One of the reasons I am convinced that the ADM’s of the blogosphere are not, have not, and cannot be ministers in any useful sense (such as located, local church ministry) is because of the very nature of the ‘work’ they do. So at the Boar’s Head Tavern, Paul McCain wrote:
But it got me to thinking. Where is the line between pathological negativity and the necessary identification of error? And it got me to thinking, when am I so caught up in finding wrong that I miss what is right [my emphasis]
People who are ‘in’ ministry simply cannot engage in the nefarious ‘work’ of unbridled criticism. Why? Because those who are ‘in’ ministry know all too well the rigors of the ministry. Why? Because those ‘in’ ministry understand all too well how much the criticism hurts and, to be sure, how much of it is nonsense and simply untrue. Why? Because those called to ministry had better have a profound working theology of grace.
I think it is tremendously important to keep ministry in perspective because ministry done by ‘ministers.’ Ministers, those who are of that un-hallowed club of so-called professional clergy, are necessarily weak, fragile, broken, and nervous people. Did you catch that? People. I think it is this ‘person’ aspect that is altogether forgotten when it comes to preachers of the Gospel. Preachers, or ‘ministers’, are simply forbidden, however subtly, to be human.
Ministers are not allowed to make mistakes, lose their temper, have bad days, or sin. Ministers are called upon by congregations to be the most legalistic bunch of Christians there is. Preachers are expected to live by the rules and die by the rules; preach the rules; expound the rules. (Sadly, most preachers are not allowed to actually enforce the rules and when they do, well…use your imagination.) When preachers start talking about grace, asking for grace, or offering grace that’s when congregations, and ADM’s, start getting really antsy.
Ministers are the leaders, so we’re told, and if they fail somehow, preach a bad sermon, be at all emotional, or discouraged…well, we can’t have that because ‘we’ might lose those folks who visited the church on Sunday. It’s much better for the preacher to be fake and have those visitors think everything is alright than for the preacher to be real and risk that they might go to the church down the road. Personally speaking, the dehumanizing of humans who preach is one of the most insidious of all the services provided by the ADM’s of the church, both those in the blogosphere and those in the pew.
A blog friend of mine, Jason Goroncy, posted an absolutely brilliant post at his blog the other day titled: The Scandal of Weak Leadership: A Sermon on 2 Corinthians 11:16-12:10. I think you should read it and be encouraged, especially if you stand week after week in any kind of pulpit. In the post, Jason wrote:
This is the sort of ad that I can imagine the church in Corinth writing. How disappointed they must have been when they got Paul! He was not the eloquent speaker for which they had hoped. Instead of providing the ’strong’ leadership they wanted, he treated them with gentleness. And while he was prepared to teach about spiritual gifts, he hardly ever talked about his own ’spiritual’ experiences, even less gloat about them. And rather than mixing with the influential, he insulted them. Even worse – he would not take their money!
Instead of getting Arnold Schwarzenegger or Napoleon or Takaroa, in Paul the Corinthians were given a weak, sick, persecuted, afflicted and bruised human being. And then to add insult to injury, Paul had the audacity to tell them that his weakness was actually proof that he was genuine! [Are you kidding me?--jerry]
[...]
And as for that mysterious ‘thorn in the flesh’, who knows? The commentators have a field day here: Paul had a theological opponent; Paul had an unbelieving wife; Paul had poor eyesight; Paul had homosexual urges; Paul had malaria – all of which are possibilities, but must remain speculations. Whatever it was, and however much Paul at times wished it removed, it served as a constant reminder to him that the integrity and effectiveness of his ministry would rest not on his worthiness or credentials but on God’s grace.
There’s that word again: Grace! Jason’s paragraph that follows the above quote is simply beyond words in its brilliance. Here’s a snippet: “Here is grace’s way – that God has a deliberate policy of positive discrimination towards nobodies, that the kingdom of God belongs to the poor and that the earth will be inherited by the meek.” Yet the ADM’s of the blogosphere and pew continue to believe that weakness is just that: weakness. They refuse to see weakness for what it is: God’s grace.
I love God’s grace. It is no mystery to me any longer why last year I was able to take one seminary class and it was Doctrine of Grace. It is one thing to know grace. It is something else entirely to experience it, believe it, and conduct oneself in accordance with what one has believed and experienced. In my estimation, there are some people in the world of blogs who simply have not experienced or believed God’s grace. I’m convinced of it. Furthermore, they simply do not understand that in their fervor to protect God’s orthodoxy, they are destroying the ones called to proclaim it.
I wonder who is really held captive?
The coup de grace, where power-criticism is finally silenced, comes at the end when Jason quotes from Henri Nouwen, (*sarcasm* alert) which I know automatically disqualifies the sermon as orthodox and legitimate. Still, it is worth repeating and perhaps committing to memory:
The way of the Christian leader is not the way of upward mobility in which our world has invested so much, but the way of downward mobility ending on the cross … Here we touch the most important quality of Christian leadership in the future. It is not a leadership of power and control, but a leadership of powerlessness and humility in which the suffering servant of God, Jesus Christ, is made manifest … To come to Christ is to come to the crucified and risen One. The life-giving apostle embodies in himself the crucifixion of Jesus in the sufferings and struggles he endures as he is faithful and obedient to his Lord. So Paul preaches the crucified and risen Jesus, and he embodies the dying of Jesus in his struggles to further point to the Savior. His message is about the cross and his life is cruciform, shaped to look like the cross … I leave you with the image of the leader with outstretched hands, who chooses a life of downward mobility. It is the image of the praying leader, the vulnerable leader, and the trusting leader. May that image fill your hearts with hope, courage, and confidence. [Henri J.M. Nouwen, In the Name of Jesus: Reflections on Christian Leadership (New York: Crossroad, 1989), 62-3, 70, 73.]
So be encouraged you who preach or you who find yourself at the barrel end of an ADM AK-47. You are in good company. I send this blog post out to all those who have found themselves the subject of negative or critical or downright hateful blog posts this week. I send it out to all those who have no voice of their own or who cannot defend themselves or choose not to. I also thank Jason for writing this sermon and preaching it.
