisses me off.

So what camp does that put me in, Pastorboy?

Go ahead Iggy and tell us all how its was just a joke and hyperbole and that I am the sick one who needs help and how Pastor Lamb is an innocent victim of a mean ODM smear campaign.

Well, you are smearing him, are you not? And what right do you have to that, exactly? Yes, his post is borne out of anger, and I can find things wrong with it, but I don’t know the man. You don’t either. You simply engage in drive-by attacks of your brothers and sisters. You are not exhibiting anything in the way of mercy or grace, and frankly, I am glad I’m not in your shoes. I hope you live up to your standards of perfection, and I hope that you have never said or written anything in anger that you later regretted.

You can keep your sick and twisted theology, thank you very much.

Still waiting for Chris R to justify attending a denomination named after a man who condoned the violent death of 10,000 peasants and yet sees fit to attack Gary Lamb over a joke…

and I bet I will wait a long time…

There is an off chance that there is more than one Bo Diaz in the world, no?

Heh.

Do you know how many Bo Diazes there are in Venezuala? He’s a legend there. Well, technically its Baudilio, but you know how white Americans butcher names.

Got it now. If you’re an ADM you’re free to run over the enemies of your country, but if you’re not an ADM then hyperbole about violence is a condemnable to hell offense.

I’m still waiting to hear from ADMs. Are any of you willing to condemn Lamb for believing that Satan is a married woman in Iowa?

BTW Don’t most ODM/ADM use the passage of Jesus clearing the temple as proof anger is godly at times? Why if this man and woman… and church were “satanic” would it not be right to be righteously angry?

Again… one standard for the ODM/ADM and one for everyone else…

iggy

I mean… think about this… the merchants were stealing from God at the temple… making profit and making it harder for people to come to God… Jesus took a whip and drove them out and over turned the tables…

Someone steals the trailer with the lights and sound system in it and Gary lets loose some strong words of anger against those that stole from his church which means these thieves stole from God…

And then the ODM gets more bent over the words of anger than the theft from God’s people. So much that they attack the victim…

iggy

Pastorboy Says:

#147

Are you saying his sermon was a joke?

Sounds like most other seeker sensitive sermons.

Have you no shame PB? Usually the slam against “seeker sensitive” sermons are that they “scratch itching ears”. So which is it?????

Of course unless you are admitting it was indeed a joke and not an angry sermon.

Unbelievable………….or not.

“However, I find it strange that there seems to be a fair amount of outrage against Ingrid, Ken, LR, campie, and others while circus church goat herders seem to get a pass by and large”

Please refernce my comments concerning Driscoll, McLaren, Paggit, and just recently my criticism of Bell’s new book. Those preachers do not get a “pass” here and I have NEVER had a comment moderated. Also, I comment once in a while on Steve Camp’s blog, Mike Ratliff’s, and sometimes on Pyro. Also John Hughes, Paul C., Pasterboy, Eric, and several others post regularly here with a negative perspective and people here engage them in a vigorous debate.

Now here is a little side note, I wonder why there are hardly any, if any, positive comments from the people you reference on this blog? Many contributors here like the ministry of Rob Bell and he is Joe’s pastor, and yet they allow negative comments about him and his views. Can you imagine someone saying something negative about McArthur on some of the other blogs?

I think, Chris, you allow debate on ET and that is good, but you can criticze this blog for their views but not for being closed to views opposite from their own.

“when she assumes he wants to explore deviancy – she crossed the line.”

She has no line, and in fact her brand of Christianity is deviant from the perspective of the Redeemer.

Can we echo with her the call to just ‘go away’ in the sense that he has done enough damage and should seek to be restored quietly?

Come on, John.
Anyone with a third grade reading comprehension level would discern that this is not what she is saying.

John, if you are looking for perfect repentance without any hint of human fallenness then I cannot point you to anyone. If you are suggesting that in the midst of a horror Haggard doesn’t in some way, knowingly or subconsciously, attempt to find some selfish ground I would agree, I have done the same thing in less horrific circumstances. But here is a sample of the Larry King interview that millions heard:

HAGGARD: Well, I made the worst mistake in my life. I embarrassed my wife and violated her and my children and everybody that trusted me and myself. I — I did some things that were contrary to the things that I believe. And — and I made a mess of my life.

