Louie Giglio and the Passion Movement

“Worship is… our response, both personal and corporate, to God – for who He is, and what He has done, expressed in and by the things we say and the way we live."

-Louie Giglio, The Air I Breath

Louie Giglio (Wikipedia)

Have you heard of Louie Giglio and the Passion Movement

In an effort to follow Christian trends, TWW has been learning about Giglio in recent days because of a huge Christian conference – Passion 2012 – that concluded earlier today in the Georgia Dome.        (More on that in tomorrow's post). 

Giglio hails from Georgia and graduated from Georgia State University.  He went on to earn a Master of Divinity degree from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and a Doctor of Ministry degree from Grace Theological Seminary.   As the Wiki article states, after finishing his seminary training "Giglio and his wife Shelley began a weekly Bible study called Choice at Baylor University where he was doing graduate studies. After several years, over 10 percent of the Baylor student body was attending the weekly gathering and Giglio's heart for the significance of the "university moment" was set."

According to the Passion website Giglio (with the help of his wife) led a campus-based student ministry at Baylor University for ten years from 1985-95. This ministry, which began with a handful of students, "grew to a movement that soon impacted 10% of the campus population in its weekly gatherings". 

In 1995 the Giglios decided to move to Atlanta, Georgia to be close to Louie's parents because his father's health was failing.  Before they fully transitioned, Giglio's father passed away in April 1995.  Two months later Giglio was on a flight from Dallas to Atlanta when he caught a vision from God to establish a ministry targeting young people around the world.  In August 1995 the Giglios officially became Georgia residents, and the following winter the name "Passion" emerged as the Board of Directors and key individuals clarified the vision and planned for its first national gathering of 18 to 25 year olds. According to its website, "Passion exists to glorify God uniting students in worship and prayer for spiritual awakening in this generation."

This organization is also referred to as the 268 Generation, based on Isaiah 26:8, which states: 

"Yes Lord, walking in the way of Your truth we wait eagerly for You, for Your name and renown and the desire of our souls." (NIV) 

In January 1997 the first Passion Conference – Passion 97 – was held in Austin, Texas.  Around two thousand students attended this four-day event.  The following year five thousand students attended Passion 98.  Then in 1999 the event had grown so much that it was held at the Fort Worth Convention Center.  Over 11,500 students attended Passion 99.  The ministry has continued to expand around the world, with Passion 2012 drawing 45,000 young people to Atlanta this week. 

Contemporary Christian music plays a big part in the success of these Passion Conferences, and artists such as the David Crowder Band, Chris Tomlin, Matt Redman, Lecrae, and others inspire the students who attend. 

In addition to Louis Giglio, speakers at these Passion conferences include:  Francis Chan, Beth Moore, John Piper, among others. 

One aspect of this ministry that greatly appeals to young people is "Do Something Now" – a collective financial effort that funds important causes such as rescuing sex slaves and curtailing slave labor around the globe.  The younger generation seems to be motivated to take action, and their valiant efforts will be highlighted tomorrow.

According to the ministry website, the Passion Team (consisting of Giglio and a Board of Directors) is "committed to spreading the fame of Jesus Christ to the 16+ million college students of the nation and countless others around the globe."  Giglio and his team appear to be effective in carrying out their mission, as will be discussed in the upcoming post.

Louie Giglio and his ministry team have also planted a church in Atlanta called Passion City Church (link)

Here is Louie Giglio explaining how We are Wonderfully Made.


Lydia's Corner:    Ecclesiastes 7:1-9:18    2 Corinthians 7:8-16    Psalm 48:1-14    Proverbs 22:17-19


Louie Giglio and the Passion Movement — 116 Comments

  1. If you needed a Giglio connection to the Calvinista’s, here you go:

    Lou Giglio spoke in a general session at SGM’s New Attitude 2003 conference. According to Joshua Harris, the New Attitude/NEXT conference is at least partially based off of the Passion conferences.

  2. I was given Passion CDs in college and went to a horrible concert where the music was blaring. I dislike all concerts no matter the genre thus contemporary music in church sends me through the roof. However, I remember one young band leader yelling “this is what Heaven is going to be like 24/7!!” and all I could think of was oh my gosh I don’t I want to be there!

  3. I’m looking forward to reading more. So many of my current co-workers worship Mr. Giglio, along with Mohler, Piper, and last but not least…Beth Moore. I’m wondering when Beth Moore spoke, did the men in attendance leave, or put in ear plugs?

  4. BTW dear Pastors, I’m so glad to think that you’re joining forces (so to speak) with Wade Burleson and Debbie Kaufman. 4 amazing voices for HIM!!

  5. numo,

    I had the same reaction when I discovered that John Piper and Beth Moore regularly speak at Passion conferences. Not only that, a female “pastor” from Australia spoke at Passion 2012. When it was Piper’s turn to speak he said something along these lines: “There’s a whole lot of freedom at this conference”.

  6. jack allen,

    We are so excited about our growing friendships with Wade and Debbie!

    With regard to Beth Moore, I listened to her message at Passion 2012, and she was preaching to a mixed audience as far as I could tell. She said she was “under the authority” of Giglio, but what does that really mean? More on that in today’s post.

  7. One of the reasons I’m researching Giglio is because both of my daughters know people who attended Passion 2012. I know very little about this man and his movement, and I am in pursuit of God’s truth.

  8. Thanks for the link, Eagle.

    I don’t like Piper, and when I heard he spoke at Giglio’s conference, I wanted to not like Giglio.

    And yet, Giglio had a female pastor speak at his conference.

    Hmmm. I should not be hasty in judgement.

  9. AS soon as I read Giglio’s name, something in my gut told me he is not what he appears to be. I haven’t heard of the Passion Movement before and have no idea who this guy is. Imagine my suprise(not!!) when I read Piper was an associate. I maybe shouldn’t rush to judgment, which here I’ll call discernment, but I have to follow my gut. It is very seldom wrong.

  10. I was at Baylor when Louie led Choice. I had the opportunity to sit under his teaching, go with him on a mission trip to England and even work with him later when I was on the mission field in France. Louie’s heart for God is undeniable. He was instrumental in my own pilgrimage and spiritual formation. As a woman and a minister, I have received nothing but support from him. I say all this to encourage everyone here. Louie is not someone to be feared. His heart for God and students is making a kingdom impact!

    one more thing…I worked the bookstore at the Passion conference when it was in Ft. Worth. It was the first year that Beth Moore spoke. A gentlemen in his 60s came up to me and asked for a taped recording of Beth’s talk. He said it was the best sermon he had ever heard. My guess was it was the first female sermon he had ever heard!