And finally, a word to the ADM’s of the church, both in blogs and pews, learn about God’s grace. I promise it will free you from that nagging, persistent feeling you have that your ‘ministry’ is to stand guard at the door of God’s throne room in order to prevent any weak, sinful, decrepit loser from finding God’s grace time and time again. It will free you to be so caught up beholding what is right that you won’t even have time to look for what is wrong.
Soli Deo Gloria!!
154 Comments(+Add)
Jerry,
A thought provoking post and yet . . . balance is needed. Scriptures provide us with examples of both grace and correction. Error needs to be confronted. We all need to be held accountable. People who publish sermons or blogs to the world are accountable to the world. And yet to personally attack individuals (and not just their theology, or lack there of) with such venome as we have seen of late has to be wrong. And as Rick has so eloquently pointed out on several occasions to re-publish and rehash individuals sins is just purient and wrong. So, yes, we need both grace and correction, but I would err to grace and all needs to be done in love. I have not seem much of that from the ODMs lately.
And I will say this. He who lives for publicity and markets himself will die by publicity. He who markets his ministry as a business for gain will receive his just reward. It’s not necessarily right, but it is what it is.
John,
This post is balance.
jerry
Well I would say that balance involves introspection. To review the criticisms if providence has brought them to your attention, filter them through the Word, keep the gold and burn the chaff. For every minister that is unjustly abused it seems there is a minister that is abusive himself. For every minister that whose motives are pure, there are ministers who’s goal is to fleece the flock. For every Biblical admonition to pay double honor to the worthy elder there are warnings to be on guard for wolves. For every admonition to love there is an admonition to inspect fruit.
I learned to look to God instead of man after I lost the 2nd pastor I looked up to, to adultry and a third to an arrest for gay cruising. And yet I learned to trust in God and not man, have not lost my faith, and understand we are all just pilgrims on this journey.
I have learned to look at my own sin and not point out others. I have looked at my own failings and learned to forgive much in others. But I have also learned the hard way that vocational ministry is a priveledge and not a right. That saints who sin will not loose their salvation, but may certainly be disqualified from holding certain offices. I have learned not to lay hands upon anyone too hastily and thereby share responsibility for the sins of others like the adulterous pastor I went with to start a new church out of a misunderstanding of how to apply grace and mercy resulting in the same paster committing adultry again in the new start-up church.
And yet I still believe and trust in God. Love and support my current pastors, but do indeed hold them to the Biblical standards regarding their office. What many of the ODMs are doing is horrendous, but I will not turn a blind eye to discernment in the name of a mistaken definition of “love”. I understand that this is not what you are advocating and your article has many good points
Again, I personally stive for balance in these matters.
John,
Thanks. Your point of view is welcomed. Grace and peace.
jerry
Negativity can become addictive and an obsession. And growing within consistent negativity is always pride and self righteousness. It reduces one’s spiritual eyesight to a very limited lanscape, and even reduces your capacity to receive, much less offer, the wonderful love and grace of God.
It is very difficult to be a discerner and remain humble and gracious since it tends to breed arrogance and self assuredness camouflaged as spiritual boldness. And there are many teachings today that are clearly false and should Christ tarry they will continue and get worse. And yet we are not called to shuffle off the commands of our Lord concerning humility, love, mercy, and grace simply because we are remaining true to other doctrines of the faith.
Last year Rick Warren paid for some bloggers we know to come and visit Saddleback. These bloggers were highly critical of Warren and yet he still desired to speak with them. I believe only Chris Rosebrough went. As I recall Ingrid wrote a post extolling the virtues of her refusal and printed the letter of scorn she sent Warren.
When Chris returned he observed how gracious Warren was to them and he was lambasted by his own crowd since most would not even give Warren credit for that becaue they assumed Warren’s hospitality was a manipulative ploy. That type of attidtude is what happens when negativity becomes your constant motivation. You cannot bear the thought that one of your prime targets exhibits anything worthwhile, and as you mentioned, Jerry, you cannot see, much less admit, anything is right.
Negativity eventually treats Jesus and His ministry as a theology to be defended, not a lifestyle to be lived. The cross becomes an argument rather than a personal goal and the Bible becomes a rock rather than a mirror. And as John noted with Ingrid, this type of negativity can become more and more vitriolic and ungracious, and yes, ultimately unchristian. And in the end, the faith that you desired to earnestly contend for has been dismantled within the very structure of its defense.
There are false doctrines and teachers out there to be sure, but there is also a darkened world that needs to see the redemptive light of the Risen Christ. When Paul began some of his epistles with “grace and peace to you” was he offering unmerited favor or earned reward? The very nature of grace does not consider its object, no, grace is fully dependent upon its giver alone.
In the end, many of the discernment bloggers are talented researchers and writers, and had they chosen to diligently seek to be humble and gracious while still dealing with important issues they may well have been so much more productive. Here is a phrase from the inauguration that got my attention:
“know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy.”
Sometimes I wonder if I am getting too caught up in the negativity of defending against constant negativity. In other words, I do assess whether I in particular, and this site in general, are guilty of being “just like them.”
To help combat that I try and mention points of agreement when I post… and sometimes when I comment. I remind myself that the ADM’s are brothers and sisters in Christ… and the point of posting is not to win an argument, or trash another part of the body. The point is to expose error, possible sin, and defend other brothers and sisters from ungracious and often unChristlike behavior. When it gets too much – I take a break.
As far as this site is concerned I think it s a good balance when we post things that are not addressed at ADM’s; a book review, a biblical lesson, or even a reminder to ourselves like this post is.
John Hughes:
#1 and #3. Maybe it is because your “and yet” seems to be saying “yes but” I am a little put off by your comments to Jerry. Jerry did say
That is a direct cut and paste job from the OP. Unbridled criticism would seem to lead to the balance you are calling Jerry to, no?
Joe,
I agree and will state again that Jerry’s article was very good. I will also keep coming back to balance. Ingrid is out of balance or worse — topsy turvey. She will reap what she sows and I am afraid for her family. I can just imagine what her sons will do when they leave her nest. My parents were pretty balanced and moderate and I still went a little “wild” in college. Didn’t a lot of us? Of course no one can see the future and hopefully that won’t happen but I have seen it time and again in my 50+ years. My last pastor did just the opposite, he doted on his kids and was very lenient. They grew up total jerks. Again, I come back to balance.
