This totally reminds me of this video from a few years back:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-may-11-2010/god-smacked

…and to think I thought it was satire.
Good for Horton for taking on the patriarchal Calvinistas! I am a big fan of Horton, but keep in mind; he is at least a modified complementarian himself: His church belongs to the URCNA, which quite recently split off the CRC over the issue of women’s ordination. IMO, Horton gives an example of traditional gender roles in the church done right.

The statement that men resist ‘conformity, control and ceremony’ is complete nonsense. Some men do, and some men don’t. That statement makes it sound as if all women just love conformity and control and have been in a position to impose ceremony on the church (for over a thousand, I guess, since Catholicism is full of ceremony). None of those generalisations is true.

Dave AA, you’re right. The muscularity of the gospel is grace.

Thought I’d inject a little humor for your Saturday morning –

10 reasons why men should not be ordained for ministry (by Eugene Cho)

Enjoy!

1. He allowed himself to be flogged.
2. He allowed himself to go down without a fight.
3. He rebuked Peter when he drew his sword and told him to put it away.
4. He wept in public with other people to see.
5. He spent a good part of his life unemployed when he taught and preached.
6. He was not married, and he was single.
7. He challenged authority (man I wish he’d pop up in Mars Hill one day… )
8. He had no problem taking directions from Mary.

Well said, Eagle, well said.

Monker, the best part of that list is the part about how since Judas was a man, men in general are not fit for ministry. Someone should have pointed that out to Mark Driscoll before he preached that women are more gullible than men because of Eve’s deception.

I found this over at goodmenproject.com. Link: http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/is-there-a-moral-to-john-edwards/. It’s not Jonathan Edwards the theologian, but John Edwards the senator – I’m sure that USA media is full of stories about the trial.

“My sympathy for John Edwards, or the long list of other men in the public eye who have fallen from grace, is limited. But we do have this unrealistic expectation that our politicians and athletes and movie stars be perfect. They amass power and wealth by whatever means possible and then set about spinning a tale about how they got there that is a fairy tale in order to stay on top. We collectively look for that crack in the armor and, more often than not, we find it. Once opened, the fall from grace is often breathtaking, with revelation after revelation of misdeeds and dishonesty. And each time, we act surprised.

Most organized religions, Christianity in particular, are premised on the idea that to be human is to be fallible. Christ died for our sins, the Bible tells us. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t try to do right, but it does mean we are going to fail as part of life. The most important part is to be honest about it, to learn from our mistakes, and take responsibility. You would never get any of that by reading the 24-hour news cycle that consists mainly of gotcha journalism.

The moral of the Edwards trial is also the extent to which we collectively are missing the point, sending us off in the direction of our own demise. Men make mistakes. Men who are taught to value their worth by power alone make more mistakes than most. And they lie about it to cover their tracks. This is a very unproductive cycle.

But it doesn’t have to be that way. What if we spent more time talking about the truth of our lives as men? What if the cult of power and wealth were balanced by a cult of compassion or courage or integrity?”

What if indeed. Focus on the last line – there is so obviously a cult of power and wealth within the advocates of ‘macho’ Christianity that they’ve spun way off from what manhood really means. Yes, I’m a woman, so some would argue that I don’t really understand, however I’m pretty sure that godly manhood doesn’t involve a lust for violent sports, contempt for the sexual wellbeing of wives, or holding an iron grip over your congregation/family. The problem? They’re forgetting that as men they’re fallible. Femininity is the enemy. Women aren’t perfect either, but these guys are CLEARLY setting up an attitude among young men which can only be described as “boys rule, girls drool”. And by boys, they mean manly men that don’t EVER reveal the truth about their deepest selves. Nawwww, real men punch their problems out…

“Monker, the best part of that list is the part about how since Judas was a man, men in general are not fit for ministry. Someone should have pointed that out to Mark Driscoll before he preached that women are more gullible than men because of Eve’s deception.”

This has never made sense to me from the bare facts of Genesis. Eve ADMITTED she was deceived. Adam never admitted anything about his own behavior…. but only BLAMED Eve and God.

So blaming is a better leadership qualification? So God decreed: Men are much better suited to lead women because Adam blamed both me and Eve for his behavior.

Right.

René: The ‘biblical’ candy coating makes it easier to sell to Christian masses. And too many are gullible enough to swallow it without examining the ingredients. Truth is, the secular world has already cottoned on to the uselessness of enforcing a macho gender role. Yet again the church is fifty years behind.

Anne, you’re right. The church is perennially fifty years behind. It’s stunning, really.

“My reason for writing was that the T4G articles seemed to rob the Gospel of virtually every bit of its real muscularity — for example the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. It’s my opinion that all the focused-upon secondary issues are filling a vacuum where the primary ones belong.

Feel free to suggest any improvements or additions. Also if you feel I unfairly took out gospel truth they really did affirm in the articles.”

Dave A. A.,

Clever satire! I envy the creative edge many of you have!

With that said, I might be missing something here, but from many of the T4G articles I read (Articles 7-13), I think they affirmed much of the foundational gospel truth. Would you really say articles 7-13 are secondary? Those articles seem pretty foundational and primary to me..

You mentioned they seemed to rob such things as the “forgiveness of sins.”

Is not justification just a “big” word that essentially means made right by God—thus forgiven of our sins through the atoning work of Jesus Christ?

Several of the articles mentioned the latter from what I could see.

I would agree with you that they did not emphasize the gift of the Holy Spirit—Although they did affirm the Trinity.

I can’t speak for all T4G speakers (especially those who formed T4G with Duncan, Dever, Mahaney, Mohler–never listened to them that much), but those I have listened too over the years affirm the Holy Spirit’s gift to us and the GIFTS the Spirit gives us. They also affirm quite frequently the forgiveness of sins through Jesus Christ.

Please remember, Not all those involved with T4G share the same extremes with Driscoll, Mahaney and others…

I know I always seem to go against the current here, but I am not seeing where they are robbing the muscularity of the Gospel truth. If the Gospel is the good news through the atoning work of Jesus Christ on the Cross, the power through Jesus resurrecton—-I think T4G affirms this…

I am not seeing where they are affirming a false gospel here, nor do I think they add any of these secondary issues to the gospel as a means for salvation.

With that said, I do agree with the majority sentiment that they are taking this “masculine” Christianity a bit too far. I don’t really get it, I must confess.. Maybe I am not seeing there conviction when it comes to the Comp doctrine and their belief in the responsibility of men as leaders in the church—but they certainly seem to push the latter a bit too far.

As I have mentioned before, I have not studied the Comp/Egal doctrine enough to know fully where I stand. I have written down many of the websites and books you all have given me to study, and I will have a bit of time to study those in a few weeks.

Regardless of where I fall on all this, I certainly think they tend to make the comp/masculine issue more primary than it should be.

I would also say to you all that ALL those involved in T4G are probablly not in the Driscoll/Fight Church extremes with this mascularity mumbo jumbo—although many of them hold to a comp viewpoint.

I just can’t see David Platt saying some of that extreme stuff, and he is involved with this group. And as I mentioned before, I had some fellow friends of mine who attended this conference…and I know for a fact they don’t line up with the Driscoll’s extremes.

Sorry to go against the current again—carry on! 🙂

Dave A A –

I weep with him . . .

“I know for a fact they don’t line up with the Driscoll’s extremes.”

They just give him their stamp of approval any chance they get.

TedS,

Take another look at what you pulled out of my post..I am referring to my friends here—They don’t give Driscoll their stamp of approval any chance they get. I KNOW that for a fact.

“I know for a fact they don’t line up with the Driscoll’s extremes.”

They just give him their stamp of approval any chance they get.”