  11. Wow!! This is so timely. My daughter just mentioned Passion to me this week. She said quite a few from her college were attending and she would like to attend the next time. I had nt clue what she was talking about. I will be very interested in any thing WW turns up on this conference.

    I am not a fan of Beth Moore or Piper but am not opposed to her hearing them and using her own discernment. At 19 I feel like she must walk her walk. Shoot I swang from every chandeller that crossed my path the first decade of my christian walk. (omg I even attended the Happy Hunters and they tried to slay me in the spirit. It didn’t work LOL)

  12. I watched most of the live stream. Indeed, Beth Moore and Christine Cain both preached! It was very refreshing to see two women have such a prominent part in the conference!

    I watched Francis Chan; John Piper, no thank you.

  13. I remain surprised by the antipathy TWW followers have towards John Piper, a stand-up follower of Jesus Christ.

  14. Kathy,

    I watched all of the sessions except the first one. It got taken down before I realized they were online. I don’t plan to pay to watch them again.

  15. Mykingdomforahorse,

    One of the reasons I paid such close attention to this conference is because my 19 year old daughter knows people from her college who attended. I like to be informed.


    Not everyone knows who Louie Giglio is, especially those in the older generation. I just realized that he was mentioned in Christianity Today’s Young, Restless, Reformed article back in 2006. That’s why his name was familiar, but I didn’t know anything about him until a few days ago. Sorry to be so in the dark…

  16. jack allen

    Do you have any idea how frequently you are in my prayers? I am always delighted to hear from you. Just remember, you are joining forces with them by proxy through us!

  17. Mara

    We will be talking about this unusual mixing of theologies at Passion. We are not so sure that Piper was particularly pleased.

  18. Scooter’s Mom

    I find the lineup of speakers most unusual. Could it be that Giglio is challenging the status quo? Deb and i were talking today and wonder when the shoe will drop.

  19. Mentanna

    I am glad to hear that a man bought a book by a woman. I wonder if things change when men actually hear what is being said instead of running out of the room when a woman speaks. In my former church, there was a man who was a deacon who came to listen to me teach and stayed with it for years. Yet, he was part of a group of deacons who voted not to let women collect the offering because women might be perceived as deacons. Such mixed signals. Maybe that is because they are confused by the teaching these days.

  20. mykingdom

    Your comment made me laugh. Both Deb and i encourage our daughters to swing from chandeliers as well. Now, for a true story about my husband. His freshman year at Dartmouth, he did not become a Christian until the spring. He was a member of the fraternity upon which Animal House was modeled (google it). Anyway, shortly before he became a Christian, he broke the chandelier in the frat house by swinging from it. I still don’t know if it has been repaired.

  21. Eagle
    You are always so perceptive. “Its a lot of emotion, little sleep, little food and making big decisions at the same time. I knew a guy who left the Crusade Christmas conference in Minneapolis who thought they were brainwashing people.” We plan to write bout the sleepless nights and emotional manipulation that goes on in conferences in general.The question for me remains this. How many people who “make big decisions” at these events actually carry through with them after they have a good night sleep?

  22. Kathy
    I am glad to see women preaching to a mixed audience. i wonder how long that will be allowed to go on? Piper did not look thrilled.

  23. Seneca

    You have read this blog for a long time. What do you think is the issue? This is not some mindless claptrap. It is based on some very specific concerns and I think you know it.

  24. Robin
    Given your comment, I am interested in what you would say to Perry Noble’s comment about people who do not like his church’s music? I think many churches do not understand that music is based on a variety of tastes. For example, I love country but many cannot abide by this genre. It would be nice for churches to offer a variety of music, giving a nod that musical tastes vary. I still remember going to a church that opened with “Hotel california.” There was some tie in to the sermon but the over the top riffs and the decibel level of the bass was overwhelming.

    One friend told me about his mother whose hearing aid makes such music very painful. She tried to talk to the music leader (very cool dude with tattoos) who thought she was not worth talking with. She left, taking her money with her.

  25. I believe that Piper, because he insists that God causes evil, is a heretic. He almost drove my daughter away from the faith at a conference with his repeated sermonizing on evil as being created by God.

  26. John Piper is a very fine man, Godly one to boot. I am concerned about believers who think he is not.

  27. Seneca,
    John Piper is a really, really nice guy with some really, really over-the-top-stinky doctrinal error concerning women that is quite dangerous and must be exposed for what it is.

    I cannot receive instruction from a man who is on such a vendetta to replace the purity of the true gospel his ill-conceived gender gospel.

  28. Re: Conferences in general. And passion in general.
    Robin wrote “I dislike al concerts no matter the genre” This got me remembering and thinking and speculating. Remembering:
    how easy it is to forget. I’d been to a couple concerts about 20 and 35 years back, from which I had to flee the volume of the speakers and the rowdy crowdy cacophony of fellow fanatics, literally holding my ears. But over time, we forget, so last year I spent too much money and travelled much too far in order to attend another, from which I again had to flee. All 3 artists are right now in my car’s CD player, so it’s not an issue with the content but the context.
    Right content in right context— very good. Concerts, conferences, conventions, conflagrations — poor substitutes for koinonea?
    Sheer speculation about passionate crowds:
    Lacking mighty rushing winds or tongues of fire as prime movers, must passionate crowds always end by shouting, “Not this Man, but Barabbas! though they began by shouting “Hosanna!”?

    One is not the loneliest number. One faith, one hope one baptism.

  29. Appalled,

    I love most contemporary Christian music; however, I am cognizant of the fact that the blaring music is done intentionally. We will probably explore this topic in an upcoming post.

  30. Arce on Fri, Jan 06 2012 at 02:36 pm

    I believe that Piper, because he insists that God causes evil, is a heretic. He almost drove my daughter away from the faith at a conference with his repeated sermonizing on evil as being created by God.

    My daughter could not worship the God that Piper describes, and neither can I. God is NOT the author of evil.