Mercy / grace / love / compassion / forgiveness
Judgement / discernment / discipline
Love for all, condemnation for none.
Rick #5. Awesome
The word ministry is diakonia which can mean a servant, a waiter, an attendant, or a host. It is permiated with the idea of humility and service.
A question:
If you were a waiter serving a customer and you saw him holding his fork the wrong way, would you:
A. Make snide remarks and call him names
B. Hollar at him loudly
C. Tell everyone in the restaurant
D. Humbly attempt to assist him*
* If you choose D you cannot do A, B, or C. But you can do A, B, and C together but without including D. In short, D is exclusive.
@ comment 6,
I agree. As the old hymn goes, “We may see the signs, but see not HIM”. Let’s devote ourselves to building and edifying the Body, rather than retaliating against the destruction done by reckless men.
Isn’t pallin’ around on Facebook a compromise in and of itself by GBA standards? I guess Ingrid made a drive by contribution to this McCain’s facebook page. So Ingrid will not attend the Christian booksellers convention, but it’s OK to wallow around on facebook looking for anything and everything to attack?
Interesting…
It makes me happy and does my heart good to know that Ken cares enough to make up a new name for us. And it’s good to know he still read us.
Love Ken, love him, love him
What name?
yikes…facebook…well, there’s another reason why my privacy settings are high.
12:
It seemed good in the Lord to lurk…
nc – The discerning lurk.
I believe Facebook is the mark of the beast.
Speaking of KS…
has anyone else noticed that he doesn’t link to Steve Camp anymore?
Over at Extreme Theology there continues a controversy , complete with open letters and back and forths about some radio squabble within one of the sects of Lutheranism. Here are some of my questions:
Isn’t this what can happen when the local church, like John’s CMA church, is tethered legally to hundreds of others commonly called a “denomination”? Also, how Biblical is it to make elder disagreements public in order to elicit support from the ecclesiastical proletariat? And finally, what damage do we do to the representation of Jesus Christ by constructing the church as a legislative body not unlike the American government complete with all the open wranglings and bickerings?
It just seems like such a waste of time and energy and is a direct result of denominationalism which usually morphs into a kind of control.
You asked, I’ll answer. A LOT!
It’s continually surprising (okay not surprising) to me that the ADM’s point fingers at others for their perceived “business model” then completely miss that a vast majority of American Evangelical churches have borrowed heavily from western ideas, government and education, to ensure “spiritual development”.
So as not to appear ignorant of history I realize that the church borrowed from culture and the culture borrowed from church but ultimately we’ve ended up with a caricature of the kingdom.
chris – the cultural “borrowings” should be as an enhancement to understandings and outreach. Almost all churches do it including signs to special music. But the actual structure of the local church, designed to allow the Spirit to have His way, must be as Biblical as can be discerned. Searching the mind of Christ in this world is difficult, but when we have constructed the church as a 508 BC Athenian government we have adopted the culture as opposed to the dictates of the Word.
Prayer and fasting combined with patience and humility seems so medievil and archaic when it is so much more expedient to play power games with post modern political accoutreuments. And to your point, chris, those that live in glass houses…etc..
OK – a lot of you guys have added me to your Facebook page. Now I am from the Bronze Age, so I really do not know how it all works. Where is a page that tells how to use and navigate on the Facebook page?
Do any of you have Ingrid as a friend??
You could try looking here. Once you set up your profile, it’s pretty intuitive. To see other people’s profiles, you just have to click on their names.
I have thought about it… but I am sure she won’t…
Though for kicks I asked Ken Silva who apparently did not want me as a friend….
And it is fine not to accept someone if you do not want them as a friend… someone here kept requesting me as a friend and I ignored him… I mean why give him more access to me?
iggy
Did Ingrid read the book is willfully lying or is she just making stuff up? In discussing the book “Quitting Church” written by a Washington Times religion writer she writes the following:
But, just this small excerpt on page 13 from the book on Amazon totally flips her thesis on it’s ear:
Have you no shame Ingrid?
Ingrid – making stuff up? Please John, that is an unwarranted slur.
Now this is, in her own words, the essence of her entire life:
Listening to, looking for, and providing a voice for gossip, complaints, murmurings, and all things negative is the core of her “ministry”. And she is always faithful to make the point “as I have said” in many posts, because she is on the cutting edge of the negative technology. You might say she is the Robert E. Peary of the negative frontier!
And on her current post she lights upon a story of a Muslim man beheading his wife. As usual she uses that opportunity to attack the religion as a whole, as if the Christian readers were considering Islam as an option. No mention of the great spiritual need of those people either.
But here is the type of sarcastic and unfeeling verbiage that identifies her self righteous core:
She has morphed into a female Don Rickles, only she means it.
BTW – Ingrid’s post about the husband beheading his wife is titled:
The Religion of Peace (Pieces) Strikes Again
Ingrid is to blog journalism what Salvador Dali was to painting!
I’m curious to know the basis for her claim that the individual is “otherwise sane.”
Did Ingrid confirm that the individual had no history of mental illness? I did not read that claim in the article she linked to. Are there other articles she read but did not cite? Were there individuals she interviewed who informed her the man had no history of mental illness?
Factual claims need to be substantiated. It’s like the article she recently posted, “When the World Has More Integrity than the Church.”
Indeed.
MG – factual assumptions are just fact on some blogs. And when the secular news article gets it wrong the blog author quickly covers her tracks with a “at some point we must trust the news articles” defense.
It’s the blog version of the Simpson’s.
Actually, a typical episode of The Simpsons contains a lot more truth than truth than many blog articles.
Ingrid destroyed her own credibility years ago. She’s now complaining that the owner of the video she linked to “censored” comments because they’re in denial.
So what should we conclude about Ingrid since she doesn’t just censor comments on a video, she censors all comments for every single post she writes.
Just add this to the host of lies, deceptions and inconsistencies that don’t just characterize her “ministry”, it is the foundation she has built on.