Exactly Dave. Hmmm. Wonder why the SBC big wigs have partnered with Acts 29 which is Driscoll and Mars Hill all the way? Oh, NOW they are saying they don’t go along with his extremes in a very indirect and subtle way. In fact, it is hilarious how they are trying not to even mention his name. All of a sudden, Akin who was big on Driscoll for years, is writing treatises of sex in marriage and “sorta kinda” dumbing down the idea of sodomy in marriage. Like, oh the book had really good things in it if you can ignore the barrell of arsenic in it.

Watching how they have parsed the Driscoll relationship has been interesting. What deceivers and charlatans! Even Chandler admitted (he was not thinking!) that Acts 29 is so enmeshed with Mars Hill anhd DRiscoll it is hard to unravel. but the SBC is trying to convince folks his DNA has now magically disappeared from Acts 29. (And he is still on the board and Chandler has no problem with that, either!)

deb –

Thanks for the excerpts from Horton’s article, and for recommending that people read the whole thing.

That Fight Church clip – wow. I probably would have thought it was a parody if I hadn’t known beforehand that it’s not.

Seeker, I don’t think that many of the T4G crowd would come out and say that complementarianism IS the gospel, or part of the gospel. They are too astute for that and they know they would get hammered for it. But according to the transcript of John Piper at this year’s T4G, to accept anything other than their view of gender roles in the family and church is to be on the precipice of a slippery slope, or to introduce a fatal flaw to the gospel like a recessive gene that will weaken it and maybe kill it. To me it feels like they give with one hand and take away with the other.

Sorry for the faulty link on the original Driscoll record label story. Let’s try this again:

(link to original story HERE).

Apologies to Mara 🙂 MARS Hill

“Just curious really. You say they share the same foundation in authoritarianism, but be a little more specific for me if you will…

In what ways is Chandler similar to Driscoll as far as Authoritarianism is concerned?”

No thanks. You probably would not believe it or connect the dots anyway. We have been down this road too many times.

Note on my last post: when I mentioned reporting and photos, i was thinking about some of the images of violence that came from Vietnam. More specifically, images that proved both its horror and futility, like the photo of the young girl who was being burned alive by napalm dropped by our planes; also the photo of the prisoner being executed by a S. Vietnamese official.

I’m a bit late to the party; my weekend has been gloriously eaten up by a family wedding. I watched the groom’s face as the bride was coming down the aisle and was overwhelmed by what I saw there. It was all about love, and the wonder that she, in all her loveliness, should be his. And this is how Christ the Bridegroom looks at us, and this is the mystery that is between man and woman, and between Jesus and His bride. Can we imagine that Jesus, the one who laid down his life for his beloved, ordering her around to prove his machismo? Can we imagine him belittling his bride because, in her femininity, she isn’t into cage fighting? he isn’t seeking to domineer his bride; he’s seeking to raise her up to himself, to even share his throne with her? Why are the preachers of dudey-ness so keen to abandon that kind of glory and wonder, and settle for their petty muscle-flexing instead?

Dave A A — that was sharply brilliant, and terribly true. Some people have forgotten that the letter kills but the Spirit gives life

Also — putting children out there to fight? Sounds way too much like the Hunger Games to me, even though they’re not intending them to die. But something dies when you do things like that

When my son was in pre-school we sent him to Karate lessons to learn self defense. The instructor was a bully-boy macho man. At one event, another child started crying. The big tough instructor berated him for crying and sent him to sit down away from the group. My son got up and walked across the room to this child and put his arm around him to comfort him. I believe my little boy showed true courage and “manliness” that day. It was also the last time he attended those classes. 🙂

Hester,

I’m fairly sure Christian pole dancing does exist… Maybe we’ll write about it soon.

Geez! Slap a fish on anything and ‘christianize’ it.

You know, for all their silly pronouncing and posturing and speaking ex cathedra, each one his own pope, I see little getting done in the kingdom by these men.

I see women, even those in churches that forbid them to preach, quietly preaching to their children, their neighbors, their coworkers, and anyone else God brings across their path. Unpaid.

While these guys pontificate about men leading their homes as rulers, I see the men running off to the lake or the game and the women quietly shepherding the hurting, the sick, the young, the old, and all those with special needs. Unpaid.

While these guys speak out against love songs to Jesus, I see the women quietly singing their love of Him as they rock the babies and tend the sick and very old. Unpaid.

Maybe, just maybe, the church isn’t that business/charitable organization that meets in a certain building under their tutelage.

Maybe the church is the followers of Christ, male and female, who do the work He gave them out of love for Him.

And at times, I wonder how long He will allow the travesty to go on.

Or maybe He has written Ichabod over the door and moved on.

The Church may be thriving mightily even while the churches are in their death throes.

How can Jonathan Edwards and the Macho Gospel coexist, anyway? Jonathan Edwards wore robes and falling bands (big clerical collars) to church. So by Mark Driscoll’s standards, he’s gay. — Hester

Simple. The only thing they know about Jonathan Edwards is the only thing I knew about him until a couple years ago: “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.”

ONE Hellfire-and-Damnation Sermon. Firewalling God’s POWER, Omnipotence, POWER, Masculinity, and POWER. A Macho God Who Can and Will Beat Us All Up.

Linda @ 11:09 –

Liked your entire post, especially this:

“Maybe, just maybe, the church isn’t that business/charitable organization that meets in a certain building under their tutelage.”

For many church leaders, the diminishing of these organizations (theirs specifically) would shatter their worlds. Sometimes I think it would be a good thing for the church in America if it had to go underground. Right now I think a part if the church here is staying underground because of what has occurred in the institutional church.

Hi Seeker
“I know I always seem to go against the current here, but I am not seeing where they are robbing the muscularity of the Gospel truth. If the Gospel is the good news through the atoning work of Jesus Christ on the Cross, the power through Jesus resurrecton—-I think T4G affirms this…”

I suppose so, in a way. In other places, and speaking individually, they may do this. But COLLECTIVELY in this particular affirm/deny statement which appears to have been carefully thought out by some really smart guys, including “the smartest man I know”, I’m appalled by how much they leave out. Just one more example: they use the word “gospel” frequently, and we all know that’s GOOD news. But not quite so good, if God is not good. This they nowhere affirm. “We affirm that the Bible reveals God to be infinite in all his perfections, and thus truly omniscient, omnipotent, timeless, and self-existent.” It would only have taken a couple words to throw in “benevolent” or “merciful” or “kind” or “loving”. The love and goodness of God are MIA in the whole piece. I fear they feared those attributes would sound too “feminine”.
“Not all those involved with T4G share the same extremes with Driscoll, Mahaney and others…” Mahaney, as a founding apostle of T4G, can’t be distanced from it (unless his friends call him to repentance) as they’re trying to do with Driscoll. I threw a Driscoll quote into my English Slandered Version just for fun.
Speaking of Driscoll, he didn’t actually use the phrase “gunning for” in the YouTube interview of his band leader, where he speaks of the “takeover” Christian music. That was apparently his editorialist’s turn of phrase. Still, this appears to be taking the MMA and punching and going OT stuff to the next level. I pictured a bunch of gangstas bursting into the local Air One studio, guns blazing, announcing “All right, youz guyz, wez iz takin ova diz place! No more o’ doze prom songz fo’ Jezus!”

Bridget2 wrote:

“It also seems that the Neo Calvinists have spent the last 25 years refuting feminism. It would be hard for any of them to lay waste to a big part of the past 25 years of their lives as misplaced . . . so now they must make what they have taught for 25 years of “major importance” to “their Gospel.”

Yes. That’s the “sunk cost fallacy”. Wenatchee the Hatchet has written about that within a church context.

Bridget2-

“I think they spend much of their time trying to figure out how to govern the church (and women) instead of doing what Jesus called all of us to do together.”