  31. Seneca

    I know that you are familiar with how to deal with hurting people. It is a focus on this blog to expose theology and practices that cause pain. You keep making generalized statements such as “John Piper is a very fine man.” Not once do you acknowledge the concerns of some folks who have legitimate concerns or who have been hurt. When you do mention people who are hurt, you tend to do so in a condescending manner-“victim mentality.”

    Even “very fine men”are sinners but you seem to give them precedence over the little guy. I bet you think they are more “trustworthy” or “fine.” Since you subscribe to the Calvinista theology, let me remind you that even your great heroes are capable of great sin. Jesus warned about giving the rich and powerful a seat at the table and ignoring the disenfranchised. It is the goal of this blog to find those who were not invited to the table and give them the place of honor. So, you can decide who you want to dine with. I’ll take the Eagles, Numos, Evies, NLRs, jack allens, Appalleds, Argos, HUGS,etc over a John Piper any day of the week.

  32. Mara
    There are great theologians in the past who supported slavery. We try to make all sorts of excuses for them. But, the bottom line is this. They sinned in this area. And I think there are some bigwig theologians today who sin in the area of gender. I wonder if the generations to come will look back at this and wonder how the church put up with stupid garbage like Tim Challies not allowing women to read Scripture in the pulpit. Remember, just 50 years ago, the Tim Challies of that day would not let blacks read in a white pulpit either.

  33. Appalled

    You said something profound. Could this stuff be a” poor substitution for koinonea?” Yep-today’s churches are involved in building large sanctuaries headed by former pastors who act more like conference speakers. Koinonea got lost in the shuffle.

  34. Arce
    The example of your daughter is something i always keep front and center on this blog. The Calvinistas are not interested in her. She doesn’t fit their paradigm.

  35. Dee, You seem to perceive yourself as theologically conservative but I really don’t see that. I think you have a blog with a viewpoint that is moderate to liberal.
    I also believe you and many of the commenters have an unfounded bias against people like John Piper.
    John Piper is not their enemy, and he is actually not their problem. But it is convenient to blame him for whatever problem beset them.
    Piper espouses a very traditional, orthodox view of Scripture, But to you, an orthodox view of Scripture has become a big problem. That’s your issue, not John Pipers.
    Finally, I would equally enjoy dinner with commentors or John Piper. Is your anger towards John Piper such that you would refuse to eat with him?

  36. Senecca @2:09 –

    “John Piper is a very fine man, Godly one to boot. I am concerned about believers who think he is not.”

    John Piper may be a very fine man, but he could also be wrong on some important issues. He is only godly because of the work of Jesus Christ in his life, not because of anything else.

    But why are you “concerned about believers who think he is not fine and godly?” Are you concerned that they are not believers because they do not agree with Piper? Your train of thought leads to Piper=God!

  37. Arce-

    Did Piper do some sermons on God creating evil or something? And then that would mean evil would be an attribute of God??? I’m missing something here about what the God I know is like, and how He declared what he made “good” or “very good.”

  38. Seneca –

    I think the question should be “Would Piper sit down to dinner with Dee?” I haven’t been around long, but I get the idea that Dee would love to sit down to dinner with Piper, and I’d love to be a fly on the wall 🙂

  39. Seneca,
    Please explain how you would see “Christian Hedonism” as traditional, conservative orthodoxy. I view it the same as “Christian Anxiety” or “Christian Riches” see Luke 8:14. Put “Christian” in front of all three types of thorns and they still choke out God’s Word….
    Or how is quoting Eph 5 twice in Desiring God, Marriage as “Wives, be submissive to your husbands… For the husband is head of the wife” where the ellipses leave out “as unto the Lord” conservative?
    Or in the same chapter where he changes “as Christ loved the church” to “as Christ led the church”?
    I tend to like and agree with Piper in many areas, but am “appalled” over how he treats scripture.

  40. I believe that Piper, because he insists that God causes evil, is a heretic. He almost drove my daughter away from the faith at a conference with his repeated sermonizing on evil as being created by God. — Arce

    The same answer as Calvin & Mohammed to the paradox of evil:
    1) God is all-powerful.
    2) God is all-good.
    3) Evil exists.

    Any two of these three axioms makes sense. Add the third and you have a paradox.

    Calvin, Mohammed, and Piper all resolve this paradox by eliminating (2), sacrificing God’s nature to God’s omnipotence. The result has been described by Christian Monist as “a God who is Omnipotent but not Benevolent.” It’s a side effect of extreme predestination.

  41. P.S. Seneca? “Godly” has been used to excuse a lot of bad behavior. The Ayatollahs and Talibani are just the most extreme examples in contemporary Islam, and I’m sure Fred Phelps would describe himself and his crusade as “Godly” and all who do not fall in line as “of the Devil”. So speak English instead of Christianese.

  42. Seneca

    You are spouting the same old, same old. Liberal-a legalist’s red herring.How novel…. It is the silly charge of those who would have accused me of being a witch in the days of those highly admired Puritans.(BTW-you do know that some godly Puritans used the witch word to do a land grab from of “witches” that held prime land. Get my drift?)Today, the word “liberal” is used by those unimaginative “leaders”,trying desperately to marginalize those who have disagreement on secondary issues.Especially those who are getting somewhere.

    You are wrong on so many counts. In fact, here is a challenge. Go ahead and list the doctrines that I espouse that you deem “liberal.” I assume that they must include primary doctrines and I am fascinated to see your list. This ought to be interesting. In fact, I just might do a post on it.I am most interested in seeing how insightful you are about my beliefs. you are a long term provocateur on this blog so i assume you will have much evidence for your accusation.

    You still have not once acknowledged the issues that some people have had with some of Piper’s “orthodox” doctrines. They do not perceive Piper as their enemy. It is some of the doctrines that he claims are of primary importance. And that is what has hurt them.

    Finally, my guess is Piper would be “too busy” to have dinner with me. I would be happy to eat with him. We would have quite a conversation-especially over the issue of domestic abuse.

  43. “Please explain how you would see “Christian Hedonism” as traditional, conservative orthodoxy. ”

    Thank you! Of course a lot of twisting and redefining of terms has to be used. But it pleases ears.

    Or, how about his “Scream of the Damned” sermon. Jesus was not “damned” on the cross but Piper purposely chose that wording to be shocking. God cannot be “damned”. Damned and cursed is not the same thing but Piper chose to redefine for us. Watch these guys, they do lots of that.