This is an insult to Dali…
I’m a little curious if there’s anything Ingrid won’t say. She managed to take a book that is a condemnation of the very churches she champions and make it mean the opposite of what it means.
She hurls the most venomous insults she can think of (lets just be glad she’s not terribly creative) against churches living and preaching the gospel .
She sicced corporate lawyers on a website she didn’t like.
What won’t she do? What speech is so vile she won’t use it? Because I’m not seeing a bottom to this poisonous well.
Personally, I preferred this article (due to the fabulous picture caption and tasteless headline).
An this seems appropriate:
I love the Naked Pastor’s cartoons.
Dave Hayward is a real gem.
Ya think?
Translation: When a Muslim beheads his wife it substatiates my claim about Islam.
Morbid, reactionary, illogical, unproductive, salacious, and most of all…typical.
40:
but she’s cited Muslims as pictures of modesty and appropriate gender role definition before…
Very, very, very strange:
“Methinks your burqas are sublime, but the beheadings–not so much”.
The divorced Ingrid Schleuter asks how we can claim to support the sanctity of marriage when a politician does something different than she said when running for office.
Just one more hypocritical polemic to add to the pile.
Also, how she can in good conscience (does that word even apply to Ingrid anymore?) condemn people for not worrying about consequences when she works for her family’s radio station after her own questionable past is just amazing.
And in another post she piles on Sarah Palin’s daughter and demands more shame. She fails (purposefully?) to notice that in the interview the young girl says she hopes her story disuades other girls from getting pregnant.
Yea, that’s the life of Jesus Christ – demand more shame.
Bristol Palin is Ingrid’s new “Miley” obssession. The moral “gatcha” police always trump the “I will pray for you” contingent. And this from the Frueh translation:
“The Son of man came not into the world to be the moral policeman, but that the immoral world might find redemption through Him.”
What kind of Christianity believes that the Holy Spirit guides believers to listen through the secular peepholes to find some verbal misstep among God’s people so they can pounce upon those imperfections and enounciate them from the spiritual bourgeoisie downward to the proletariat. The image of a believer holding a judgment glass against the wall in order to hear something against another person is distasteful at best and spiritually psychotic at worst.
The self righteous bottom feeders continue to troll the airwaves, looking for whom they may devour. I am certainly glad much of what I said as a teenager wasn’t recorded or picked up and spread publicly for all to judge. There is no grace, no forbearance, no forgiveness, no mercy, and certainly no love. When will some believers return to the Person of Christ that is portrayed in the gospels?
The answer, my friend, is blowin’ in the wind…
#23
I have her as a friend, along with Rick Freuh.
Every part of the spectrum.
Dead Catchers and Washed up rock stars are the only ones I do not have represented!
She may be your friend, John, but she is no friend to sinners, as was our Master.
#47
If that was true, Rick, it is all the more reason to befriend someone, is it not?
I am no better than anyone else. I am a simple sinner saved by grace, and being sanctified by God. Who am I?
Look, I am the polar opposite of Tony Jones. I disagree with him regularly online and in person. The same can be said of Doug Pagitt. I m still their friend, though I disagree.
And I am Ken Silva’s friend, also.
#49
too bad Ken actively picks and rejects his friendships as he did with Iggy.
Blessings to you for passing Ken’s test.
#50
The only test I need pass has been passed for me by Christ. I get the results of the test; His righteousness, which means I get to pass into heaven when I die, and I am becoming more like Christ as I live.
Too bad you don’t actually believe that, at least as it applies to other people.
Dead Catcher,
You shouldn’t try and assign motives!
You don’t know if I believe it or not.
By your response towards me, I wonder if you believe it….
I believe the Scripture commands us to mark those who cause divisions…and avoid them. You will notice that Ingrid’s blog carries much more gossip than does Ken’s, at least Ken mostly addresses issues. And Ingrid is a female without a covering and without authority questioning the ordination of pastors and other elders.
And the “orthodox” pastors expose their bias when they not only refuse to correct her, they embrace her “ministry”. Anyone who embraces Ingrid’s style of Christianity has a different view of the faith than do I.
Yep…
This is how we know we are in the faith, by our love for our brothers.
1 John 4 Beloved, let us love one another for love is of God, and everyone who loves is born of God, and knows God. He who does not love does not know God, for God is love.
Yep….thats true love
Yep, this is surely meant to bring brothers in Christ together, to not divide them. Just like this is!
I think a real Christian who loves people enough to tell the truth in love wrote this and he was mocked for it.
Yep. Godly love.
#55
Just like the lies you posted about Tim Reed?
Hypocrite
PB (#53):
Dang!!!!!! There’s another monitor ruined by a spit-take.
Is there anything more self righteous and human centered than posting a song about the greatness of God and making it a platform to attack others and lift up human talent? The whole post is about the singer, not the God of whom he sings, which is what she constantly laments about in others. It is code speak for “god delights in my style of worship”.
http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/encouragement/how-great-thou-art/
ummm…
I’m confused about this running “Dead Catcher” thing…
Who is this “Dead Catcher” and “washed up rock star”?
I didn’t assign motives. I pointed out that you don’t extend that sort of theology outside of the three people you agree with online, and the 25 people who attend your church.
55:
I assume you’ve addressed your concerns about itodyaso to iggy?
I mean…you actually can do that, right?
nc,
PB is trying to be funny and accusatory at the same time. He insists that Bo Diaz is not using his real name but the name of a dead baseball catcher. So PB keeps using the worn out joke as a accusatory tool to say that Bo Diaz is fictitious and a liar…
But then that is my take on the situation that has gone on for way too long.
iggy
Still confused about the Dead Catcher and the rock star…
ah, we must have crossed comments…
got it on the dead catcher…
was Bo a rock star at one point?
Re: the cartoon that looks like a 2 year old drew (and that is an insult to 2 year olds)
Is the “artist” saying the Law is satanic? Is the Law the devil’s idea?
Psa 119:47 for I find my delight in your commandments, which I love.
David must have been one of those bible-worshippers.
Rom 7:12 So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.