Is this governing of the church male only elders or not? Driscoll tweeted about his “friend pastor Judah” Smiths’s The City Church hosting wof/prosperity preacher Brian Houston this weekend. (They evidently had a conference as well.) Driscoll had gone and “enjoyed an hour with both.” But, City Church has an unbiblical and ungospelly co-lead pastor; Judah’s wife, Pastor Chelsea. Judah’s mother, Pastor Gini Smith, is an elder there as well according to the web site. Is this one of those times where we just go to get the “biblical” wof prosperity teaching from Houston and just forget that Driscoll is promoting a church with female pastors…isn’t that against some A29 comp rule or something?
http://www.regonline.com/builder/site/?eventid=1069738

Rene –
We could just write it off as “ego” and say “get over yourself.” At the same time, it is a difficult and heart renching thing to experience shaking to that degree in your life. That said, I think many of today’s leaders need such an event in their lives. Or, they can be like Mr. Mahaney and try to keep morphing into something else, somewhere else. I’m praying for a “Paul” experience for them. Sometimes I wonder what Paul would preach in their churches if was even invited.

Hester

Great comment! I will plan to write on pole dancing for. Jesus soon. We need to go after our gender, too.

Those high heels didn’t look like fitness equipment to me. Who do they think they’re kidding?

I have to say a few things after watching that Fight Church promo.

1. I almost pissed myself laughing at the sight of the minister praying over the fighter’s injured testicles. I hope I wasn’t the only immature one who found that just sublimely ridiculous. — Pam

Well, to a Real Man (TM) that IS The Most Important Part of the Body…

And weren’t the testicles and phallus actually worshipped in a LOT of cultures? Hmmmm…. How long a distance between praying over and praying TO?

Just one more example: they use the word “gospel” frequently, and we all know that’s GOOD news. But not quite so good, if God is not good. This they nowhere affirm. “We affirm that the Bible reveals God to be infinite in all his perfections, and thus truly omniscient, omnipotent, timeless, and self-existent.” It would only have taken a couple words to throw in “benevolent” or “merciful” or “kind” or “loving”. The love and goodness of God are MIA in the whole piece. — Dave A A (not to be confused with Titan A E)

God Omniscient and Omnipotent, i.e. All-POWERful.

All about God’s POWER, nothing about God’s Nature or Benevolence or Kindness or Mercy. Only POWER.

A God who is Omnipotent but not Benevolent.

If they don’t say anything about the latter, they might as well close with “AL’LAH’U AKBAR! AL’LAH’U AKBAR! AL’LAH’U AKBAR!”

“No thanks. You probably would not believe it or connect the dots anyway. We have been down this road too many times.”

Wow..Really?

Why do you assume I would not believe it or not connect the dots…And no…on this particular subject…we have not been down this road..

You call Chandler as having the same authoritative issues just like Driscoll,

But the last time I checked—

Chandler hasn’t fired Elders like Driscoll…

And on top of this, there isn’t a “Village Refuge” website like Mars Hill because of authoritarian issues in the Village…Or have I missed that as well?

There isn’t ANY evidence, as far as I know, to show that Chandler/The Village have had the same type of problems that Driscoll/Mars Hill have committed when it comes to Authoritative problems…..That is what you are implying, is it not?

All you can come up with is “Chandler just says it nicer from stage.”

So I ask you to show me evidence…To point me in the right direction…To show me how Chandler and Driscoll share similar authoritative issues…If I am missing something, then I would love to see it…Do you really have some condemning evidence that connects Chandler to Driscoll’s authoritarian problems? Or are you just creating a straw man argument?

So if you have something, I will ask once again, show me? Or will you continue to dismiss me like you did with your slightly arrogant statement above…

Sigh…

“There isn’t ANY evidence, as far as I know, to show that Chandler/The Village have had the same type of problems that Driscoll/Mars Hill have committed when it comes to Authoritative problems…..That is what you are implying, is it not?”

No. I am simply looking at doctrinal beliefs of the two because doctrine always drives behavior and eventually shows itself in fruit. But in closed authoritarian (elder ruled) systems that takes a lot of time and you need brave people like the Petrys to come forward with documentation. Most won’t. Still, many simply respond that they were not there and cannot judge. That is how strong the celebrity authoritarian hold is on people.

Chandler has many years of supporting and working with Driscoll. Had he problems with the doctrinal direction and behavior of Driscoll, I would assume as a man of integrity, he would have backed off and not continued to “affirm” him in any way.

As to evidence,most pew sitters who have had disagreements and been treated badly already know they would never be believed. So it takes someone in the inner circle to come forward. But that is rare. It is like going against Stalin. You are ruined.

What we believe drives our actions and responses. So, many people believe the guru and his interpretation of scripture for whatever reason. People are drawn to authoritarian systems where the talking head tells them they know best and what to believe. And since the talking heads are affirmed by other talking heads, most people take this as the good housekeeping seal of approval and never look at the false underlying premise of the entire system. Which is built on authoritarianism of some “specially anointed” ones and has nothing to do with the Kingdom.

Hot off the press: “When Grace Goes Violent” from the Desiring God blog quoting Matt Chandler
http://www.desiringgod.org/blog/posts/when-grace-goes-violent
And you know what? I actually think this post is good! He speaks of the love of God and the right kind of violence and aggression–against sin!

Seeker

I have already listened to that breakout session. While I appreciated Carl Trueman’s constructive criticism of celebrity pastors, I am mindful of the fact that he claimed Mahaney was.NOT a colleague when he was appointed to the review panel that declared CJ “fit for ministry”. I believe we adequately demonstrated in a previous post that Trueman’s and Mahaney were indeed friends PRIOR to the review.

Who do these guys think they’re kidding? Certainly not us here at TWW.

Hester – I don’t know if he mentioned pole dancing in that sermon in Scotland but I do know that he mentioned that women should be willing to orally pleasure their husbands all the time in order to win them to Christ. Which to me is a shame because I was planning on attending that church sometime – it’s near where I live and I know for a fact that the pastor preaches about the grace of God in Christ at least now and again, rather than his own opinions on how you should live your life, which is hard to find in a church these days (as this very blog testifies). But then I heard about that infamous Driscoll sermon there and I checked out the church’s website and they don’t appear to have distanced themselves from his comments. In fact it looks like you can still listen to the sermon online. It makes me scared to go there.

In his Confessions of a Reformission Rev, Mark Driscoll wrote:

“I assumed the students and singles were all pretty horny, so I went out on a limb and preached through the Song of Solomon in the fall. I printed up a nice lengthy introduction to the book, with a lot of information about sex and marriage… Each week, I extolled the virtues of marriage, foreplay, oral sex, sacred stripping and sex outdoors, just as the book teaches, because all Scripture is indeed profitable. I was frank but not crass and did not back away from any of the tough issues regarding sex and pleasure. This helped us a lot because apparently a pastor using words like “penis” and “oral sex” is unusual; and before you could say “aluminum pole in the bedroom”, attendance began to climb steadily to more than two hundred people a week.” (Confessions, pp. 94, 96)

Seeker

I agree with your opinion that Trueman’s should not have been on that review panel.

Lo and behold, he’s selected to assess Mahaney and other ‘celebrity pastors.’ It just looks silly to me.

In addition, it seemed to me that Duncan and Anyabwile went out of their way to emphasize “honoring” pastors who “have a wider influence”, as a conscious effort to balance out Trueman’s points.

“You may be right regarding Chandler. He says many things that frustrate me, although that’s a more recent phenomenon. There’s a tangible difference between the Chandler we see today and the one before he started running with the T4G crowd.”

I agree with you. And agree with you concerning Truman. Bizarre considering his public housekeeping seal of approval for Mahaney even befoe AoR started their process.

Scot McKnight did a decent review of Chandler’s book. This book is just the same basic regurgitated stuff of other Reformed up and comers in their books.

Anon 1 –

I do 🙂

CJ’s “non-pals” have all stuck their heads (including their brains) in the sand. They remind me of the three monkeys who see no, hear no, speak no evil. There are about three sets of the monkeys though.

