CRN.Info and Analysis

Abraham Piper weighs in on some of the shortcomings of Christian modernity… in 22 words:

Opponents of postmodernism often judge texts according to what they would’ve meant, not realizing this is the self-creation of meaning they deplore.

In the comments he opines further:

I run into it almost every time I read an anti-postmodernist’s review of anything he disagrees with.

For example, every negative review I’ve ever seen of Rob Bell or Donald Miller, interprets their words to mean what the reviewer would have meant if he’d written them.

And, of course, since the reviewer would never in a million years write anything like Velvet Elvis or Blue Like Jazz, then they must be full of heresy.

Ooooh if you thought Steve Camp was anti-Abraham Piper before you can just imagine the capillary busting trauma that will result from this.

[UPDATE: Please see the notes at the bottom of this post, as Ingrid has removed the referenced article and apologized for her actions.]

Ingrid pulls out her amazing voo-doo magic / discernment once again in the Cast of the Baffling Beauty. Cornerstone Church in Chandler, AZ is having a Mother’s Day service that celebrates the image of God in our mothers. Here is a clip from their advertisement

In our culture, image is everything. This Mother’s Day at Cornerstone, we’re celebrating a different image though. We’re celebrating the image of God that has been placed in our moms and women. We’ll discover the fullness of the image of God and how we can carry that image to a world that needs it! Women and men alike, come ready for the best Mother’s Day you’ve had!

So, they are obviously not glorifying the physical beauty of mothers and women. They are attempting to celebrate the heart and image of God within the female soul. As a guest speaker, they will be having Hilary Griffith Peele, the former Miss Arizona and 2007 contestant in the Miss America pageant, speak for their special day. Well, this obviously has Ingrid’s spidey-sense tingling. She writes the following

So the mother who is bombarded with the world’s expectations of beauty must now come to church on Sunday and be, well, bombarded by the world’s expectation of beauty. Rather than find an elderly saint who has walked with God for 50 or more years to speak to women about what really matters before God, they get a 22-year-old beauty pageant contestant so women of every age and circumstance will be sent the message that real beauty lessons should come from a woman who is willing to parade across a stage in a bikini in front of men to be judged like a piece of meat.

I love how Ingrid absolutely loves to look solely at the externals. There is nothing in the way of what she will be speaking on, her theology, her credentials, etc. It’s all about her body and how she has flaunted herself like a piece of meat. Ingrid has probably never heard Ms. Peele speak, and probably not done the research to find out what she stands for. She just assumes that a 50 year-old woman is more qualified than a younger women, just becasue of a hobby that they younger has (she also seems to imply that a less-attractive 50 year-old woman is best).

I find it interesting that Ingrid doesn’t put this up in her article, found on the same website from the first quote

She graduated Summa Cum Laude from Arizona State University in December 2007 with a degree in Journalism and Mass Communication. She is currently an on-air personality at KGCB Radio Shine 90.9 FM, where she hosts a Christian music program weekdays from 10 a.m. to noon. Hilary lives in Glendale with her husband, Justin, whom she married in February 2008.

So, we aren’t talking about some blonde twit with nothing to say. This is an educated woman, serving in a Christian media outlet. Maybe Ingrid is just upset because Peele’s show gets higher ratings?

______________

UPDATE: Ms. Peele has graciously replied to Ingrid and our article (please see her comment below from 2008/05/11 at 12:47 AM). With even more context provided, it will be interesting to see if Ingrid retracts her diatribe. -Chris L
______________

UPDATE: Ingrid has removed her original post regarding Ms. Peele’s appearance at Cornerstone Church, and has issued an apology. While it is not our policy to delete articles as if they had never happened, I am updating the article (both here and in the body) to recognize Ingrid’s apology and repentance in this matter. Thank you, Ingrid. -Chris L

Made of fail!