This blog is a monument to dead theology, and and ten pounds of talmudic/open theist/ arminian abstraction in a five pound bag.
nc,
about 55… the difference is that I do love Ken and that chart is just showing that maybe Ken should not be a pastor.
I have some of my best friends be honest with me and it stings, but the honesty has made me a better person. Now, if Ken Silva was truly offended by it he can publicly state so, but really he has not. He seems to actually like the attention and comes and reads the satire/parody and calls me stupid… (loving huh?) It is ironic that PB of all people use 1 Cor 13 to rebuke me over the things he has done. But whatever, instead of facing his own issues he will take of a “so-called” offense of another over and over.
Would it be better for me to lie or to state it is great Ken brought a church of around 200 to 6-8 people? Is that really what the SBC desires? I doubt it. I had a church the same size (8-10) people yet after two years decided it was not “growing” and merged with a growing church plant. I saw my own failing and limitation for what they were and was not too proud to get help…
It is interesting that there is no commentary on that chart. Instead I have two versions of the same story. That is all… yet, PB finds that as offensive and unloving.
If by placing the two stories out that readers can decide whether Ken Silva should be or is a a real Pastor is wrong, then again, facts mean nothing to the one that is accusing me of said wrong.
iggy
nc,
Who knows the mind of PB? Maybe he is expanding his joke repertoire…
Maybe PB is saying Bo refers to Bo Diddly?… but again how ironic that PB would call names of Bo and twist his name to abuse Bo Diaz and then call others unloving.
iggy
the template of general disdain is once again edifying and loving and uplifting…
so…
replace Billy Madison with with the template of general disdain as it seems very fitting.
BTW… The Law is only the shadow of the reality that is in Christ…. so why love the shadow when now we can love the reality of Jesus Christ?
It seems like loving a picture of one’s wife more than the person… It seems that some desire the Law to make them perfect instead of Jesus…
As for myself, I now have a better hope than what the Law required of me….
iggy
#55 ff
I am amazed at the self righteous pride and reaction.
I have repeatedly confronted washed up rock star on his ODMafia site. It is offensive. It is not loving. But yet, somehow, he still justifies it.
Dead Catcher knows nothing about the church I Pastor. He does not know anything about our attendance. So this attempted insult was a lie, and it belies the fact that the church is not based on the size. I guess the dead catcher and Iggy thing size=God’s blessing and success. WRONG-O
I didn’t mean to give the impression that you pastor anyone or anything. If you’ve proven anything with your online shenanigans its that you’re incapable of living up to the normal Christian life we’re called to, much less that of a pastor.
Dead Catcher,
Its okay, I am in not in ministry to please you. I am in ministry to serve and please God. So your assumption about my ministry is irrelevant and further proof of the quality of your own testimony.
“pastor” boy,
You’re lead by God, just like Ken and Ingrid are.
If I have to choose between the commands of scripture which are a direct rebuke of your character and actions and you, then I’ll take scripture every time.
And again, how ironic… and it is as if there is not one mirror in his own house.
iggy
Someone explain to me how putting up the two conflicting versions of Ken Silva’s church and then having a graph that shows how many people he states attends Ken’s church is unloving?
It seems again that stating the truth in love is wrong, while purposely lying about others is right.
I’ll tell you what PB, if Ken states he is truly hurt and offended by the graph of how many people attend his church, then I will take it down… but until then it stays up. OK?
iggy
And I was never a rockstar… so I can’t be a washed up one…
PB,
I only ask that if Ken does ask, that you also take down your posts about me that I find offensive.
Start here. as it is an outright twisting of my words.
Thanks I know you will “man-up” and do the same as you request of me.
iggy
This is the post I have offense over and you refuse to allow my comments through and claimed that I was “nasty”… funny that quoting the bible to you and showing you that if I am wrong, then you are the one who is contradicting the bible is considered… “nasty”
but that seems to be your game.
iggy
I hate to break up this food fight,but I have a challenge much closer to the original post. I want everyone to contribute as to how many inconsistencies and unbiblical principles we can find at this post:
http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/true-church/for-christs-true-flock/
I will provide the first obvious head scratcher with this statement from the article:
Besides calling it the “blood bought American church”, I see two more unbiblical issues. Can you find them??
Rick,
Just a reminder as to the intent of the OP:
Therefore, I would also offer a challenge: Can anyone find anything good in the link Bro. Rick provided? I’ll start:
I know, that is slightly out of context, but still I believe it was the apostle Paul who said something about being friends with the world in 1 Corinthians 5:9-11. So I think this is a good thing that Mr Guzman has brought to our attention (even though I know he means that ‘friendship with the world means enmity with God’ and I believe he has taken that out of context.)
Then there’s this:
Yes, so did D Bonhoeffer. The easy believism Mr Guzman is warning us about is found in such legalistic places as SOL and C?N. I don’t think Mr Guzman has spent an significant time in the church if he believes that being a Christian is easy in any sense of the words.
Just ask anyone who is a pulpit preacher. They will tell you just exactly how ‘easy’ Christianity is not.
jerry
Jerry,
I agree that the easy believism is found at SOL and CRN as their faith seems not to be in Jesus the Person, but rather in their “belief”….
Now the problem is not in “believing” but that the idea that the knowledge that is founded on their beliefs saves them… funny that is pure Gnosticism…
When we think our belief/knowledge can save us it no longer is salvation by faith.
Now that does not mean we deny beliefs or knowledge, rather we need keep them in proper perspective to Jesus…
That is what leads them to things like:
1. the duality of spirit/body where the body is evil…
2. Salvation is no longer based on the works of Jesus but on our own “right” knowledge.
This leads them into a “soft Gnosticism” which is still off from the biblical teachings.
The core issue I see with the post is that it is a gross mixture of nationalism and Christianity… and it seems more worried about our “rights” and freedom than about the Gospel. The most offensive thing is that it judges and condemns those that lived under the persecution of Rome… I guess they should of gone into combat against the Caesars?
In one breath she states we need fight for our rights then states we have traded the American dream for the Great Commission…
This would all be silly but sadly she is sincere… and misses that she also in that post exchanged the great commission for the American dream or has at the very least mix the two so much that for her to condemn others is really a self condemnation.
iggy
John Chisham and Iggy,
If the two of you can’t interact without throwing at each other stuff that has nothing to do with the OP, I’ll put you in moderation.