Seeker, we are simply not going to agree on connecting dots. In your scenario it takes men who remain holy and humble in the face of long term celebrity. That is so rare…. I cannot tell you. They keep the same stage persona the whole time, though. People really do think they know the talking heads. People are so naive they will believe anything.

I have noticed a big change in Chandler’s demeanor in the last 5 years. And it is not better. I thought the tumor would make him more contented and focused as a shepherd, but he is all over the place and cannot get enough of the big time with the celebs.

You need to know that I have no need to “prove” anything to you. We are all free. You are on a blog that discusses things like this and what we have experienced, seen first hand back stages, and what some of us see are parallels to what other celebs have done.

Chandler has “affirmed” Driscoll for a long time now even knowing what we have all known because it has been public– his actions and teaching have been public for years. He has been a time bomb waiting to go off for a long time. Many others have affirmed him, too. To me, that means they have NO credibility at all. I question their integrity and biblical wisdom concerning their long time affirmation of Driscoll. I have no need to provide you proof because I have seen the “proof” for years. And remember, Chandler did not just “affirm” Driscoll, he was on the front line with Acts 29 for years. They all knew about the Petry’s and others years ago. It has not been a big secret. They affirmed Driscoll going from 40 voting elders to 3 when the church tripled giving Driscoll full power. And that power was translated to Acts 29 since it was all Mars Hill. I am not sure how much naivete it takes to ignore that fact. Chandler agreed with all of this. I do wonder if he agrees with the sodomy. See, he has never rebuked Driscoll publicly for teaching it, so I have to assume he agrees. He has affirmed everything else.

If you don’t think we have the right to say all this then there is not much you can do about it. Some, like Mahaney and others, try to call it sin or gossip. It is in their interest to try and make folks believe such discussions of public celebrities words and actions are gossip and sin. It really is amusing when you take the time to think about it. They are not to be questioned in a way they don’t like. How convenient. Guess it is that special anointing.

Tell you what, ask your friends who attend the Village to request a detailed budget for the whole operation including sat campi and see what happens. I have yet to find an elder ruled mega that would make one in detail available to members. I would be pleasantly surprised if the Village did. But make sure it is detailed and ask an accountant to go over it if not sure.

Eagle

“Do they think people are stupid? Do they think people are that naive?”

They depend on that!

I have not listened to the T4G stuff about celebrity pastors. Whatever they said, I know how they really feel about it by seeing their ad for T4G, with all the RBD standing in a row, smiling and laughing. Used to be that a list of names was enough; not anymore.

I’ll know they’re serious when they stop churning out books on a regular basis. How many are worth the paper they’re printed on? How many are written just to fulfill a contract? And, mainly, of course, to make some dough.

Despite Trueman’s hypocrisy about celebrity pastors, he at least knows how to write, and he’s witty and knowledgeable.

Okay, looked it up – he mentioned stripteases, not pole dancing. Not that that makes it any better. Somebody probably did put a pole in their bedroom because of what he said, since stripteases and poles are so closely associated in our culture.

I think of what President Bush once said… Fool me once… Uh… can’t get fooled again…

Heh, just kidding 😉 (not a Bush hater!)

Conferences, Christian celebrities, etc.: iirc, there was a LOT of that back in the 70s and 80s as well. (And yes, I’m over 50…)

“Wives and husbands work out roles and responsibilities together, in a variety of ways. There is no template. I have never seen what Russell Moore is advocating — a “defined pattern” of assigned roles that comes from the Bible.”

I studied German at school. It got tiresome trying to figure out whether a pencil was masculine, or why a tabe was feminine (actually not sure if those designations are correct, but whatever). How much more tiresome if we lived as Russell Moore is advocating.

Sophie’s comment reminds me again of that German muscular male “leader” who had the defined pattern of assigned roles down pat.
“Woman’s world is her husband, her family, her children and her home. We do not find it right when she presses into the world of men.”. Der Fuehrer

Thinking of Germans and Asherah “Poles” reminds me of the Gleiwitz incident fabricated by der muscular leader to begin WW2.

“The ‘take over of a German broadcast by Poles’ was being reported by German radio by 10.30 pm and by the BBC the same evening, and featured in the New York Times the next day. Hitler referred to ‘three serious border incidents’ in his speech to the Reichstag on the 1st September announcing the war.”

Hmmm…. Similarities to the Mars (god of war) Hill record label “gunning to take over” Christian radio?

Deb,

I am curious to see where Acts 29 will head now as well, and what the SBC will have to say about Driscoll and Chandler. Will you or Dee be present there?

I have not been to an SBC Annual Meeting in several years..This year should prove to be quite interesting I am imagining.

I am watching what will happen with Chandler as well..I am under no illusion to think Chandler is beyond the temptation he himself says he could fall prey too..

I just hope his path will turn out quite differently than the “blow job dude”….(That one made me laugh Eagle)

My prediction for Acts 29: some outrage will push Chandler to express more disagreement with Driscoll than he has to date, which will get him ousted from presidency and board. Think something similar to Josh Harris and Sovereign Grace. Speaking of which, I noticed Andrew Mahr was taken off the website after 1-30-12 with no explanation.

The A29 board seems to be back to 1/3 MH and 2/3 not MH. Having A29 central moved to TX will reduce the presence of MH in central staff. If 80% of the funding for Acts 29 still comes from Mars Hill, though, and Driscoll is still on the board the SBC will have legitimate reason to be concerned about a heavy influence. Now if MH leaders ever had the stones to admit they are and want to be a denomination then Acts 29 could be cheerfully acknowledged as a puppet entity of Mars Hill but the thing is Driscoll and the other elders at the top seem to be in complete denial about being a denomination. How can Acts 29 be an interdenominational network if it’s been dominated by a raging closet case denomination the way Mars Hill seems to be one? If Mars Hill executive leadership would just come out of the closet about being a denomination that alone might help the MH image and make it easier for A29 to be seen as interdenominational all in one go. 🙂

Deb: I don’t know if comments disappeared at exactly the same time, but blog postings switched from a person, Andrew, who I think was Communications Director, to the impersonal “SGM Staff” and this change coincided with CJ’s return to active duty. Of course in the back of my mind is, “Uh oh, he got degifted!”

Wendy –

Where did you read/besr that blurb from Piper?

Moniker –

Thanks for that information. I can go pee now with no worries :). What a relief to know that!!!

Well seeing as I don’t even have a husband, I’m very glad I can still pee when I want to.

Dave –

You’re right 🙂 The only one actually honored AT ALL, that I can see, has been CJ. Any other apostles that left the organization were demoted and then given the boot. If people don’t see a problem with that scenario, then they must choose to be blind. I guess CJ can claim godliness by being the last man standing of the originals. In his own mind anyway!)

P.S.: Larry Tomczak and CJ were influential back in the 70s (believe it or not). They had their fans even then.

“Woman’s world is her husband, her family, her children and her home. We do not find it right when she presses into the world of men.”. Der Fuehrer — Dave A A

Guess where I first heard the term “Hypermasculinity”? And who it was used to describe?

Jer 7:18 The children gather wood, the fathers light the fire, and the women knead the dough and make cakes of bread for the Queen of Heaven. They pour out drink offerings to other gods to provoke me to anger.

Dave, this is the first time I’ve heard that verse quoted in other than an anti-Catholic context. (As in “cakes of bread” referring to Communion Hosts and “Queen of Heaven” referring to St Mary.)

Estelle: I completely agree. After all, that’s the kind of love Christians should be known for. Not for being judgemental, self-righteous and power-grabbing.