I’ve been watching some fascinating discussion on the internet over the last 7-10 days. I’ve come to a conclusion. Too many people, too many Christians believe the Holy Spirit is dead. It’s the only reasonable explanation for what I’ve seen. The internet is a funny place. It is one heck of a tool for good, but like any tool it is also a tool for evil. If you have an axe to grind, if no one would actually hire you to be their pastor, then just buy a 9.99 webpage, set it up and you’re off. You can start out criticizing the “big boys and girls.” You know Rick Warren, Joel Olsteen, John Ortberg, Doug Pagitt, etc. After you’re done with them you can go after a guy pastoring a little church in the middle of nowhere because you don’t like how he does outreach. If you’re lucky he’ll do something really bad, like be a friend of sinners. Don’t believe me? Just search for blogs that call themselves ministries and you’ll find thousands. Some even set up boards, and make up fancy schmancy titles, it’s amazing!!! There are people that talk about being “internet apologist,” which I guess means that they don’t do any apologizing in real life.

Some will decry anyone female questioning them because they are a “pastor-teacher” but will snuggle up next to another ministry that is dominated by a woman. I suppose that proves the old saying, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

It’s not just these Online Discernment Ministries (ODM) that believe the Holy Spirit has died. It’s every day rank and file Christians too. Don’t believe me? Ok, what about gambling? Is that a sin? How about alcohol consumption? Sooner or later, I’m sure I could bring up a social issue where many would decide that anyone who disagreed with them was apostate. This is why I bring up the ODM’s because for sure they have created a rhetoric that is unhelpful. Some of my favorites go on and on about how a church isn’t the “real church” of God because they have a New Year’s Eve party. Now, I’m willing to bet that some of you reading this thought, “Well, I’m against parties like that, especially in the church! That is sin.” Here’s the thing, you can hold that view. I disagree with you, and I know we can’t both be right but you can hold that view. I want to ask a serious question, does my salvation get questioned because I disagree with you? In way too many instances it is the first thing questioned. This is why I think that many who claim Christ believe the Holy Spirit is dead. No longer, do we agree to respectfully disagree and allow the Holy Spirit room to convict someone who disagrees with us. We try, convict, and execute all based on our standard.

Do me a favor, think back fifteen years. Is there anything you believed back then, that you don’t today? Is there anything that you thought was sin back then, that now you think differently on? Now ask yourself if there is anyone that you tried to get to conform to that belief fifteen years ago? Did it damage the relationship? Was it worth it?

The other night I was talking about this with a friend of mine and she said that she thought it was wrong because it involved spending money in a way that wasn’t “best.” I told her I agree that for some it can lead to that and I asked “Well, what about this situation?” (Please note I’m not going to tell you the specifics because they don’t matter, it’s a principal I’m driving at) She responded to me, “Well, that’s different because it’s only one time a year.” Of course I responded, “Well, what if someone only does the original offending activity once a year?”

Did you see what happened? Now, there’s degrees and protocol and something that is exactly the same is now somehow different. We all have our pet sins that we like to slam others for. I think it probably makes God wan to puke.

I have to ask, what is the purpose of the Holy Spirit? Is it not to convict a believer of their sin? Is it not to show us the error of our ways? I’m not saying this is the only job of the Holy Spirit but it is one of them, right? Where in Scripture does it say that God needs our help convicting others? Where in Scripture does it say that God needs us to write nasty posts about other Christians ranting and shrieking about them being apostate? Isn’t it God who decides that?

Don’t go running to Paul and Peter either, they had a relationship. I’m not saying we shouldn’t call sin, sin or call errors into question. Where are matters of conviction? Where is the grace to disagree without making cowardly hit pieces on your webpage? Has the church really come to the place where some would have us say that John Wesley is in Hell because he believed in free will?

Show me the verse that says we will be known as disciples of Christ by our reformed doctrine! Show me the verse that says we will be known as disciples of Christ because we don’t dance, or smoke a cigar, or drink a glass of Wine! Show me the verse that says, we have to preach from a high up pulpit! Show me the verses that say we have to have church three times a week! I want to see them! Show me the verses that say we should wear a certain pattern of clothes on Sunday.

It’s amazing to watch. Don’t wear pants (if you’re a female), don’t get a tattoo, don’t have hair over your collar, don’t listen to music that might involve dancing. Who has bewitched us!!!

Now look, if you hold to some of these beliefs, I’m not saying you shouldn’t. I’m asking why do too many say that others have to. Usually this involves people on both sides of theses issues. Too often we take a matter of personal preference and turn it into some sort of litmus test for salvation.

Seriously, which is worse; to cuss or to call someone apostate–not because they don’t preach the gospel but because they have a New Year’s Eve Party with a glass of champagne?