KING: Did you not, though, preach against homosexuality?

T. HAGGARD: Yes, I did. And I…

KING: Wasn’t that hypocritical?

T. HAGGARD: It was hypocritical. Absolutely, it was. And the reason I did was because I have a belief system that I still have. I believe the bible is the word of God. I believe Jesus is the son of God. I believe in being born again, those things that are fundamental to Christianity.

And I knew that the bible was a set of ideals. The bible says God hates divorce, but we know that lots of fine, wonderful people have to go through the horrible experiences of divorce.

We know that the bible says pray continually. And I’m not giving it as an excuse, but I knew — I knew that the bible taught that sexuality was — I felt like God’s plan was for sexuality to be in a monogamous, heterosexual marriage. And I wanted that for myself. I wanted to please God. But at the same time, I had these other things going on and I ended up violating my wife and family and everything.

*******

So if anyone desires to look for inconsistencies in Haggards approach, if they are going to suggest some impure motives, and if they are going to point out imperfections in his post exposure journey, they will find much evidence that will take up some of their time and will not help forward the redemptive process.

But if we are all painfully transparent and honest, all of us fall infinitely short of exhibiting the commands of Scripture and surely the life of Christ. Haggard has lost his reputation forever, but if God can use a broken vessel for His glory then we should be the repairers of the breach, not the bearers of midnight torches coming to finish the job Satan has begun.

Haggard is still a sinner, and look around the room, he is in good company.

It may be a Mia Culpa, but it is bourne out of shame for a sin that He has committed and has rightly been criticized for.

Rightly criticized for? Are you freaking serious? Isn’t that what the world does? Isn’t that what the media does? Isn’t that what the enemy does? Hasn’t Christ himself rightly criticized our sin by, while we were yet sinners, demonstrating God’s love for us?

Rightly criticized for? You cannot be serious about that statement. If that is your general idea about what discernment is then you are more off your rocker than I gave you credit for.

Rightly criticized?

Can anyone here agree that while we may not echo the sentiments of Ingrid, that the larger problem with this story is that Haggard is acting in a way not unlike a secular celebrity or politician in self justification?

And can we agree here that the author of Slice is acting in a way that is not unlike the satan himself or the national enquirer or God in the way she accuses, reports and judges the actions and motives of the hearts of people for whom Christ died to demonstrate God’s love?

Rightly criticized? John, do you preach in a church? Do you know what you are even saying when you say ‘rightly criticized’?

That must be why you start your own churches and ‘open air preach.’ This inoculates you from any such ‘right criticism.’

Lame.

Should he be speaking in public at all? How soon can one expect to see him back in the pulpit? Should he be allowed back in the pulpit at all? Could he ever be an elder? Does his home church have an obligation to keep him in the congregation? Should he even be in the congregation that he once led?

I don’t want to give the impression that I think Haggard has done everything right. I do think he’s sorry from what I’ve seen, but there’s also a shallowness to him that’s hard to explain. I guess in a way it’s symptomatic of much of evangelical theology.

I don’t think he could ever really serve as a pastor again, unless there is a real change in his theology. Right now, it seems he is existing on a surface level. I hope he is able to get some time away from the media for his and his family’s sake.

Pastorboy,
You are as qualified to psychoanalyze me as Ingrid is to diagnose psychological disorders over the internet, so leave my motivations out of your rhetoric. You are as wrong on this issue as you are on every single issue you weigh in on.

We all must make a choice as to who God is. Is He a policeman or is He a doctor in this church age? An executionor or a redeemer? A judge or an advocate? A seeker of men’s souls or a seeker of men’s sins? Is He quick to judge or quick to forgive?

How in God’s dear Name He could have allowed the writings of an adulterer, a murderer, and a very poor father to slip into the Scriptures is beyond me!! Unless, just maybe, God is a redeemer of sinners and a restorer of saints. Maybe…

Whether or not PB has a valid point here is irrelevant. The issue is not Haggard and whether or not he should be doing this, that, or even the other thing… the issue is Ingrid’s attack.

My question is; whether or not you agree with the tenor of her attack, is questioning and judging his attention seeking behavior and stone throwing valid?