Seeker, My time has been very limited in checking out your entire comment but we are simply going to disagree. I take not just associations but promotion and affirmation of false teaching with bad behavior very seriously. Where are the Nathan’s? Afraid of offending their followers? Chandler has helped and partnered with Driscoll.So have many others. Not only that but he has gone along with the deception of Driscoll stepping down to “focus on Mars Hill” when only a few weeks before Driscoll had to come back to Acts 29 in a more hands on capacity to straighten things out. They are convinced we believe whatever they say. And many do. And many will parse every word looking for loopholes. Chandler has decided to who to hang out with and he has aligned himself with the Calvinistas for some reason. The question is why?

Anon1,

No problem about the time…I understand..my thoughts turned out to be rather long, longer than it should have been really.

One thing I mentioned in my post was if there is a link floating about that shows Chandler affirming Driscoll’s false teaching and bad behavior publicly. I know he has been silent, and that may be what you mean when you say “affirming”..but I would be intrigued to see him publicly affirm some of the ridicoulous things Driscoll has done…

I know Chandler and Driscoll are associates, maybe even friends, and I can’t understand why Chandler has been silent on these things. It raises questions, and causes concern on my part. Yet I still see a lot of good and credibility in Chandler. I think that is mostly where we disagree.

And yes, the Acts 29 stuff seems a bit too “under the rug” or political for me as well, but I think in the long run, it will be a good move.

Chandler posted a blog post on the A29 website a while back..This might have been linked before on TWW…He mentions something about “running diagnostics on our systems”….That could mean a number of things, but I wonder if they are going to do an “overhaul” on the Driscoll DNA of A29…or maybe it just means something about computers..lol.

You can read the blog post, along with an interesting video on church planting, on the website.

http://www.acts29network.org/

I can’t answer why Chandler has fully decided to run with the Calvinista crowd like he has over the last 5 years. Obviously Chandler is a Calvinist himself…and I mentioned in my previous post that it is really nothing new for him to speak at speaking engagements such as this…

I personally think Chandler goes to these events and walks in these circles (aside for himself being a Calvinist) for two reasons:

1. In Chandlers point of view, the Calvinistas emphasize the Gospel moreso than other things that one can find in some Christian circles such as—-(Church Growth, Prosperity Gospel, Debt is Dumb, etc)

The moments where he has been to other conferences that are not strictly the latter, I think he has made a concerted effort to emphasize Christ above all, including His good news (I think of Catalyst conference, Orange Conference at Furtick’s church, etc)..

2. I think he sees the potential in using the influence that these events (and influence that comes with Calvinista connections) can offer to lift up the name of Christ, His Gospel, serve other ministers, etc.

I know there is a great potential to fall prey to Pride, Greed, Power, Prestige, etc in all of this…I just don’t see Chandler has arrived at this point yet…I sincerely think he chooses to be a part of all this to make much of Jesus.

Sopwith quoted Paul,
“The things also which you learned and received and heard and saw in me, these things habitually practice, and the God of peace shall be with you.”
The God of peace, and the gospel of peace mentioned by Paul in another letter–
Peace–just another attribute never affirmed by the t4g a&d or the church of MMA. Nor, of course, is violence denied.
The 18th century pacifist William Law said, 
    “Now fancy to yourself Christ, the Lamb of God, after His Divine Sermon on the Mount, putting himself at the head of a blood-thirsty army, or Paul going forth with a squadron of fire and brimstone, to make more havoc in human lives than a devouring earthquake.
     But if this is too blasphemous an absurdity to be supposed, what follows, but that the Christian who acts in the destroying fury of war (or the destroying fury of Christian kickboxing, or the destroying fury of a season of abuse or smacking around–ed.) acts in full contrariety to the whole nature and Spirit of Christ, and can no more be said to be led by His Spirit, or be one with Him, than those His enemies who “Came forth with swords and staves to take Him.”
     HUG wrote of how some Protestants think the prophets had the VIRGIN Mary in mind when they spoke of FERTILITY goddesses and their poles. But we reformers  don’t dare apply the prophecy to ourselves. We don’t see the parallel between Xian Pole Dancing and Asherah Pole worship. Or between Quiverfull and the Astarte Bunny and all her eggs. Or between OT families working together in assigned roles with an other-than-God focal point, and Focus on the Family. We’re blind.
But statues of the Mary? We can see them! Looks like idolatry to us…  
     Law continues,
     “Blinded Protestants think they have the glory of slaughtering blind papists; and the victorious papist claims the merit of having conquered the troops of heretics: but alas! The conquest is equally great on both sides, both are entitled to the same victory; and the glorious victory on both sides, is only that of having gospel goodness equally trampled under their feet.
     When a most Christian majesty, with his catholic church, sings a te deum at the high altar, for rivers of protestant blood poured out; or an evangelic church sings praise and glory to the Lamb of God, for helping them from His holy throne in heaven, to make popish towns burn like Sodom and Gomorrah, they blaspheme God as much as Cain would have done, had he offered a sacrifice of praise to God for helping him to murder his brother. Let such worshippers of God be told this, that the field of blood gives all its glory to Satan, who was a murderer from the beginning, and will to the end of his reign be the only receiver of all the glory, that can come from it.”

“Clothed In Righteousness: Holding Your Ground…”

HowDee YaAll,

Eagle found himself among those bewildered of why so much evil exists in the world, a short while go in one of his posts. 

hmmm… (maybe he was juz think’in out loud…)

The historical consensus finds the absence of effectuated moral good, the underlining reason. 

Succinctly stated, if man would find good in the world, he must of necessity, take it upon himself to create it. 

(Let him busy himself forthwith, as you can never create too much of it.)

Ahem! In the material world, Evil finds it’s self-expression through man. 

Satan and his thirdly hord would be left among the swine, if not for man. 

[And seeing that pigs are incapable of moral choice, (last time I checked) the party would be short lived.]

 Satan knows he is doomed. He simply has nothing to loose. 

But man does!

The moral of the story being a victory for Jesus, the “Hope of God” for a large family of Christ-like children, and ‘evil’ vanquish in the lake of fire. The first, a done deal, the second, on going, the third…TBD.  Yo! Stay Tuned.

“Yah mo b there…”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJRPMAG_vGA&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Paul also said: “Finally, be constantly strengthened in the Lord and in the active efficacy of the might that is inherent in Him. Clothe yourselves with the full armor of God to the end that you will be able to hold your ground against the strategems of the devil, because ‘our wrestling is not against blood and flesh’, but against the principalities, against the authorities, against the world rulers of this darkness, against spirit forces of perniciousness in the heavenly places. On this account, take to yourself, at once and once for all, the complete armor of God in order that you may be able to resist in the day, the pernicious day, and having achieved all things, to stand. Stand therefore, having girded your loins in the sphere of truth, and having clothed yourself with the breastplate of righteousness, and having sandalled your feet with a firm foundation of the good news of peace; in addition to all these, taking to yourselves the shield of faith by means of which you will be able to quench all the fiery arrows of the pernicious one, and take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit which is the word of God; through the instrumentality of every prayer supplication for need, praying at every season by means of the Spirit, and maintaining a constant alertness in the same with every kind of unremitting care and supplication for all the saints.”

… and pray in order that there might be given you utterance in the opening of your mouth, in every fearless, confident freedom of speaking, to make known the mystery of the good news! Christ crucified, risen, at the right hand of The Father, sin & death- a solution satisfied, and entrance made to the glorious God Almighty!  ===>Sweet! Make da call!

Bottom line: Stay close to the Almighty, pray effectively …in Jesus’ name, do much good, trust Him for the balance. 

(Oh, and teach & encouraged others to do the same!)

So that: “…Paul, I know…but whoooo in the Hell, are you! doesn’t happen…”

See, the air is ‘honeysuckle’ already!