My problem is I can show you the verses where we are told the litmus test of our faith is how well we love other people. Even people who are wrong, and are caught up in sin. I am the first to admit that I need to do better at this. I am called to love people, the Holy Spirit convicts. Why don’t we consider a lack of love to be the test of apostasy?

What happened to the Holy Spirit? When did He die? Who killed Her?

I hate to post this without Chris L’s post about hermeneutics having some time on its own to breath but this was too much. Here’s an excerpt from my response.

Well, my wife has hit the big time. It appears that Ken Silva felt the need to defend himself from what my wife wrote. Read her article here, and then read his response here.
It seems that Ken has a man crush on our pastor. He and I have exchanged words on issues in the past. In fact we’re coming up on the anniversary of the first time he ever told me I was apostate. Recently, I’ve been trying to help Mr. Silva maintain his integrity but it appears he has fallen short of this yet again. As just yesterday he, made this statement:

I don’t plan on speaking further with, or about, Joe because in my view he has a real problem with reading comprehension. (Online Source)

Yet, he works me into his “defense” piece. Now, I wonder what I had to do with anything? It appears that Mr. Silva who claims to be an ordained SBC minister has missed these verses in James:

Read more here

Before I even endeavor to touch this third-rail of discussion, please let me be clear that a) if Roe v. Wade is ever overturned by the US Supreme Court, I will be at the front of the pack leading a week-long celebration; b) I am a stauch believer in the rights of the unborn to have life; and c) if anyone links to or quotes this article in a manner which implies nullification of (a) or (b), they will be guilty of slander.

I was born in 1968, five years before the landmark Supreme Court ruling on Roe vs. Wade, which made abortion legal in all 50 US States. I was probably 12 years old before I heard anything about it, or even understood what it was all about. Since this time, almost every political discussion I have heard with Christians has had, at its underpinnings, the subtext of abortion. Every presidential and congressional vote I have cast to date has been, by and large, based almost solely on this issue - with little more than lip service paid to other issues (which happen to best align with my pocketbook, coincidentally).

In the past few years, I wonder how wise I - and entire Christian organizations - have been in so blindly following this issue and electing politicians who a) promise to do something about - or to at least curb - abortion; and b) fail to accomplish anything regarding it. We end up playing Charlie Brown while Lucy holds the ball for us to kick - and we’re continually surprised and/or disappointed when nothing happens.

In reality, though, we have displaced our faith.

Find rest, O my soul, in God alone;
my hope comes from him.

He alone is my rock and my salvation;
he is my fortress, I will not be shaken

Instead, we have placed our hope in politicians and governments to correct this “wrong” - we have expected that the government will provide the justice that only God can provide. Certainly, the government’s purpose according to scripture is to provide defense and to provide a system of justice. Abortion is clearly an injustice against the most innocent in our society. But when we cry out against the systems of this world for not acting in the manner that God would, have we not displaced our source of hope and is it possible that our cry is one of selfishness, as well?

The Silver Lining of Roe v. Wade

Something that I have witnessed in the church that, I have been told by those older and wiser than I, was distinctly missing prior to the legalization of abortion is this:

In the manner of caring for young, unwed mothers, the church finally stepped up to the plate and been what it is supposed to be. Before 1973, there were very few ministries aimed at assisting young, unwed women (or, for that matter, poor married and/or abused women) who were pregnant and in despair of what was to come in their lives. I have heard it argued, and I believe, that Roe v. Wade became culturally ‘necessary’ because of the failure of, and self-righteous attitude of, the church.

Much like the stages of grief, the church moved through denial, protest and anger (with a rash of abortion clinic bombings, to boot) in its response to abortion legalization, and it wasn’t until at least a decade (possibly two) after the 1973 ruling that wholesale ministries aimed at assisting at-risk women and their unborn children both before and after their childbirth really took hold in the church. While it speaks to the human nature of humans in the church, it is a sad commentary that it took millions of unnecessary deaths to convince the church that their attitude toward others who, indeed, had “gotten themselves into their own mess”, needed to be Christ-like in caring for them.
If nothing else, Roe v. Wade forced the church to man-up and act like the body of Christ, if it was going to claim to be like him.