What happened to love for one’s enemies? Blessing one’s enemies? What might happen if when they caught the theives instead of breaking their legs they gave them the equipment and even threw in an extra CD player

?

Gosh. Can I take that back.? It comes across as awfully emergent on a second read.

Defense of things like these plays right in to the ODM’s charge that you do exactly the **same** thing for your home team as they do for theirs and will defend any thing the ODM’s attack. The standard seems to be “be anti-ODM”. If they are for it, we are against it. If they are against it, we are for it. I’ve never heard of this guy, but that was pretty sad. But on the other hand, I don’t need to know about this guy and it’s really none of my business as I do not live in his community or go to his church.

I didn’t see any defense of the stolen trailer diatribe here. Pastorboy tried to deflect the discussion into the hyperbolic joking of Lamb’s sermon in which he joked about violence against Satan (who is a married woman who was a member of his church in Iowa).

Speaking of which, when is one of the ADMs going to man up and excoriate Lamb for his unBiblical belief in Satan as a married woman in Iowa? It’d be as legitimate a beef as complaining about his joking.

I agree, John. The little I’ve seen of Lamb seems very fleshly. But I’m sure there are thousands like him who like the UFC, endorse fight club, and believe violence, verbal and physical, is what exhibits true, Godly manhood.

It seems like a trend.

#212 no. If you all want him to go away so badly the trick is to ignore him.

No to judging his “attention seeking behavior”… this assigns motives which we have no way of knowing.

I disagree….if he didn’t want attention, why would he be on the TV, Newspapers, and lecturing at Divinity Schools? We can judge actions, if not motives.

To me, Haggard struggle with homosexuality is just a symptom of larger and deeper issues that go down to the core of Americanized evangelicalism. To some, like Ingrid, this Americanized version of Christianity is the correct version of Christianity, so on one hand I’m not surprised when she reacts the way she has.

I disagree. Haggard is a result of Americanized Christianity, which brought us the goat herders and their entertainment church services made to put buts in the pews and avoiding any talk whatsoever of Biblical Righteousness and the cross, choosing instead to inflict pain on those who would dare steal from them…etc. etc.

That said, there is hope for Haggard, and all of us…if we will repent and trust alone in Jesus.

“choosing instead to inflict pain on those who would dare steal from them…etc. etc.”

His words were wrong, however I know many orthodox believers who own guns (like me) who would shoot someone who they caught them stealing a trailer on their property.

So if we find fault with Lamb’s words let us look inward as well.

Do not muzzle the goat.

A goat herder is worthy of his hire.

I’m always amazed at how ADMs speak authoritatively on topics which they have no way of knowing about.

In this thread alone we have:
The motives of Ted Haggard (even failing to watch source material like the HBO documentary doesn’t stop them).

Condemning entire churches to hell on the basis of 2 minutes of a sermon by their pastor (out of a 40 minute sermon no less).

This is what you call discernment?

Phil: I will say that I find the thought of Christians dredging this stuff up and posting it a lot more offensive than the actual rant itself. That whole mindset behind that is the thinking of, “thank God I’m not like this sinful pastor here.”

Completely agree.

*********

Iggy was defending Lamb’s rant.

*********

Phil: The ironic thing to me is that John can condemn Lamb for talking about beating up someone who stole his church trailer,

Wrong “John”.

Wrong “John”.

I was referring to PB (John Chisham), not you, just to clarify.

Jesus used those terms. sheep and goats, whear and tares, good fruit and bad. I would say the fruit of modern american evangelicalism is bad. Wouldn’t you agree?

I can’t say it’s all bad, but there is much that leaves much to be desired.

The thing is that I actually think that many of the things that Ingrid links to to such as topical sermons and the like seem very silly and stupid to me as well. But, our reasons for disliking them are very different from what I can tell. Whereas Ingrid sees them as a disgrace because they’re simply not the correct way to do church, I see them as people desperately clinging onto the past oddly enough.

In any case, I do not feel comfortable making a judgment call on who’s a sheep and who’s a goat. All I will say is that it seems many of the goats in that parable assume they are doing all the correct religious things. Unfortunately for them, it turns out they neglected the true heart of the Gospel by failing to exhibit love for God by loving their neighbor.