    And of course, Piper never tells us if the husband who asked his wife to do a threesome was a professing believer or not. He simply tells the wife to tell the husband she “wants” him to be her leader but cannot sin. Say what? You want a thug who just asked you to do a threesome to be your “leader”? Only the brainwashed can follow Piper. I think it is his stage persona…that “passion” with all the flowery phrases and adjectives he uses. People buy into that.

  44. H U G.
    Radio host Michael Savage eliminates (1) to resolve the paradox…. In light of the Cross as the ultimate revelation of the Divine nature, this view is intriguing… Of course Savage thinks Jesus was mistaken to turn the other cheek- Look where that got him!

  45. Seneca,

    Dee & Deb are anything but liberal. They hold to a traditional Christian orthodoxy that may or may not include the various doctrines of reformed thought (and please correct me Dee & Deb if I intrude where I know not).

    If anybody is a dyed-in-the-wool liberal here, it’s Muff Potter. I am grateful for the atmosphere of tolerance here at TWW. Like a wandering Jew or Gypsy in Old Eastern Europe I have been booted from many cities (blogs), but not from this one.

  46. Dee has scoffed at those conservatives who hold to a young earth.
    Dee disagrees with those who conservatives who believe the Apostle Paul wrote exactly, in quite simple words, what God intended he would write about gender roles.
    Dee, according to the posts I have read, does not like conservative theologians.
    I believe Dee is a moderate, not a conservative.

  47. John Piper has NEVER caused anybody to lose their faith.
    Wade Burleson has NEVER caused anybody to lose their faith.
    Bishop John Spong has NEVER caused anybody to lose their faith.

    When we stand before God at the great judgment day, we will stand without excuse.
    GOD: “Why did you not listen to and obey my voice?”
    ME: “It’s John Piper’s fault. I didn’t like what he said about Christian hedonism.”

    GOD: “Okay, your excused.”

  48. Seneca,
    Paul’s contemporary, Peter, said that Paul was hard to understand.
    The problem with taking Paul’s words of instruction to different churches as God’s intentions for all is to deny what Jesus said and did in very simple words and actions concerning gender.
    Gender Gospel pushers HAVE to IGNORE what Jesus said for all time and to all people and what Jesus did as an example for all time and to all people. Then, WHILE ignoring JESUS and the gospels, they pick and choose and string together bits and pieces of what Paul said, who wasn’t even fully understood by his contemporaries who lived during the same time and spoke the same language.
    And you and Piper, who don’t even speak the same language as Paul or live in the same culture as he did, you call what he said simple and God’s intent. You deceive yourselves chasing after what is not clear and ignoring that which is.

  49. Piper makes the gospel a heavy burden for some wives rather than lifts their burden, claiming to speak for God. He makes God look bad and makes it easy for those women to turn away from God because of how Piper misrepresents God to them.

    Ultimately the choice is up to the woman.

    But with so many fanboys claiming Piper is above reproach and demanding that we respect him, it sure does add to a woman’s burden to the point that the burden becomes easier to toss to the side than to knuckle under and follow the gospel according to Piper.


  50. Seneca,

    To disagree and to vilify are NOT the same things. To disagree with a theologian of either stripe, liberal or conservative, has NOTHING whatsoever to do with personal like or dislike of the individual whose ideas are under discussion.

    I have NEVER observed Dee or Deb resort to personal attacks on anyone when discussing their ideas. Think critically before you make charges that you can’t back up with fact.

  51. Seneca
    You have proven my point, and I shall write a post about it soon. According to Seneca, to be God’s right hand man one must be a conservative (read real Christian) and buy certain secondary issues. Who the heck gives a hoot about trusting in Jesus and following Him as your Lord? Seneca says that it doesn’t matter unless one believes in a young earth and his designated conservative theologians.

    Now Seneca, who is traveling around the blogosphere insulting decent people (not only at TWW), why don’t you list the conservative theologians besides Piper that I must follow in order to fit your exacting standards. No wonder there has been much turmoil in your church.

  52. Muff
    Please do not misunderstand this argument. I love liberals, especially liberals like you. In fact, I would far rather dine with you than with Seneca. Promise me you will play the piano! I think Seneca will be startled with who is in heaven. Can you imagine what he will do if there are a few liberals there? God may not heed his advice.

  53. Seneca@8:38
    IF (and I ain’t sayin it’s necessarily so, Eagle) but IF an agnostic makes excuse for faith-less-ness based on Piper’s or any other preacher’s ideas, then obviously there’s no excuse. To the extent Piper, or any other preacher says “Ttrust and obey, for there’s no other way to be happy in Jesus” then I am in total agreement. Still, as someone who’s conservative in the sense of not wanting to take too many liberties with the Bible, and orthodox in trusting Christ alone for my regeneration and the fulfillment of all listening to and obeying of God’s law in me, I must ask, “If Piper, or any other preacher, says a man must be born again “as a Christian Hedonist” in order to see the kingdom of God, just how does that square with orthodoxy/conservatism/tradition in your view?

  54. Appalled – have you read Piper’s blog entry on the bridge collapse in MN?

    Talk about horrifying “theology”!

  55. Mara 8:54 about making the gospel a burden– I hear I John 5:3a quoted quite often “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments.” Making the point that just loving God is not enough, or some such– but they leave out part b “and his commandment is NOT burdensome.”

  56. I hear you Appalled.

    The problem is with men adding to the gospel and teaching as God’s precepts the commandments of men.
    And those commands of men become very burdensome. But the men who have added the commands blame God, saying, I’m not the one that said it, God did. You aren’t arguing with me but with God when you resist these commands I’m teaching.

    You know, there are all sort of people who think taking the Lord’s name in vain means using “God” and “Jesus Christ” as swear words.
    But really, it is so much more than that. It is saying, “Thus saith the Lord,” when God has not said.

    Sometimes I get really concerned about those who add to the Gospel. They are breaking one of the ten commandments.

  57. Yeah, I’ve read about the bridge collapse. Sure am thankful I wasn’t among the folks who got in God’s way while He was trying to get JP’s attention….