(grin)

hahahahahaha

Hum, hum,hum…♫♫♫  “..all else is sinking sand?”

pr♥ayHard

S㋡py
___
Comic relief: “Put On The Full Armor of God”…Iron Man!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RwiXHRZoF0&feature=youtube_gdata_player

—

“One thing I mentioned in my post was if there is a link floating about that shows Chandler affirming Driscoll’s false teaching and bad behavior publicly. I know he has been silent, and that may be what you mean when you say “affirming”..but I would be intrigued to see him publicly affirm some of the ridicoulous things Driscoll has done…”

I am confused why we would need a link showing affirmation of Driscoll’s teaching/behavior by Chandler. The facts are the facts. He has partnered with Driscoll, been close friends, been on the Acts 29 board….. so shouldn’t we assume he did not have a huge problem with Driscoll’s teaching or behavior all those years? And if he did, he would have backed off long before? So, I am not really following you here. Seems you want a specific statement from Chandler that is really unnecessary considering the facts.

WTH,

Thanks for the insight. How the funding is giong to happen is really the key to this.

I cannot help but think Driscoll’s behavior toward TD Jakes in the Elephant room probably hurt him more with the SBC Calvinists than anything. They are probably proud of him concerning the Petry’s ruin and they have basically done some two steps concerning his sodomy stuff in the book….really dumbing it down. But I think the Jakes thing has really been a sore point with the SBC Calvinistas. Driscoll is too independent and off the NC reservation for them to get to go along on all things.

Anon1,

“so shouldn’t we assume he did not have a huge problem with Driscoll’s teaching or behavior all those years? And if he did, he would have backed off long before? So, I am not really following you here. Seems you want a specific statement from Chandler that is really unnecessary considering the facts.”

I am looking for public statements because you have stated before, quite confidently I might add, that Chandler affirms everything Driscoll has done…I am not as confident as you are just because of Chandler’s silence.

I wrote about this before, and I already know we disagree on this, but silence to me does not necessarily mean full affirmation on EVERYTHING that Driscoll has done. I know Chandler supports Driscoll in a lot of ways, but I think it is quite ridicoulous to assume Chandler supports him on every thing Driscoll has done just because he has not publicly spoken out against what Driscoll has done or because he has not “backed off” on Driscoll.

It may mean cowardice..It may mean Chandler “wants to play it safe”…It may just mean Chandler doesn’t want to publicly speak out against his friend…It may just mean Chandler has taken the necessary steps to show his disapproval privately or in smaller circles…Not necessarily the “right” thing to do in my opinion, but I still am careful to not assume that Chandler supports him in everything.

“Now the newbies are getting published without much effort. Think Platt and Tullian as just a few examples. Some of these guys are in their 30′s and have huge followings, book deals, speaking gigs they can barely keep up. All for the Glory of God, of course, not them. (sarcasm alert)”

So now Platt is all about himself as opposed for the Glory of God?

I really don’t get it…Why is there so much disdain for things (books, conferences, etc) that can make much of Christ? Is it that hard to see? Another area where we could not even begin to agree..

Radical was an excellent book, with an excellent premise for American Christians…

There is a lot of “Christian fluff books” out there—Imo, Radical was not one of them…I believe the message of Radical brought glory to Christ, as well as caused many American Christians to take a hard look at our selves in relation to how we serve others.

And I think in the case of Platt’s book, didn’t the proceeds end up going towards missions?

And as I have said before in regards to Chandler, I am not seeing the portrait you try so hard to paint towards these guys being all about themselves, etc, etc…Some are, this is true…but Platt…Really?

Sopwith,

I respectuflly understand your position on all of this.

I guess I just disagree with your assessment that ACTS 29 should be “suspect” because they haven’t given an apology for the actions of Mark Driscoll.

Is Mark Driscoll an incapable person of apologizing himself? What about Mars Hill?

To me, it would be far better for Driscoll or Mars Hill to offer a statement of apology for all of these things, rather than an organization that consists of over 400 different churches. Those churches and the organization as a whole were not responsible for writing or stating these things.

For me, it is more appropriate for Driscoll and Mars Hill themselves to offer this apology, rather than an organization that is much bigger than Driscoll and Mars Hill.

I will say this though, I find it suspect that Chandler has not spoken out against some of the things that Driscoll has done publicly, that alone raises some questions and concerns.

Frankly, I wish he would speak up, but his failure to do so by no means shows me that he fully supports everything Driscoll has done or said…I have a lot of friends in my life that I support, encourage, and work with, but I by no means support everything that they have done, and I don’t necessarily call them out publicly for things that they have done wrong either…

At the end of the day though, in spite of all the ways that Driscoll has tarnished the reputation of himself and the organization he is connected with, Acts 29 will continue to do great things for the Kingdom of God..

Through many Acts 29 Churches and ministries, the Good News of Jesus Christ will be shared to those who are lost, people will come to know Christ, and disciples will be made.

The latter will happen, regardless of how many people consider that this organization is “suspect” and has no “credibility”.

I hope an apology comes forth at some point, and if the organization of Acts 29 steps up to make this apology, then that will be a great thing. I just hope Driscoll will be the one to offer this apology, for he alone is the main culprit in so many of these issues..

Diane,

“Spectacular? Who is determining that?”

Just a guess here, but when you see the “GOOD” in the “Good News”, does it not cause your heart to rejoice and worship the God who saves?

Maybe that is what they are referring too…? The Gospel should cause us to worship spectacularly!! The Bible reveals this…does it not?

“Diane,

“Spectacular? Who is determining that?”

Just a guess here, but when you see the “GOOD” in the “Good News”, does it not cause your heart to rejoice and worship the God who saves?

Maybe that is what they are referring too…? The Gospel should cause us to worship spectacularly!! The Bible reveals this…does it not?”

The gospel causes me to worship God. I honestly never thought about whether or not I, or a church, was doing it spectacularly.

Will others think…hmmm, I am not seeing spectacular worship in my church. Wonder why. I must buy this book and get the spectacular worship I evidently need.

Perhaps the book will have helpful recommendations on how to get spectacular worship going-maybe A29/The Village DNA brand of spectacular worship? We’ll have to wait and see.

.

Diane,

“Perhaps the book will have helpful recommendations on how to get spectacular worship going-maybe A29/The Village DNA brand of spectacular worship? We’ll have to wait and see.”

Agreed…We will have to wait and see for sure…I certainly don’t think that this book will head in the direction you mention, but I could be wrong..

I will say this though, it is quite obvious, at least in my area, that genuine worship is sometimes replaced with something akin to “going through the motions”…no matter the style of music or style of service…

But I have seen, when the Good News is lifted up, that people seem to open up to worship God more deeply, not only in a hour long gathering of the Church, but the day to day actions of the church..Perhaps that is what is meant by—“spectacular worship”…

.02 cents

Chandler could say that, under the new leadership the organization is not responsible for, nor does in inherently endorse, what any former leader taught or said. That is not an apology, and it is a very unspecific but broad disclaimer.

“Day Of The Spawned Religious Nonsense?”

HowDee YaAll,

Diane… (wink)

Bridget2… “Brilliant”

Matt “Chandler should apologize for a lot of the nonsense that has been spawned by the Acts 29 leadership?” -Dee, TWW.

Comic relief: “High Hopes?”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJAdEdXdrCc&feature=youtube_gdata_player

hmmm…

5. Until Acts 29 President Matt Chandler addresses former Acts 29 “nonsense that has been spawned by the Acts 29 leadership”, this man and the Acts 29 mission & Acts 29 organization remain suspect, as it should be.

actions unbecoming a Christian establishment?

“Is The Acts 29 Thrill Gone?”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lt2c9Iyq2UQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player

hmmm…

The Lord’s kids aren’t alright…

And this ain’t green eggs & ham we’re talkin’ bout chere?!? Is it now?

Pr♥ayHard  [Jesus hears our crys!]

S㋡py
__
Comic relief: What ta do when da proverbial faux religion monster comes?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTWY0FHcj6Y&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Bonus: Acts 29 – “How Blue Can You Get?”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jCNXASjzMY&feature=youtube_gdata_player

—

“The only problem is if there is Jesus Christ, plus.