But they are not goats and tares until the judgment.
Up until that point, they are potential sheep and wheat.

I do find it interesting that Jesus said the sheep seemed surprised as did the goats.

The Scriptures declar that HE will then divide the sheep from the goats. Jesus told usm not to dig up tares because we do not know which is which.

Phil, is that from “Ragamuffin Gospel”?

Nathanael – It is interesting that in Jesus’s account, even the saved are perplexed by their good fortune. “When did we see you in prison and visited you?”

The unsaved expected to be saved, and the saved seem bewildered at their divine favor. Doesn’t seem to match up with the ambiance of today’s self righteousness, does it?

You’ve created an idol of self and your self-righteous judgment, literally worshiping your self and your ability do judge.

You’d do well not to stand in God’s place. He tends to get a bit irate when people or things take his place.

They take people who are admitedly goats, and in the case of seeker sensitive cater to their fleshly desires to attract them to their church. It is not much different with the emergent crowd, it is a come as you are for a god as you want him to be in your post modern milleu.

Do you even know who you’re attacking anymore? You seem to be ignorant about everyone who you rage against. I’m a little shocked its possible to be as wrong as you are.

People who live in glass houses should wear clothes.

237:

PB,

ummmm….how exactly did TH wound Ingrid and the like?
Prior to his public fall his church represented much of what gets criticized with respect to “mega-churches” that “only entertain” and “charismatic/pentecostal” so-called unbiblicalness, etc.

How did the “fall” of a man they had no real use for in the first place hurt them?

I don’t even know how his fall hurt me, or you, or anyone else except his own local church, his family, and himself?

Then again, he maybe he is hurting us by keeping the issue on the front burner so that our collective feet are held to the fire when it comes to actually extending hope, joy, forgiveness…the Gospel.

hmmm….

something to think about.

#264
Because he ‘represented’ (falsely) Evangelicals because of his presidency of the American Evangelical Association.

As I mentioned before, I have disavowed any membership I might have had in that group.

Any judgement of them is on the basis of their watered down theology and ecumenism with Muslims.

Any judgement of them is on the basis of their watered down theology and ecumenism with Muslims.

Proverbs 17:28

Not speaking in cliche’s- they wanted ecumenism with Muslims

Ecumenism (also ëcumenism, oecumenism, œcumenism, or even eucumenism) now mainly refers to initiatives aimed at greater religious unity or cooperation.
In its broadest sense, this unity or cooperation may refer to a worldwide religious unity; by the advocation of a greater sense of shared spirituality across the three Abrahamic faiths of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Most commonly, however, ecumenism is used in a more narrow meaning; referring to a greater cooperation among different religious denominations of a single one of these faiths.

HT Wikipedia

Most commonly, however, ecumenism is used in a more narrow meaning; referring to a greater cooperation among different religious denominations of a single one of these faiths.

I guess I am not the one narrow in this instance.

John – are you a member of a denomination that has been accused in several lawsuits of taking over the assets of some CMA churches (Vietnamese, Chinese, etc.) and been accused of being heartless? And are you a member of of a denomination where many pastors have set up church growth strategies in their CMA churches, some even dabbling with emergent views?

#268

Matthew 5:22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.

We can all throw verses around, chris.

Because he ‘represented’ (falsely) Evangelicals because of his presidency of the American Evangelical Association.

I thought I was going to be able to leave it alone but I can’t.

Represented falsely? How exactly?

He doesn’t represent me any more than you represent me when you’re out on street corners with your placards, tracts, and bait and switch sinner quiz.

Certainly he did damage to the cause of Christ which as I’m certain we all have done. And all of us will have to answer for that. Not to Larry King, Ingrid, PB, or even or families but to Christ.

Ingrid et al certainly are not advancing the cause themselves with their bunker house sniper brigade. The Christian Army the only army in the world that shoots their wounded. “SINNER! Ready, Aim, Publish”

#274

Yep, and like Charles Spurgeon, I am on the forefront of critiquing these churches within my denomination sliding down the slippery slope.

Matthew 5:22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.

Thanks PB I’ll take it under advisement.