  58. I am going to throw in my two cents or maybe if I ramble too much, a whole dollar…

    1.) Dee and Deb aren’t liberals because they can recite the apostles creed without crossing their fingers. An example: I don’t care for Beth Moore but she isn’t a liberal. Liberal theology ends with that Episcopalian female priest, in Oregon I believe, who claims to also be a Buddhist. Perhaps Dee and Deb are incorrect in their interpretation of female leaders in the church but, they aren’t liberal in the tenants of the faith that deal with our Justification. See liberal theology leads to unbelief. Read J. Gresham Machen, a Presbyterian but not a Calvinista. He came up in the twenties when this new social gospel was spreading like wild fire. He was a liberal for a time before returning to orthodoxy. Also, just because someone doesn’t agree with you that doesn’t mean they are liberal. Liberal is thrown about like racist these days. Soon it will lose all meaning. Also, some conservative church bodies such as the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod do not believe in women pastors but have deaconesses. Something to think about… Oh wait, Lutherans believe that Jesus died for the world not just a few so never mind don’t look at that church body… (Notice I’m joking)

    2.) John Piper…. John Piper can also say the creed without crossing his fingers thus he is a conservative. Not only that but he believes Christ death was for JP. This a good thing. Therefore, he is an orthodox Christian. However, John Piper’s writings are as flowery as a 16 year old girl writing a note about her boyfriend so I generally don’t read him. John Piper’s notion of Christian Hedonism is a bit bizarre… I am not sure if you can ever come to the conclusion that you desire God enough and further more desiring something and actually having it are two totally different things. I am pregnant so, I desire strange things often; recently CHEESEBURGERS!! But wanting that Cheeseburger and sinking my teeth into it are two totally different things. Of course when I think of Hedonism I think of any addiction out there and you do that thing until it makes you sick so you stop and then do it all over again. Are we supposed to OD on God? What does that mean?
    So, if you are a Calvinista, enjoy John Piper. I hope you are blessed and grow in grace but, don’t get angry because someone who isn’t reformed, wait scratch that, Calivinista doesn’t jump on the JP bandwagon. If you aren’t a Calvinista you might be a little disturbed by the L in Tulip and the fact that some Calvinista like to shock people by saying dead babies are in HELL. (Note I said SOME say this) Plus, before the Calvinistas, there were actually some very good expositors of the gospel from all denominations not just Calvinist ones. You can find others to feed you the word of God. The Calvinistas aren’t the only ones on the market.

    3.) Crappy Christian P&R. I suggest you try to find the Youtube click (12 min.) from King of the Hill when Bobby rebels against his father and starts going to Youth group where the hip, tatted up, skate boarding, youth leader gets Bobby to go to Christian rock concerts. Hank freaks out because Bobby wants to get a tattoo to be his testimony. Hank rescues Bobby from the Christian Rock Concert and tells him this amazing thing. “Bobby, Christian rock doesn’t make Christianity better, it makes Rock and Roll worse.” The episode is called “Reborn to be Wild” I want to write SO MUCH MORE about this but I will stop for now. Let’s just say that I talk to lots of people who HATE this type of music. Dee, give me your email again. I want to write you about this!

  59. A final, probably unread note: I agree, we’ll be shocked at who is in heaven if we are given that awareness. You don’t have to be a conservative theologian; many religious conservatives will not be there.
    It’s not about secondary issues, it is about the veracity of Scripture given to us by God for all times, all peoples, all cultures.
    I read TWW a lot and have been given the opportunity to comment. But I’m not one of the choir yea-saying everything they write.
    I believe Dee and Deb are fine ladies; we disagree about a number of things, agree about others.
    TWW is a BLOG, theoretically contrary opinions are welcome.

  60. Dee, thanks for your note and your prayers! Some major changes are coming my way and I need them now more than ever. I appreciate TWW a great deal! Though my personal feelings toward BMoore limit my ability to appreciate her teaching, I’m glad to know that she was allowed to teach, even if it was under the blah blah blah…She’s obviously gifted and speaks to the hearts of many, and Father uses her. I hope eventually freedom for ALL of our gifted sisters, such as you, Deb and Debbie K. will be embraced by the SBC?! Thanks again for your prayers!

  61. Seneca

    Theoretically???? The mere fact that you are allowed to comment here, as well as other similar blogs, shows our sincerity about contrary positions. But, I am also allowed to tell you that you are way off base when you judge me. I trust the veracity of the Scriptures. I do not believe that it speaks clearly to secondary issues, including young earth. Where Scripture is not patently clear, we have to be careful with our man interpreted dogmas. And that is why we exist.

    As for you being one of the choir, if the history of which I am aware is correct, you are contrarian to a fault.

    As for unread, everything that gets written on this blog gets read. We just cannot respond to every comment. However, we do give it a whirl.

  62. jack allen

    Go back and read our review on Beth Moore-The Enigma of Beth Moore. We still get ugly comments and emails about it. It taught us an important lesson. Put on your armor if you say anything less than glowing about an idol. Heck, all we did was review a Christianity Today article.

  63. Robin

    Now this I need to hear about. Potential post???
    Well stated about the liberal thing. It is interesting to me that certain folks – mostly YE types or Calvinista wonks – tend to claim that I, along with many others, are ether “liberal” or, even worse, a heretic. For some, liberal and heretic are one and the same.

    I may not like some folks like CJ Mahaney, but it would never occur to me to think that they were not saved. I am curious. What is it about the gender debate that would cause someone to think that I might not be saved? There seem to be a lot of people out there who believe they are sitting on the Moses seat making judgments for God.

  64. Appalled

    I like Anne Graham Lotz, but she said that 911 was a call to her to repent. So, 3000+ people had to die for Anne to repent?? Hopefully she has reconsidered her words.

  65. Dee; “Theoretically???? The mere fact that you are allowed to comment here, as well as other similar blogs, shows our sincerity about contrary positions

    Dee/Deb, I’m actually quite appreciative of that. I can’t recall that you ever refused to post one of my responses.

    Finally I’m more deeply cynical than contrarian. It’s hard to overestimate the depth of my cynicism.

  66. Someone in this thread said that if a person believes that the NT order for churches results in ordained leadership (bishops, elders, pastors, whatever – depending on that polity), being male that they are ignoring what Jesus said and did with respect to gender.

    Did I get that right?

    People who hold that view are ignoring Jesus?

    That is really stunning.