Or if the making much of Jesus Christ is “our way” of doing things.”

I agree with you. I certainly hope it doesn’t go in that direction.

At first glance, it seems that it intends to keep it focused on Jesus and His Good News.

Hence the language—“Jesus Centered Chuch”…”Gospel of Jesus Christ the basis of the Church’s existence”….

Sounds good to me, but only time will tell…I fear other things much more than this..

Anon1 – Exactly.

SGM (aka TAG, PDI, etc. etc. etc.) has deep roots in the discipleship movement. I think their name changes are about re-branding the same old same old rather than any actual changes. (Unless a religious equivalent to reinventing the wheel counts as “change.”)

The corporate branding/franchise aspect is a relatively new development, but a logical one – xtian publishing was way ahead of the curve in that respect, back in the 70s. (Building on the charismatic movement in general and the discipleship movement in particular.) Though I would not characterize previous efforts as “grass roots” so much as lower-key, without the huge PR machine that everyone seems to want to use nowadays.

Sopy,

This is my take on all this:

“Q. What is “gospel saturated”?
Q. What does “gospel saturated” mean?
Q.How does the term ”gospel saturated” equate to The Biblical Scriptures?”

1. To be saturated with the Good News of Jesus Christ…Hence, this is a central part of your life…This is a primary thing in your life, not secondary.

2. See above.

3. Romans 1:16 “I am unashamed of the Gospel” Seems like Paul was saturated with the Good News of Jesus—-He is not alone.

“Q. What is “biblically faithful” ?
Q. What does “biblically faithful” mean?
Q. How does the term ”biblically faithful” equate to The Biblical Scriptures?”

1. To be as faithful as you can to the word of God..(sticky situation I know, since our interpretations can cloud this..but I think as long as the primary issues are held together (salvation, Jesus as God, etc)—I think that is a good thing.
2. See above.
3. Considering the Revelation of God is held to high esteem throughout His word—it is probablly not a good idea to deviate from that.

“Q. What is “missionally engaged”?
Q. What does “missionally engaged” mean?
Q. How does the term ”missionally engaged” equate to The Biblical Scriptures?”

1. To be engaged throughout the world on the mission of Jesus Christ—-ie…Go out, make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit..
2. See above.
3. Great Commission? (I believe the church planting goal of A29 ultimately hopes to fulfill the Great Commission..)

“Q. What is “planted everywhere possible”?
Q. What does “planted everywhere possible” mean?
Q. How does the term ”planted everywhere possible” equate to The Biblical Scriptures?”

1. Um…plant churches throughout the US…maybe even the Globe? (Think it might help the “go into all nations part of the Great Commission?)
2. See above?
3. Great Commission

“Q. What is “in all types of locations”?
Q. What does “in all types of locations.” mean?
Q. How does the term ”in all types of locations.” equate to The Biblical Scriptures?”

I will answer this all together….It probablly means: Urban Areas, Rural Areas, Suburban Areas, Poor Areas, etc, etc, etc…

.02 cents

And Dee:

“If I don’t buy, let’s say strict complementarianism ala Acts 29 (which did a poor job explaining it in their statement btw, am i suddenly practicing something that is NOT the Gospel?”

Under the affirmations in the role of women guide for membership:

http://fm.thevillagedev.net/resource_files/study_guides/20070204TheRoleofWomen.pdf

“10. We are convinced that a denial or neglect of these principles will lead to increasingly destructive consequences in our families, churches, and the culture at large.”

I guess complete agreement to the views on comp is not mandatory for membership at The Village, but one would be contributing to point number 10 (destructive consequences in the culture) should one disagree.

For those of you who might be wondering what Hester and I have talked about regarding boys/patriarchy/home business after they are too old for traditional homeschooling because Mom would be “teaching” them – read this article.

Stumbled across it today and thought it would make things perhaps clearer for some. It’s a long article but it deserves to be read all the way through. You’ll quickly see how these families in patriarchal circles push for home-based biz or family biz so that Daddy & Sons can still keep tabs on mom & daughter (and get lots of FREE labor)

http://nolongerquivering.com/2010/08/27/debt-free-how-the-duggars-other-quiverfull-couples-support-all-those-kids/

“It is certainly not a mandate for membership, and I don’t see Chandler and the other Pastors emphasizing this as a continuous primary thing in their church as the Gospel is primary.”

You are right–it does say it is not mandatory for membership, as I pointed out. But culture destroying, and important enough to be listed as one of the A29 four core convictions (Chandler is the prez and surely holds to these):

“5.A manifesto on our core convictions: gospel-centered theology, Spirit-filled or empowered lives, complementarian relationships, and missional churches.”
http://www.acts29network.org/acts-29-blog/dear-acts-29-members/

And since a comp marriage displays the gospel, then they surely would deem it very important if not a “continuous primary thing.”

“Diane
Hmmm, me, a destroyer of the culture? I wonder how they “proved” that or is it just another one of those Christian urban legends.”

They are free to have their strong comp convictions and people are free to join up should they so desire. But to say that those who do not hold to the comp view add to increasingly destructive consequences in family, culture and church is certainly a claim that I would like to see expanded. I have not destroyed my family nor has my husband…32 years and counting.

“If anything, I have commended Chandler for emphasizing to his young crowd at the Village, specifically Husbands, to care for their wives and to love their wives….I can’t tell you how many times he has “harped” on the men to STEP UP and love their wives as they should.”

Someone a while back gave a quote from Chandler to the effect his wife could be any woman. Anyone remember this?

The Gospel, aka Good News, it that God loved us and sent Jesus (God in flesh) to show us how to live and to die for us, so that we might be saved from the consequence of sin. He rose from the dead, showing that we too can defeat death and have eternal life as an adopted child of God. If we believe that message and accept his gift of grace to us, we are redeemed and will have eternal life.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Focusing on a lot of side issues and making anything else terribly important detracts from the Gospel. Everything but that Good News is not an A issue or B issue but a Z issue.

Seeker @ 10:15 am –

“Churches planting churches” sounds like an Amway growth pyramid to me.

A29 (as he refers to it — name morf?) DNA is not equal to Jesus. I have seen the same “mission statement” in SGM. Planting (c)hurches is not the same as sharing the Gospel of the Good News of Jesus Christ and a person becoming a new creation in Christ Jesus. It can include that but, frankly, most growth is people coming from other churches. A29 churches have nothing “new” to offer under the sun. They want to offer A29 DNA (a cutesy attempt at a term BTW). Why don’t they offer Jesus and the Holy Spirit. It sounds like a set-up to a new improved image and marketing scheme. Why not publicly repent (or recant) for some wrong direction and teaching by their former leader? That is a true Biblical concept. That is what SGM and CJ Mahaney need to do. They all try to avoid the “Biblical” prescription to bring about “real” change by the power of the Holy Spirit. They keep putting bandaids on problems when they need the Great Surgeon to do a work in them. They are all so worried about their image and whatever else they are worried about that they miss what God “might” use before a world that laughs at Christianity because of what they see. What would true “humility” and repentance look like to the world if they should see it? What would that type of “Godly, Biblical, Gospel” action say to the world?

Maybe, just maybe, it (the world) would say that there are people who believe and trust in God. Their actions align with the words that they keep spewing at us. They are humble people that give honor and glory to God in their lives. They are different because they live and act different. They don’t just give lip service and build little empires to rule. They don’t take in millions of dollars a year that go to salaries and media and buildings and furnishings. Who is their God? Radical I know.

Well, that’s my rant for now.

Dee,

“Could you please describe the Gospel? What do you mean when you use the term? Do you use it an an adjective or a noun? Is it an event or concept unto itself or must it be defined in conjunction with another term?”

I have done this before with you. Forgot so soon? The Gospel (in short) is the atoning work of Christ on the cross, the power of His resurrection. It is literally the Good News of Christ’s redemption for us.