What Then and What Now?

As part of business planning in my professional life, I often get pulled into “future-ing” exercises of “if X happens, what will we do?” In these, the biggest question is “What then?” - What then, will we do in response to X?

If the Supreme Court tomorrow outlawed abortion, I would rejoice at the innocent lives saved in such a ruling. I would probably rejoice for days on end.

But.

But then I would wake up, and I would worry. I would worry about the church and its response. Would our response be like our response when the government took over in caring for the poor in the early 20th Century, where the church rather quickly pulled out of wholesale ministration to the poor, the widow and the orphan because the government would do their job for them. Would the church go back to despising those young women and leaving them to the consequences of their sin? Would the church be prepared to triple or quadruple its giving and serving to women who - prior to its abolishment - would have received abortions?

If history is our guide, I do not think I would like the answer to those questions. Having seen the church’s pitifully slow response to the AIDS crisis today, I think the church would fail. Not for lack of “orthodoxy” - we’ve got more of that than we’ll ever need, despite what the ODM shriekers shout at us. No - it is because we generally fail to love our neighbor beyond prostelyzation.

Case in point: Last year, Rick Warren lined up numerous leaders - religious, political and industrial - pledging monetary support to fight AIDS in Africa, where the death toll to this disease overshadows our own abortion death toll. One of those leaders was a politician who supports the Roe v. Wade ruling. After witnessing the hand-wringing, wailing, gnashing of teeth and the calls of Warren being the “False Prophet of the Antichrist” for allowing this person to speak (not at a meeting of the church, mind you, but at a mid-week event on property owned by the church), I have absolutly no doubt that the church in America does not have what it takes to be Christ in a post-Roe society.

The church is too lazy to give the manpower, too stingy to give the money, and it is too proud to partner with the agencies with the manpower required to provide this care. The church I recognize in much of America - primarily from the right - would be content standing on the sidelines while government agencies, Mormons and atheists did its work for them, all the while sniping “you’re doing it wrong!”

Maybe I’m just a pessimist, and the church really would rise to the occasion and be the salt and light required if Roe was overturned.

But maybe I’m right and the church isn’t ready.

Maybe that’s why it hasn’t happened yet…

Quiz:

1. It is not a sin to be a woman, but it is if she is a pastor. (T or F)
2. Scripture is very clear on that issue that to deny it is to deny the Bible. (T or F)
3. A woman pastor is in direct opposition to godliness. (T or F)
4. A woman pastor is in direct opposition to what the gospel teaches or is about. (T or F)
5. A church led by a woman pastor is not a real Christian church and is, instead, the synagogue of Satan. (T or F)
6. A woman pastor is in clear defiance of Christ’s commands and anyone supporting her can hardly call themselves a Christian anymore. (T or F)

———-

In support of these statements, Chad, an apparently sincere writer at Old Truth, uses the story of Adam and Eve to prove that Eve was deceived, not Adam. He neglects to point out Genesis 3:6 where it notes that Adam was standing there with Eve when it all went down, never saying a word. I wonder what, then, that says about the character of all men in general if the character of Eve speaks for all women?

Chad’s use of the order of creation to support his idea that men are in some way superior, (though he is careful to not state that implicitly) is problematic. Genesis 1:27 is a bit of a monkey wrench, in that case. I would also note that, if we are going to take the order of creation into consideration, it is important to remember that God started with the basics and ended with the pinnacle. From nothing, to water, to animals. I would say to Chad, then, that woman was the final creation.

Actually, I wouldn’t say that to Chad, because I think feuding over the order of creation and what it means to either gender is foolish. It is unnecessary to make one gender higher in the hierarchy than the other; we are both in the image of God.

Women seem to have the burden of an extra sin to be wary of that men do not have, according to Chad. For a woman to be a pastor — no matter the situation, the culture, or the setting — is a sin.

I prefer to call it obedience, often in the face of adversity from both the world and supposedly fellow brothers in Christ. Women are too often left with this “additional” sex-based sin unique to us and not men, as well as having the double burden of forms of persecution and verbal assaults from within our own family, the family of God.

Adam ate the fruit, too, and it was never more evident than in comments like Chad’s.

(The true or false statements above came directly from Chad’s comments.)

[Read more: Are Women Human?]