    I believe we have to get a place where we can respect one another and not let an issue like gender roles dominate our thinking and cause us to claim that everyone who doesn’t believe as we do is ignoring Jesus.

    Btw, the people who are ignoring Jesus includes the vast majority of Christians on the planet today.

    One may not agree with that position, but to say that all of these Christians and churches are just ignoring Jesus is really unbelievable.

    How about we learn to say that whatever we may believe about gender roles is what we believe to be consistent with all of biblical teaching, but we know others disagree, and that’s o.k.?

    Then we can attend the church that practices the view that we agree with.

    Is there something wrong with this approach?

  67. Anonymous

    I am not sure what comment to which you are referring. You criticism is valid. However, it is important to note that those who do not adhere to what the current secondary doctrine du jour is, have been called all sorts of names-heretics, liberals, ignoring the Bible, etc. I have written extensively on this subject as you know. It does not surprise me that such a criticism comes up. It is another way of saying “back atcha bub.” “Good for the goose, good for the gander”, etc.

    This sort of comment becomes a natural protective response on the part of those who have been hurt. And that is why I believe that teachers and pastors will be held to a tough standard when we meet our Savior. If those who allow themselves to be the designated leaders start this nonsense (Ken Ham, CBMW, etc), they better be prepared that others will follow suit. They are to be role models, after all.

    I think it is important to look behind the scenes as to why this stuff is happening. I am not condoning it, but I certainly understand it.

  68. Seneca, you said John Piper has never caused anyone to lose their faith. That may be true, I don’t know, but he sure robbed me of the JOY of my faith for awhile. When I started studying his thoughts on limited atonement I got sucked into a deep hole of depression. It looked for all the world like the God I had loved for for 44 years wasn’t who I thought he was. I began to fear death because I was terrified I would die and have to face some kind of a cruel capricious monster. God tenderly brought me back to who he really is, but it was the most painful season of my life.

    I loved a lot of things about Passion, but I worry that it opened a door for thousands of young people to start delving into Piper’s theology, and not having the many long years of a tender relationship with God that I have, they are in danger of getting derailed into that narrow theology, and they might not recover from it like I did.

    On a happier subject, my SBC church here in Arkansas lets women baptize people in our church services! I think it started with our female children’s minister baptizing children, but now I’ve seen other women baptizing people they have mentored. I hope I get to baptize someone some day, and I think I will!

  69. Seneca,

    No matter what one says one believes, JESUS said, if there are poor people in your community and you do not feed them, clothe them, and love them, you will not be in heaven. Tough thing. And he boiled all the OT commandments down to: Love God, Love humans. With all the hate coming out of some so-called conservative Reformed Christians, I suspect the commandments of Jesus are more often violated than followed. I suppose that makes me a liberal if I care more for the downtrodden than the preachers and pastors who live high on the hog, but then Jesus would have called them hypocrits for pushing more money, and power, and more restrictions on who can serve Jesus, and not living in love for the least of his children.

  70. Kathy
    Thank you for your comment. Perhaps it will help others to understand the dangers involved with certain doctrines and those that espouse them. Thankfully, I was a member of a Pete Briscoe’s church in Dallas in which women could baptize children. I hope you get a chance to do so one day. Send us a picture if you do.

  71. Some thoughts for the ladies (and others) regarding John Piper’s “orthodoxy” or lack thereof, depending on where you come down on things:

    It is worth keeping in mind when dealing with John Piper’s theology, that what you are getting is Jonathan Edwards distilled through John Piper; this creates all sorts of problems! First, you have to do the background reading to separate Edwards from Piper, which isn’t always easy to do.

    Also, where the problem of evil is concerned, neither Dr. Piper nor Jonathan Edwards, has taught that God causes evil, although both would take the position that God did ordain that evil exist through secondary causes, which is practically the same position that the Westminster Confession of Faith takes. While it may seem like quibbling with words, the two positions are worlds apart. The distasteful reality is that Piper, and occasionally Edwards, aren’t as precise in their use of words as they really should be.

    The deeper problem is why in the world the Calvinistas (as they have been named here) are so quick to claim Edwards! While Jonathan Edwards is unquestionably a genius, he is often far further from the world of Reformed orthodoxy (by which I mean the Reformed faith as contained in the various confessions, i.e., the Westminster Confession, Belgic Confession, or 2nd Helvetic Confession) than they know. Just one example is the fact that Edwards functionally teaches a doctrine of divinization; all that’s missing is the term itself!

    While Piper raves about Edward’s The Religious Affections, he apparently never mentions that it is a political work, meant to defend the revival in Northampton, Mass., by doing the impossible – namely interpreting the providence of God. The Reformed “orthodox” of the day, known as the Old Side, were taking Edwards to school over the excesses of the revival, and their theology is far, far more orthodox than Edwards (just read the writings of Samuel Davies or John Thomson for evidence of that fact).

    Unfortunately, it seems that the vast majority of the Calvinistas are getting their Edwards through Piper, which means that they haven’t understood Edwards at all!

  72. “…I suppose that makes me a liberal if I care more for the downtrodden than the preachers and pastors…”

    I beg your pardon Arce, MUFF is the only liberal, Marxist, apostate, heretic here! (smiley face)

  73. Dee, I’m pretty sure anonymous is referring to me, though he missed what I was saying.

    What I said, and I stand by it, is that in order to claim that compism is ordained by God, a person MUST ignore the words of Jesus in the matter.

    Jesus said that whoever builds his house on the bedrock of His words, that house will stand.

    compism IS NOT build on the bedrock of the words of Jesus. Compism is built on the sand of the traditions of men.

    Men take (a few select) words of Paul (while ignoring much else of what Paul says) and make them the foundation of their pet doctrine of male hierarchy.

    But nowhere, in all of the words of Jesus, is there any support for this doctrine. The words of Jesus ARE NOT the bedrock of compism. Compism is built on sand and propped up with a lot of assumption, speculation, and warped logic.

    In order to support compism, men like Piper and Driscoll have to pretend that Jesus never said:

    Matthew 23:8 But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. 9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. 10 Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ.


    Luke 11:27 While [t]Jesus was saying these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed.” 28 But He said, “On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it.”