#274

As a denomination church, we sign a revisionary clause which means if we cease to function as a C&MA church our assets revert to the district.

It is all very clearly spelled out, and legal.

The “revisionary clause” is a control mechanism that resembles the Church of Rome and dilutes the indigenous aspect of the local assembly.

In short is restricts the movement of the Holy Spirit and makes the denomination a business.

#285

Rick spelled it out pretty well;

We have as a denomination been guilty of using church growth methods that can be called seeker sensitive or purpose driven, in fact as an elder before I was a pastor I had to read PDC because we as a church applied these methods.

We also as a denomination have been educating some students at our colleges in ’spiritual formation’ which includes ‘contemplative prayer’ and lectio divina.

We also have a number of ‘emergent’ congregations.

Yep, our denomination is guilty as charged; but at its core is a denomination that loves Jesus as Savior Sanctifier, Healer, and Coming King, strives to reach the world for Jesus, and as individuals chase after Christ our Sanctifier.

My point, John, was that you belong to and support financially a denomination that in your view is compromising substantially. How then can you throw stones at those who belong to the AEA?

Having a denomination that cooperates on evangelistic efforts etc. is one thing, but having the assets tethered to the “mother church” is unscriptural and mirrors the RCC.

#283

I am not here to justify Ingrid.

In this comment stream, I am simply trying to provide some balance against the seeming rabid attacks against her supposed rabid attacks!

Can’t you all who comment against Ingrid’s perceived rage and ragings are doing the same thing, no matter how much you cry that you are not? Especially when you get personal and go up against her as a person and her divorce and her this and her that.

Yep. You become what you hate. I truly wonder what a non-believer would think looking at this site and its comment streams.

My point, John, was that you belong to and support financially a denomination that in your view is compromising substantially. How then can you throw stones at those who belong to the AEA?

Yes, that’s the crazy thing – somehow these people can justify making GBA attacks on everyone and their brother, but somehow they manage to ignore all their own spurious connections.

Ingrid is Lutheran. My wife grew up in Lutheran circles and never even heard anything like a basic explanation of having a relationship with Christ in any services or church camps. They believed they were saved because they baptized as infants. That’s much more dangerous theologically than having a pastor dressed in a clown costume. Yet, people like Ingrid seem to have selective moral outrage that always favors their own clan. It’s nice how that works out for them…

#299

“We will quit doing it if she quits doing it”

I get it. So Jr. High of ya’ll.

I will live a Christian life if she will live like I think a Christian should.

Umm Hmmm

#299

“We will quit doing it if she quits doing it”

I get it. So Jr. High of ya’ll.

I will live a Christian life if she will live like I think a Christian should.

Umm Hmmm

Oh brother…

You don’t get satire so why would I expect you to actually get logic?

No judgement? No attacks on Ingrid personally?

Bo Diaz:

When are you going to get around to applying that to people like Ingrid and Steve Camp who usurp the power of elders and yet are divorced?

Pastor”boy keeps running and dodging. He refuses to confront Ingrid and Steve Campy on their elder usurping ways, and he refuses to answer the question as to why Haggard hasn’t felt the grace of God because he condemns and yet all of his little ADM friends condemn far more regularly and viciously yet have felt the grace of God.

“Pastor” boy,
Is Ingrid living in a reconciled relationship with her ex husband?
In fact, you even link to CRN.com which Ingrid posts on. Clearly you are recommending the writings of an unrepentant divorcee.

Come on Pastor Boy, go FOIA up Ingrid’s divorce and post that too!

We’ve already seen what little value the ADMs put on marriage, we shouldn’t be surprised that ADMs attack anyone who does.

I am only up to 61 with one commenter….Should I continue?

I believe Bo was using hyperbole to make a point about vitriolic legalism. I and most here have never referred to that aspect of Ingrid’s past, in fact she seems like a good wife and mother and has adopted needy children as well. That should not be questioned.

That is a side issue and a straw man, take it up with Bo but his comments are not written by the overseer of this blog. I would mention that “sociopath” and “monster” trumps “divorcee”.

I am only up to 61 with one commenter….Should I continue?

Well, go ahead…

We don’t delete comments here, except in the rarest of occasions (which, ironically was to protect you), so we don’t really censor what people say. Bo isn’t a writer here, so we’re not responsible for it.