Tantrums are done.
Iggy,
Right. When our faith is boiled down to nothing more than how many rules we can follow, we have done away with grace. Grace is costly when it is not about how many rules we can and do keep.
jerry
JOe,
No tantrum here… and moderate me all you want… it seems to not be working for PB… and I was being very nice to him…
iggy
Really then place Bo Diaz, nc, and Chris L and myself and anyone who will stand up to or disagree strongly with PB and his antics if you want… I even laid down a challenge for him… that was all. Be a man and do as he wants others to do…
It seems that if I do anything I am rebuked… but whatever…
Really it gets tiring to have you guys come after me when there are more people than me who are tired of PB…
and one runs this blog!
iggy
I am not coming back for a while… just tired of the threats and BS…
if you have something to say email me.
iggy@wwdb.org
Iggy,
I really like. I do. But you’re too close to your stuff with John Chisham to see it. He posts your stuff from the mafia site and you come back. I’m not against you having vigorous dialogue with him but you two are like two high school kids fighting.
Now, if you want throw another temper tantrum and run away b/c I told you to stop so be it. That’s your choice.
It doesn’t affect my promise to you and him one iota.
Iggy, Come on, really?
Joe,
Its more like two jr. high kids.
I know. I work with em’
Actually, it is kinda like the whole A-Rod thingy. I will confess because I got caught. I can’t see its wrong when I am in the middle of it.
But it comes from a place of honesty. I mean, we all should examine ourselves. It is so easy to go after the percieved inappropriate behavior of Ingrid and Ken and Steve Camp and SJ Walker etc. But when one in our own camp does it (see Online Discernment Mafia) We have a very hard time confronting it, because it feeds our flesh to see our percieved enemies get their comeuppance.
I go to the post, and say, let us all examine ourselves:
And I still think you guys oughtta make Iggy a contributor here….
Why haven’t you done that yet?
PB,
Are you being sarcastic, re: #91?
M.G.,
For some reason Pastorboy tends to address Iggy on this blog as if he were a contributor. I don’t know why, though… what’s the point of posting links to Iggy’s site and rebuking him, in the comment section of a post by Jerry?
Neil
…and on another unrelated note – I’ve grown tired of reading references to Ingrid’s marital history.
John,
Please address the OP from now on, not Iggy.
Thank you
This is the basis of many of Ingrid’s posts… not sure I’d say the same of Silva. I believe it stems from her ethnocentrism.
“Perceived”.
~snicker~
I’m just wondering why there’s such a double standard here. Ted Haggard commits one sin, but keeps his marriage together and apparently he just needs to “go away”. Ingrid on the other hand can be living an adulteress life with her second husband and its all good.
I didn’t say it’s all good. I said I was tired of hearing about it.
#99
And it has nothing to do with this OP, or any other.
PB,
When you get a chance, please direct me to the apparently dozens of OPs that address Iggy’s website. I’m curious to read them. Thank you.
It just demonstrates PB’s hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty.
Iggy writes a parody site that is explicitly labeled so and PB finds manages to condemn it multiple times (and does so dishonestly as he pretends what was written as parody and satire is a straight ahead opinion piece).
Ingrid gets a divorce then becomes an adulteress when she re-marries and PB can’t figure out to type out even the most mild of rebukes.
Bo – I would disagree, as we do not know the circumstances of the divorce, and I also question your reasoning for considering this to be adultery.
I am assuming that this is likely an interpretation of Matt 5:31-32:
I would note that a number of scholars read this as a Hebraism translated into Greek, which would be more accurately rendered to mean that if someone divorces his wife in order to marry another woman, he would make the other woman (not the faithful wife he divorced) an adulteress.
When Jesus was asked the question on divorce, he was being drawn into a rather contentious debate between the House of Hillel (who allowed divorce for any reason, as trivial as being a poor cook) and the House of Shammai (who only allowed it in cases of infidelity, forbidding the unfaithful spouse from marrying the partner in their unfaithfulness).
Jesus’ ruling is in line w/ the teaching of the House of Shammai, and the above interpretation of Matt 5:31-32 matches this teaching. [It's also interesting that this is the only time that Jesus sides with Shammai in debates on orthodoxy/orthopraxy.]
With this in mind, I would affirm Neil’s comment:
To me, Ingrid’s marital history is as much of a non-issue as Rick Warren’s use of multi-lingual names for Jesus, and it should be left alone…
When Ingrid stops publicizing the sins of others I’ll do the same for her. Its quite the Biblical concept.
I also see that the adulteress and divorced Ingrid Schleuter is busy publicizing the sin of a pastor that was removed by his church for sexual impurity.
The hypocrisy is darkly hilarious.
I observe she also uses a secular source for her gossip information. It is also darkly hilarious that she bemoans the shame that fallen Christians bring on the church, and then makes sure that shame is as widespread as possible.
That’s the thing:
a) we don’t know it’s a sin on her part;
b) it requires taking an uncharitable view;
c) it seems like an “eye-for-an-eye” approach, in contradiction to Jesus’ words shortly after those on divorce in Matt 5…
The judgment she judges with she is being judged by.
All issues of paying evil-for-evil aside:
Where has she declared that someone who has gone through divorce is automatically an adulterer/ess?
How do you know that her divorce was not granted under biblical grounds (infidelity of a spouse)?
In regard to your first question I was referring to your A,B,C questions, not to the specific theology of divorce.
And as for the second, she can correct it at any time. Much as she has expected of other people after she has publicly accused them.
Chris L
While I do not agree with your assessment on divorce/remarriage, I do find it amazing that Ingrid’s rumored marriage status is an issue here. It is the dead catchers way of distracting from the topic at hand. It is typical.
Marriage is a picture of Christ and His church; there is not any justification for divorce and remarriage. God does hate divorce, even in the case of marital unfaithfulness. If one does leave the marriage, whether the offending partner or the wronged one, we are called to be reconciled to our former spouse. This means no remarriage in the event that the offending spouse gets saved and returns to the glory of God.
Get to writing about Ingrid then, boy.