    Luke 22:25 And He said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who have authority over them are called ‘Benefactors.’ 26 But it is not this way with you, but the one who is the greatest among you must become like the youngest, and the leader like the servant. 27 For who is greater, the one who reclines at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who reclines at the table? But I am among you as the one who serves.

    and there are many other words of Jesus that undercut the comp position, as well as words spoken by Paul, himself. But the pushers of comp doctrine ignore all those words and focus on a few that seem to uphold the comp doctrine that their itching ears love to hear.

    And I stand by what I say.

    I would hope others would be more concerned about what they are building their houses on.

  74. Reformed Rebel
    Fascinating! Would you ever be interested in doing a post on this issue here.

    You said “The distasteful reality is that Piper, and occasionally Edwards, aren’t as precise in their use of words as they really should be.” Could you expand on this idea? I cannot believe that Piper is unaware of the effects of his language. So why doesn’t he carefully expand on his thoughts in this area? Especially he should be clear in the area of God preselecting and creating people, before creation, to go to hell.

    Could you recommend one book that could give us insight into what you say? Is there any analysis of the current movement, that we have labeled Calvinista to differentiate it from Calvinism with which we have no beef. (albeit some theological differences in a few areas.)

  75. Mara
    Good response. Anonymous, she makes sense in her approach. It sounds like a valid theological argument. Thoughts?

  76. Mara
    Someday I am going to write a book called The It Sucks for You Gospel.” I will share the profits-it will sell millions.

  77. Oh, good! I could use the money! 😉

    (You could also call it the SOL gospel… Sorry Outa Luck Gospel. Since this is the message many people are given concerning the gender gospel.)

  78. “The distasteful reality is that Piper, and occasionally Edwards, aren’t as precise in their use of words as they really should be”

    yes, a huge problem. And many are willing to translate for them both. Problem is Piper is so flowery with words and add to that his passionate stage persona many can hear him say a wife should take abuse for a season and think it is Gospel. Of course, he never tells us whether the abusing husband is a professing believer or not. Seems to be an unimportant point for him.

  79. Mara
    How about The Darn Tootin’ Shame Gospel? BTW, did you hear the Mark Driscoll deal with his wife’s hair. She has a number of children and decided to cut her hair short to make life a bit easier for herself in the AM. Well, Mark was displeased because she hadn’t consulted him and he wanted her hair longer. So, she has apologized. Never once did he say ‘Gee, maybe I could bend here since she is putting up with me and also raising the kids so I can run around and instruct a dying world how to interpret the SOS?” Nyet. She was so, so sorry to have offended him. SFY Gospel in play, once again. (This is a guy who wears Mickey Mouse shirts).

  80. anon
    And what is it with these guys and women staying with abusive husbands. Is there a play book somewhere?

  81. Per the email I just sent Dee:

    Could I expand? Absolutely, though I don’t have room for it here. Read some of Edwards on re-creation, which flies in the face of Reformed doctrine… For Piper, you’d need to plow through a lot of audio.

    Can I recommend one book for further research? I could, but I won’t – as a bibliophile, I can’t ever limit myself to just one work! You might try these two for starters:

    McClymond, Michael J. “Salvation and Divinization: Jonathan Edwards and Gregory Palamas and the Theological Uses of Neoplatonism” in Jonathan Edwards: Philisophical Theologian, ed. Helm and Crisp.

    Fiering, Norman. “The Rationalist Foundations of Jonathan Edwards’s Metaphysics”, in Jonathan Edwards and the Merican Experience, ed. Nathan O. Hatch and Harry S. Stout (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998)

    Either of those will point you in the right direction, however dry and academic they may be.

    And I’ll think on writing something up for y’all; right now, with the writing load for seminary, that might be a tall order.

  82. Yeah, Dee, I know what you mean by the Grace haircut story. It’s like her hair doesn’t even belong to her. It belongs to Mark.
    And to Mark, the most important thing for a wife to be is hot. When she turns into a mother (a result of being hot btw) she can’t start looking like a mother because she has to be hot to bolster his position of leadership and praise among all the other manly men.

    Paul tells us to know each other after the spirit rather than the flesh. But the gender gospel people teach that it’s ALL ABOUT FLESH. Male flesh and female flesh, all must stay in their role and be defined by their flesh and what culture says their flesh must be.

    Are you a new mother that is looking for a way to make life a little easier? Sucks to be you. Don’t you dare cut your hair. Life is all about being perfect and hot for your husband while you try to figure out how to chase and corral messy little toddlers. The hot image must never be compromised.

  83. Arce:

    So you are back to saying this: “No matter what one says one believes, JESUS said, if there are poor people in your community and you do not feed them, clothe them, and love them, you will not be in heaven.”

    Jesus did not say this.

  84. Dee:

    Mara’s additional explanation does not make sense.

    I am not going to try and argue her out of her position. I see where she is coming from.

    My complaint is her claim that anyone who doesn’t accept her view is ignoring Jesus. I know that she “stands by that.” That is her right, too.

    Last night I went to a wedding reception, and they had a coffee bar. I began talking to the man and woman working the bar. The woman had lived in the same country where my wife was raised. She is a believer and is relatively new to town. I asked her where she went to church, and she told me the name. The name was one of these new one – word church names from which one cannot tell much.

    So I asked her what denomination it was or type of church.

    She launched into a long speech about how bad denominations were because they were divisions and Jesus did not support divisions and such. She was quoting Jesus, and putting things in Jesus’ mouth that he did not say, and making some stretches and conclusions from things he did say etc. I just listened. It was terrible exegesis and showed little regard for understanding the Bible in context etc.

    I also found that she was extremely judgmental – about all denominations, all Christians who go to denominational churches, and then she even piled in on her own church because it wasnt’ “led by the spirit enough.”

    She had a little support for everything she had. She was close and a mile off at the same time.

    Despite her espoused love for Jesus (which was no doubt real in my opinion), she did not really seem to love the saints all that much. She was in pounce mode. I asked a really simple question, and she began unloading all this stuff that appeared to be based on a lot of baggage she had, but was also papered over with scriptural references. I did not ask another question.

    I know, and hope, that the Lord will mature her in time.

    Christians of all stripes have too much time, in my opinion, to be sniping at one another like this.

    I am perfectly comfortable with disagreements among the brethren.

    I will promote what I believe. But I am not trying to wrestle or shame people into my opinion about a host of issues. And I don’t want to belittle them either.