I would also note that I have a hard time seeing those things as attacks, especially how you raked Amy Grant and Sandi Patti over the coals earlier.

What you and the ADMs do is the equivalent of poking a bear with a stick. You then act surprised if the bear bites you.

The first was unsolicited by anybody.

Thus my use of the word “most”…

“Blindingly white teeth”

I have to admit that this one actually made me laugh when I first read it. As if having white teeth is somehow a measure of spiritual health or lack thereof…

#315

My point…which you won’t see, is that the ‘protection’ of Haggard (and others) always goes to a personal attack (Ingrid’s marriage status). Neil did a fine job in the OP giving his opinion on Ingrid without attacking, or even getting personal.

I don’t agree with the OP, but I do not attack Neil personally.

People agree with the OP, and go on to attack Ingrid on an unrelated topic.

How is that any different than what you say she does?

The challenge is irreleevant, because my definition would be when a person goes after someone personally on an unrelated topic, Like I demonstrated ms. Diaz did, and others did as well. That to me is far worse than what you perceive Ingrids attacks to be.

“That to me is far worse than what you perceive Ingrids attacks to be.”

That, my friend, sums it all up. In the words of the Princess Bride:

“We are at an impasse”.

(But be assured, I know where the poison is and it isn’t on this blog)

I don’t agree with the OP, but I do not attack Neil personally.

People agree with the OP, and go on to attack Ingrid on an unrelated topic.

How is that any different than what you say she does?

Let me type slowly…

Ingrid is being judged by the same measure in which she judges. This is a biblical concept.

The original challenge came to you in your defense of Ingrid. It was asked, rightfully, why you don’t have the same issue with Ingrid as you do with Haggard? To which you began the downward spiral of “Hey you guys do it too”.

This is not complicated. Is Ingrid’s divorce out of bounds? Maybe. I would say that when one acts like a Pharisee (see white washed tomb, clean on the outside, burdens that they don’t help to lift, etc…) they should not be surprised when it’s pointed out that “Hey you sin/sinned too”. Mind you with much less of the mind numbing, vitriolic, adjectives.

if he wants to hold people to a standard of moral perfection, than she herself should exhibit that standard in her own life.

Straw man.

Ingrid is being judged by the same measure in which she judges. This is a biblical concept.

Who is supposed to do the judging? In that passage, it is God who will judge those who judge wrongly.

Ted Haggard’s feet to the the fire and exhibit so little in the way of grace, when she is willing to overlook other people’s offenses in the same areas.

She was going after Haggard for being divorced? I must have read the wrong article. I thought she was going after him (as I pointed out) for attacking the ‘Religious Right’ and going on a press junket to proclaim that he has repented and demonstrating thus by going after the rotten people who have too high a moral standard.

Haggard’s wife’s forgiveness, and their continuing commitment to each other, is an open testimony to the power of Christ in a world that has little value for marriage.

Who is supposed to do the judging? In that passage, it is God who will judge those who judge wrongly.

Exactly… someone should inform Ingrid and the other heresy hunters of that fact.

She was going after Haggard for being divorced? I must have read the wrong article. I thought she was going after him (as I pointed out) for attacking the ‘Religious Right’ and going on a press junket to proclaim that he has repented and demonstrating thus by going after the rotten people who have too high a moral standard.

Pretend to be smart, OK. Haggard isn’t divorced, but he did commit a sin that’s a moral failure. I don’t know all the details of Ingrid’s divorce, and I don’t want to, but for someone who has experienced moral failure of her own (we all have) she is exhibiting no grace in her treatment of Haggard. Haggard isn’t “going after” anybody. Repeating a lie again doesn’t make it true.

I was baptized as a Lutheran, I went to a Christian and Missionary Alliance school, I was ordained Southern Baptist, and I have read one of Rob Bell’s books.

I am the consummate expert on all things spiritual!!

The only point I was making about Ingrid being Lutheran is that using her same GBA standards, she should condemn herself for having ties with such a spiritually dead institution. She’s certainly condemned others with much less evidence.

Haggard is going after the religious right (whoever that is)

At least, that is how I read the article. Words mean things, even in this ‘post modern’ era.