Oh, right, you have no integrity and won’t criticize the people you agree with on certain other issues.
There is no proof she is divorced, dead catcher. And it is not the point of this OP. I do not know her to be divorced, I do not know how long ago it was, and if it really happened, what good does it do to dredge it up? It is exactly what you accuse the ADM’s of doing.
The politics of character assasination. Nice.
Bo,
As far as I am concerned we should take a higher road… or, to say it another way, not play her game. I say “we” since I include you in those who comment on this site in general agreement with those of us who post.
Since no one has stated/shown that her divorce/remarriage constitutes adultery you are basically stooping to her level in doing so.
Saying you are simply employing her methods back on her may be true – but it lowers you to her level.
Neil
Pastorboy,
I suggest you start using Bo’s name and not the condescending knick-name you have given him.
As far as diverting, I don;t think that’s Bo’s point. Obviously I think he should cease, but that said, his referencing Ingrid’s alleged divorce has a point – even if it is wrong and over played.
PB,
I am still interested in knowing which OPs have addressed Iggy’s site. I simply want to understand your justufucatio for bringing his site in light of your professed commitment to topical relevancy. Thanks.
It is Biblical and appropriate to expose Ingrid’s methodology and unbiblical language, but her past mistakes personally are under the blood and not to be dug up again.
Her continuing behavior needs to be addressed, but not her personal past. (or present)
I don’t really think her past is the issue. I think it’s John Chisham’s picking and chosing, his aligning himself with people so he can go after other people that is rightly being questioned here.
For John to have any ounce of integrity, he should investigate (since he claims to not know) and then write accordingly. Until, then he’s just more or less a clanging gong.
Bwahahahaha. More hypocrisy, you post all kinds of garbage when you have no way of knowing what’s going on. You post about the legitimacy of someone’s repentance, you post about motives, and when that’s not enough you just make stuff up.
That’s the name of the ADM game. Guess you guys are only against it when it gets used against you.
The measuring stick you use is being used to measure you.
PB,
Ingrid has freely admitted that she was once Ingrid Guzman (and her son is Sam Guzman), and she was then divorced and remarried as Ingrid Schlueter. Whether or not she was divorced is not at issue – she is, and it is a matter of public record.
I agree that it is pointless to bring up, in the same way many of the items you bring to the table re: Bell and others are pointless to bring up and not the point of the OP…
My contention w/ Bo is that:
a) There is no evidence that her divorce was (or was not) on biblical grounds (i.e. infidelity)
b) It is not reasonable to call her an adulteress, simply because she was divorced and remarried. A =/= B
c) We don’t put up w/ the constant stream of nastiness coming from ADM’s, and we don’t approve of having the same types of smear-jobs aimed at them…
Also, can you please honor Neil’s request and drop the “dead catcher” shtick…
PB,
Just so you know…Iggy has and does get called out in these comment threads.
I’m surprised you haven’t noticed this.
It does look pretty silly that you keep bringing up his site here as if it bears on the concerns of CRN.info.
and to re-iterate there have been numerous times where his comments here and links back to the Mafia site have been rebuffed or rebuked because of how they have been received.
So as far as your complaints go…
Fail.
I would note that Jesus’ later teaching in Matthew does not support this:
I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
Additionally, the underlying linguistics of this are consistent with the Hebraic interpretation that the woman that the divorcee is married to (not the ex-wife) is taking part in adultery, not the wronged partner. This ruling is actually compassionate to the wronged partner (by making her ex-husband an adulterer), because it allows her to remarry with a clear conscience (because her ex- is committing infidelity to the marriage), since single women/mothers were much more likely to starve/suffer in that culture, than married ones.
I would also note that Paul does not support your contention:
If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. [...] But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace.
Does God intend that we only marry once, and for life? Yes.
Does He grant honorable provisions, should our spouses prove unfaithful? Yes.
Chris L, Neil,
I do not know what to call BD, because he is an anonomys commenter in reality. I am simply coming up with a fitting moniker, as you all see fit to do with template of general disdain and some others.
furthermore, in 119…
chris l makes abundantly clear what is already quite clear about the stance of this website.
At the same time, I do think that Bo’s recent comments are designed to highlight where the need for consistency actually lay–with you and the ADM’s.
So when the professed standards of the ADM’s is actually measured to them, things don’t look pretty.
And it must not feel good when your own medicine gets administered to you.
PB,
instead of railing at Bo about it, this would seem to be a fantastic opportunity for you and the lurkers here to really account for that twinge of “hurt/resentment/whatever is going on in your inner world” and to accept its invitation to see the effects of your own way of being in the world.
He has a point. The ADM’s have initiated the situation by taking up a certain kind of stance.
They’ve been entreated to alter the way they take up that stance to no avail.
So the biblical measuring they claim to be guardians of is being rightly applied to them.
Is that wrong to biblically apply the biblical standard?
If yes, then the whole basis on which the ADM’s exist is wrong.
We know who Template is…
So give “Bo” or “Bo Diaz” or “Mr. Diaz” a whirl.
John Chisham,
#122. Bo Diaz’s IP comes out of LA. That’s all we know about him. His IP address checks out. I mean come on, surely you’re not saying that there is only one Bo Diaz in the entire world.
Joe Martino,
It is a fake name, proven by the fact he will not link it to a site. He is just another gutless anonomouys commenter.
Well, I would say you did better right there. “Dead catcher” just isn’t funny or clever.
Not linking to a site does not prove anything… maybe he has no site to link to.
I think your standard of proof is quite bogus. I am not linked to any “site” because I don’t have my own blog or website if that is what it means……but my name is john bROWN. I guess with a name like that it doesn’t matter if it’s real or not now does it?
I think what we are more concerned with is taking the measuring stick and using it – not to measure but to whip.
All metaphors aside… the point of this post was as a challenge against engaging a foe using the same methods that we oppose.
The IP camouflage is boring. Just say who you are and we’ll promise not to tell the FBI.
PB,
if Bo Diaz is such a coward and sending out the cyber-equivalent of “unsigned notes”, then just do the best bit of pastoral strategy and ignore him.
Seriously.
Otherwise, take up the challenge he is offering.