  85. Being the evangelical pietistic movement that it is, Passion is at least better than Acquire the Fire. My experience from both has been that Giglio’s group is intentionally more God focused, while the SBC’s parallel (which seems to be more targeted at youth groups) more unashamedly promotes the culture wars. And let’s face it; Passion has produce a ton of utility songs for churches. They’re not my favorite, but they’re pretty useful.

  86. Dee: “This is a guy who wears Mickey Mouse shirts…”

    Check again, Sister Dee.
    You will notice in the latest pics being posted on PastorMark.TV, publicity for the new book, and elsewhere, he’s wearing a white shirt, minus a tie, and a blazer. More respectability now that he’s the best-selling author and CEO of a giant mega corporate network that is making serious inroads into the Southern Baptist denomination and philosophically taking over SBC scholarship and academia – i.e.: the ‘mainstreaming’ of Mark Driscoll. Is that a good thing, or bad? Your call.


  87. Hmm, so Edwards was stumping for what the Eastern Orthodox might describe as “theosis” or Pentecostals might refer to as “full sanctification”? Curious. Not that Edwards was likely stumping for a Keswick theology but it’s fun to play with the idea on a Sunday afternoon.

  88. Anonymous on Sun, Jan 08 2012 at 04:01 pm

    My comment made complete sense.

    But you are putting words in my mouth.

    I didn’t say, “Ignore Jesus.”
    I said, “Ignore some of what Jesus said.” I also say they ignore some of what Paul said.

    I still believe Piper and Driscoll are saved. But they are promoting a pet doctrine that cannot be supported by the words of Jesus.

    You only don’t understand what I said because you don’t want to understand what I said, not because it didn’t make sense. It made way more sense than what you want to admit.

    If I’m in attack mode, sorry, but CBMW, Together for the Gospel, and Driscoll’s resurgence movement are in attack mode against women and then slap a, “It’s clearly defined in scripture and clearly God’s intention and if you don’t believe it you are in rebellion to God” when none of this is true. It’s just bullying tactics that I will not be bullied by.

  89. Anonymous on Sun, Jan 08 2012 at 03:46 pm


    So you are back to saying this: “No matter what one says one believes, JESUS said, if there are poor people in your community and you do not feed them, clothe them, and love them, you will not be in heaven.”

    Jesus did not say this.

    Read Matthew 25. He did say it. If there are people who are hungry, unclothed, etc., and you do not do for them, you are a goat and the goats go to hell.

  90. TedS
    I have noticed this. But, somehow with Driscoll, I think he may be poking fun at the establishment.he looks a little too “put together.” It actually looks a bit off.

  91. Anonymous on Sun, Jan 08 2012 at 04:01 pm

    In case you don’t know how this started, it was with Seneca whining about people not respecting Piper who is only “teaching the Bible and God’s intention on gender.”

    My words about ignoring the things Jesus said is in response to him. Too many men think they know what God’s intention is concerning gender when what they are really teaching is what they WANT God’s intention to be on gender.
    I will not let this go by. You cannot prove that what these men teach is God’s intention unless you, straight up, ignore a lot of what Jesus said and even a lot of other things that Paul said.

    If you want to turn it into an accusation that I’m saying these men ignore Jesus, knock yourself out. But the evidence is on my side.
    In order for Piper’s gender gospel to be supported you MUST ignore what Jesus said. That’s the only way it has a leg to stand on. I’m calling these men into account for mishandling and ignoring large portions of scripture. And I’m calling Seneca out for whining over the treatment of Piper here. Piper deserves it. He loves his little gender gospel too much and is sacrificing the purity of the true gospel on his preferences concerning gender.

  92. Bridget
    Yes! That’s it. I knew it was evoking something in me. I think it is a bit of role playing.

  93. RE: dee on Sat, Jan 07 2012 at 06:08 pm:

    Driscoll has also assured us that if a guy doesn’t care for big boobs he’s either lying or he’s queer. Can it be that if a wife wants a short cut with fashionable hair styling she’s a latent lesbian or in blatant rebellion?

    I can’t wait for this moron’s next pronouncement. Keep up the pushback TWW, you ladies will be instrumental in freeing more than one soul from the YRR (young rabid & reformed).

  94. Arce:

    I have read what Matthew 25 says. You can post it word for word next to what you said.

    What Jesus said is not what you said.

    I agree with what Jesus said. I do not agree with what you said. They are not the same.

  95. Arce and Anonymous

    Here is Matt 25 in ref to the goats (Bible Gateway-NIV)
    41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
    44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
    45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
    46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

  96. Thanks Dee.

    I do believe it says what I said it says — don’t take care of the poor and you go to hell.

  97. I have worked with college students for 35 years knowing the Giglios for many of those years. I have the highest regard for Louie and Shelly….they are Godly people. Is Passion the only answer for the Church in modern history? Of course not! Giglio doesn’t claim this however bringing together 45,000 students for an event speaks loudly that God is up to something. Do I agree with every speaker? No. I don’t know of any conference I have attended where I agree with all aspects. Do I agree with Piper on the role of women or his reformed views? No.
    I do believe Louie has devoted his life to reaching college students. Be careful in discerning character, motive and intent because you don’t like the speakers or music. Maybe we ought to talk to him personally before drawing unfounded conclusion. By the way Campus Crusade is not a cult! Come on!
    bruce mcgowan

  98. Bruce
    One of my dearest friends is part of Cru admin in Orlando. I think it is important, whether one agrees with our commenters or not, to get a pulse on the perceptions of the wider Christian community. One must also be aware that some people have been hurt by those in various ministries. Such ministries vary from chapter to chapter.

    Your caution about judging motive is well taken. However, please be a bit more understanding of those who have been hurt. That is the prime directive of this site. You said “Come on.” I could say “Where is the love for those who are not the big names?” You are part of the Texas Baptists. The Baptists are seeing a decline in both baptisms and membership. I might suggest that this may be due to a growing disillusionment with the status quo. Stick around. You might learn something from our readers.

  99. Dee – OK, you finally said it.

    The Prime Directive.

    I’d like to think that you would say this aloud in a very Jean-Luc Picard manner. 😉

  100. also – Dee, it’s so nice of you to fix my bloopers, but you really don’t have to do that for me! 🙂