Any believer who cannot see a distinct problem with reconciling Ingrid’s words with the Spirit of God has a skewed view of Christianity.

Rick Frueh circa A.D. 2009

# 335

no, I am not an emergent, Phil.

I go for the literal and historical interpretation of the Bible….and of the Newspaper.

By the way, I think we’ve answered Neil’s question in this thread. Can God be embarrassed? After seeing the willingness of some in this thread to justify the attack of a wounded brother, I think the answer is resoundingly “yes”…

I wonder which he’s embarrassed by more – the fallen pastor who then ‘repents’ and proclaims his repentance to the world by going after people who he used to be a part of…and demonstrates his repentance through television, newspaper, and lectures, and justifies his sin by a supposed sexual assault by another man, and shows that the has not been changed because he describes his sexuality as undefined.. or the attacking sister who sees no sin in her behavior.

There…fixed it. I wonder also.

PB,

Pointing out bad behavior by Ingrid isn’t “personal attacks”…no matter how much you insist otherwise.

Her sin in this matter is apparent.

Asking for justification for it, especially in light of actual facts about her concrete behavior is not attacking. It’s taking the clear reality of what she has done and is doing and addresses it.

Taken to it’s logical conclusion, your attitude about this must mean that all criticism is “personal” and a form of “hate filled attack”….and therefore should probably stop altogether.

In that case…

You first, then the ODM’s, and then there’s no reason for us to remain.

Until then I suspect this site will not lay down so that you can all go on glorifying yourselves with your ministry of anger.

hey guys, interesting thread here. Maybe you could start up a sister site called Slice of Slice of Laodicea. There are more than enough posts here for a whole other website! Not sure if that’s a compliment or not. Just an observation.

Rick, I liked your #2 post. A lot of wisdom there. A lot more than SoL it seems. Thanks for posting the Larry King transcript too. I haven’t seen the TH interview or documentary. What I will say is there are many harsh words on SoL, a little lacking in grace. It seems it’s very difficult to comment on motivation so maybe Ingrid could stay away from that. Sometimes she gets it right, but on this occasion her post had no space for Ted’s repentance, when we always need to hope and pray for others’ repentance…and our own repentance too!

Neil,

But you miss the point…Haggard gave them fuel for these attacks by his behavior. He is giving them more fuel on His current media tour, even joining in on the attacks. I argue that the fruit of repentance is grace, and grace that is extended outward- even to those who he believes he has excoriated.

…submit himself to the restoration work of a local church under a board of elders and live a quiet and peaceful life.

Considering all the respect you show for local churches and their boards of elders I’m going to assume this was an understated joke on your part.

Lets review a bit shall we?

Ted Haggard criticizes the religious right its because he hasn’t experienced the grace of God. Ingrid criticizes the church, and its because she has experienced the grace of God.

Ted Haggard needs to go away and live a peaceful life away from any sort of public statement because he has sinned. Ingrid and Steve Camp have divorced, and they need to continue their public ministries that consist of usurping the role of the local church and the boards of elders.

And the reason why you won’t dare to rebuke Ingrid or Steve is because they’re not a part of your church. But the reason why you will publicly rebuke Ted Haggard is because…. oh right, because…. why is it again?

Your reasoning is as poor as your theology.

Haggard is under the authority of the church leadership of Tommy Barnett I believe. He mentioned that so they must be blamed.

But you miss the point…Haggard gave them fuel for these attacks by his behavior. He is giving them more fuel on His current media tour, even joining in on the attacks. I argue that the fruit of repentance is grace, and grace that is extended outward- even to those who he believes he has excoriated.

Haha! Again, this is what Satan does with “fuel” for attacks. It is not what God or Jesus does.

The people that you are defending look more like the Enemy they claim to be fighting against than they do the King they claim to be fighting for.

“The accuser of the brethren” shall be known by his/her blog….

So let’s get this straight, a man gets caught in immorality and is brought way down low. He confesses and repents of not only the sex, but he realizes how he was blind in other areas. And so now he has a perspective that could be valuable, but he shouldn’t share it?

Don’t former drug addicts share about the harmful effects of drugs? I really believe that many believers are not satified until