You might get a hearing from people here if they saw you take seriously the substance of what he is really asking for.
If not, then there’s a whole lot of so-called cowardice to go around.
There’s a bunch of folk on here that don’t link to anyplace…
so what?
#66
I totally forgot to thank Chris P/Template for staying persistent in his witness to being angry to the glory of himself.
How fitting his comment was 66…just one away from an identifying mark of some kind.
I kid, I kiiiiiiiid.
“The time for praising yourself will come to an end, majesty.”
The law is dead and gone, and whoever resurrects it has fallen from grace.
The Apostle Paul
BTW – whosever insults 2 year olds will have it worse than having a millstone around his neck and thrown into the sea.
I guess when Ingrid or Ken use a “proxy” to read my satire blog… she is also a coward?
LOL!
Oh, I missed this whole conversation about my identity.
Be honest pastor boy, the reason you want more details about my personal life is so you can lie and smear my name across the internet the way you have with so many others.
There’s a reason I don’t put my hometown or employer up, and it has everything to do with wolves like you.
Bo – I have done some research about you, and I know you are a serial killer livng in a van down by the river.
Bo,
After some research I found out you were actually Pastorboy. It seems you have a split personality that is waring against itself.
I kid! (for the record in case someone takes me serious!)
iggy
I don’t know what I’m more insulted by, being accused of being a serial killer, or being accused of being pastor boy.
Bo,
On one level they are the same thing…
iggy
140ff
So Neil, Joe, et.al
What do these comments have to do with the OP?
Its alright, Bo and Iggy, I know very well the wretch that I am. My sin is ever before me, and I know more than anyone the grace and mercy of God is the only thing that keeps me alive.
Not much, John… not much at all.
So some create alternative personalities online that they can attack others with becoming multiple personalities themselves…
There you go….
all fits right into the OP peice nicely.
iggy
Sure, pastorboy. You say one thing, and then do another.
It’ll be, at most, three more comments before you write something directly at odds with that. I’m neither a prophet nor a song of a prophet, its just what you do.
PB,
Seriously this could be the core of your issue… you have not exchanged your life for His… and you still dwell in the belief that your sin is yours and it has not been transferred to Jesus who became sin for us.
Jesus became our sin and sin died on the Cross… with the resurrection we now have become new creations in Christ and having been reconciled we have new identities.
Yes, we still sin as sin dwells in our mortal bodies, yet now we are not condemned nor will we lose the Holy Spirit as sin was already dealt with and God is not surprised by our mortality… in the end we will be fully regenerated and clothed in immortality and with the imperishable…
So if one dwells in this life focused on their sin and lives life in remorse and not the joy that comes form forgiveness then they miss the abundant life that comes with Christ and the New Identity we have in him.
So my prayer is that you stop starring at the darkness that you seem to have embraced and come into the light of Christ and though you may still sin at times… sin in the light and knowledge that God’s love covers our sin.
I highly recommend Classic Christianity by Bob George or any books by Maj Ian Thomas to help you come ot a fuller understanding of your new identity in Christ.
iggy
Igs,
Are you saying that you don’t think PB is a christian?
Igs,
Thanks for the advice, but despite the fact that I know my sin is under the blood, and I am redeemed, and have new life in Christ, I still grieve over my sin when it happens because it breaks the heart of God. But the joy comes out of that brokeness as I get the forgiveness of God!
nc,
Many Christians walk in bondage to their sin and never enter into the freedom that is in Christ. They use 1 John 1:9 like a bar of soap or a proxy priest for forgiveness and never walk in the forgiveness that is in Christ.
We are call to trust in God’s forgiveness and walk in the newness of life… and sadly most stop at forgiveness and never find the newness of life.
I am not saying one is not saved, just lacking in their experience and power as a believer. I am one that believes in confessing but that repentance is a one time thing… and I see that by repenting over and over we in affect crucify Jesus over and over… it is the difference between the a perpetual sacrifice, the one sacrifice of perpetual efficacy.
And it seems at times PB fits that to a tee and is one that believes in perpetual sacrifice in his words and actions toward others.
.
iggy
well igs clearly you do not understand redemtion according to the Bible. I am fully justif
and redeemed, it does not mean sinless perfection. When the Holy Spirit reveals sin as one progresses towards sanctification, the holy spirit reveals sin. This sin we must confess and have a chang of mind about it, to agree with the mind of God about it.
PB,
There is there renewing of the mind and I do not deny that… yet to repent over and over is to crucify Jesus and over…
Hebrews 6 is clear as to that if one comes to faith in Christ it is impossible to repent again as it is crucifying Jesus over and over.
Now I am not into being legalistic over words but that is the biblical teaching… The sacrifice was once and for all not over and over for each person. In fact Tozer taught as I am saying here. http://articles.christiansunite.com/article5586.shtml
We are to live a confessional life, meaning that we live in agreement with God that He is Right and when we are wrong we confess that… and then learn from it and grow from it.
So if you disagree with that, then the bible and Tozer and many great men of God throughout the history of the church are all wrong.
I do allow people to misuse the word repentance as some use it to mean confession, yet there is a distiction between the two according to the bible.
I don’t care if you agree with me, but consider what the bible teaches as you are opposing it. And it is that kind of error that can stunt or harm someone in their growth as a believer.
iggy
PB,
For some light reading on the topic here is a PDF file on what I am talking about…
Here is a question I have. When we reprint the prayers of someone else, especially suggesting the Puritanical beauty of such an instrument, are we not treating prayer as if it were a museum piece? Is it not unlike what Jesus warned against in making public prayers that are heard (read) of men?
And when read, some of those prayers that have come from someone else’s heart seem inconsistent when compared to another’s experience. Spoken in old English and with formal structure these prayers are often viewed as great spiritual literature rather than the secret closets of the spiritual proletariat spoken sincerely in today’s parlance. I am usually put off by the “he can pray a good prayer” type of attitude since to me it emphasizes the person’s literary ability rather than the sincerity of his heart which can only be discerned by God.
This particular phrase and thought seemed to me to be one of those phrases that is at variance with the blogger’s own orthopraxic demonstration:
Yea, right.