I grow tired of these silly questions…especially when I have answered them before…

“also do not appreciate being told by Acts 29 that we damage the witness to the Gospel if we don’t buy the comp doctrine as defined by this “oh so correct” group. (Read it at T4G)”

Wait, I am confused now…Is Acts 29 and T4G the same organization? I know they share similarities, but they are two different organizations are they not? I looked at the Acts 29 website, and all I could find on the Comp issue on their Doctrine page was this:

“•We are not egalitarians and do believe that men should head their homes and male elders/pastors should lead their churches with masculine love like Jesus Christ”

That is all I could find…maybe you saw something else though..

I know T4G mentions that you damage the witness of the Gospel if you confuse the Comp issue. I have stated on here before that they took this too far…

I would love to hear this further expanded on exactly what they mean….The only thing I could think of is their opinion of Comp doctrine is a picture of the Gospel, especially in relation to Ephesians 5 (The mutual submission of Man loving wife as Christ loves church and wife loving husband by submitting to him)…This implies laying yourself down for the other as Christ has done for us out of love on the cross.

I am assuming that they believe in our marriages, if we fail to follow this, then we could damage a witness that our marriages could give for the Gospel. This is THEIR interpretation on all of this of course..but it makes sense to me.

For you Dee, I would look at it like this…In your marriage, you have stated that you and your husband practice radical sacrifice for each other..or something like that…Can that not be a picture or witness of what Christ has done for us?

Through you and your Husbands marriage, you have an opportunity to “witness” to what Christ has done for you to other through your marriages radical sacrifice. Now if you or your husband become selfish, that could damage that potential witness you have…

“Since Chandler leads this organization he obviously believes that I, your humble blog queen, am damaging the Gospel. Do I damage the Gospel when I work with the handicapped? Do I damage the Gospel when I work with medical and dental students to encourage them in their faith? Oh yeah, when I pray for all those who comment here, do I damage the Gospel? When I raised my children to love God and serve others, did I damage the Gospel? Do I damage the Gospel when I tweet Bible verses and encourage people to read through the Bible?”

No, No, No, No, and No…..It is silly to think that Chandler or anyone would think that. You are smarter than this. I think Chandler and others find what is in Ephesians 5, in regards to husband/wife, points to a “picture” of the Gospel and even a witness for the Gospel (You know..to “walk in love” as Christ walked in love for us in His redemption for us…)..

I think they find when the Man fails to love his wife as he should, or when the Women fails to submit to her husband as she should…then this creates confusion to that “picture and witness” that could be in the marriage..thus causing potential problems.

This is their interpretation, not mine, but they hold to this view of scripture as you do for your Egal viewpoint.

I think you could look at an Egal relationship in marriage and say the same thing in regards to a picture or witness of the Gospel.

I don’t know if you will follow what I am trying to say…but I don’t think they are taking this to the level that you assume they are…Maybe in some cases, but I have never seen this with Platt or Chandler…

“Seeker, I get it. You love Chandler. Fine. I feel that way about a few leaders myself. But I am frankly getting a bit irritated having you tell me that Chandler has done nothing wrong yet I am being told, by his organization that I am damaging the Gospel, something that I have loved and followed all of my life. So, I could join his church with my beliefs but he would contend I am damaging the Gospel. Why would I want to join his church?”

I never said Chandler has done nothing wrong…I just said Chandler, as my brother in Christ (and yours), has credibility and value in regards to the Kingdom. I believe Chandler truly loves Jesus, His Gospel, and the Kingdom of God. I respect him for a lot of things he has done…I also question a lot of things he has done..

I belive Chandler has served the Kingdom of God in some good ways.

I also believe Chanlder is not perfect, he has made some mistakes.

I belive he should speak up in regards to Driscoll, but I do not believe his credibility is shot completely because he has not done so.

Sorry you are irritated Dee…Frankly, I am a bit irritated at alot of things on this blog as well…Such as the incessant generalities that pop up every now and again….Things taken out of context….Getting questioned on things I have already answered…The continuous denial from many that a guy like Chandler actually might love Jesus, the Gospel, and cares for the Kingdom…

Irritation happens when people strongly disagree…I still have great respect for much of what you do here and respect you as a Sister in Christ. I have no doubt you love Jesus and are doing great things for Him in what you have stated above…

And Dee, you wouldn’t want to join his church considering you are an Egalitarian and the Village’s leadership holds to a Comp viewpoint…Not to mention you have disdain for all things “Calvinista”…but they wouldn’t condemn you for joining if you do not hold to a comp view, they make this clear in their membership agreement…

Oh…One more thing:

“This blog is open to all people and all comments, including a running apologetic on a favorite pastor whilst criticizing,with a broad swath, those who comment here.”

Criticism runs both ways on this blog..I can’t tell you how many times the words “naive”, “blind”, and others have been implied in my direction because I don’t consider Chandler, Conferences, book sales, etc to be the kind of heresy that is often painted at TWW.

And just to be clear, I have great respect for every commentor here, but like you, I get irritated on the approach taken at times.. Things are a little less objective than I want them to be when it comes to certain comments directed at Chandler and others…The comment above was a classic example….

But I get it, when it comes to the majority of Calvinista’s, this blog’s intention is not to show the “good” that can be found…that is what other blogs are for…I have heard that one quite a bit as well..

But as a commentor, I can’t help but try to bring some balance to the “one-sided” approach that is often planted here…Hence my “running apologetic”..

Seeker – I guess you will continue to defend Chandler, and I will continue to disagree with your assessment of him, but… I honestly don’t feel like getting into further discussion of this.

I think anyone who speaks publicly and is a public personality is liable to criticism and knows it.

Dee and others are well within their rights to express their opinions on this blog and anywhere else.

‘Nuff said.

“Seeker’s poisoning of the TWW Well?”

HowDee YaAll,

Seeker’s Implicit long-winded conclusion: “Therefore, any claims made here @ TWW, cannot be relied upon”.

…all that is missing is the bullhorn!

Aufmerksamkeit!  Kann ich Ihre Aufmerksamkeit bitte haben!

…nice try 

(grin)

hahahahahahaha

“We go to gain a little patch of ground that hath in it no profit but the name.” -Wm. Shakespeare

hmmm…

S㋡py
___
Comic relief: MASH 4077 – “Potters Rant”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpIgQTeAD9c&feature=youtube_gdata_player

“HMMMMM….Changes the perspective a bit when we see it in its’ full context? ”

Not at all. He calls her a “girl” twice and refers to himself as a “man”. He is actually very confusing and is starting to sound a lot like the flowery, confusing Piper. And why people are so confused and simply walk away trying to match the puzzle pieces of their confusing doctrine.

Not only that but if you listen to all their teaching he actually contradicts himself….girls have a “role” in marriage you know. But don’t expect much from the man? You are nothing but his support and help him along but he cannot complete you? Right.

The woman’s whole purpose in marriage is to “complete the man” by supporting him totally in whatever he does. That is her “role”, her meaning for living. and she is just a “girl”.

Someone mentioned earlier the “pawns” in God’s game connection here. I agree. This is the Calvinista view.

“Wonder what Lauren would think about your criticisms on all this….Appearances can be decieving, but I would be careful before you “think you know” how Chandler loves his wife and what he thinks of her.”

It does not matter what she thinks. I am surprised you are using that. I expect her to be very biased. She has bought into and supported the whole Calvinista thing. She is referred to as ‘just a girl’ by her husband so why should I take her seriously? He doesn’t.

Dee,

“Marriage is two sinners trying to figure out how to live with one another while learning how to forgive one another. The world is not looking for role models of submissive wives and patriarch husbands. They are looking at marriages to see how to keep them together in spite of the sinful nature of both of the involved parties.Our marriages should be examples of grace given to each other in spite of our sinfulness.”

I don’t disagree with this…I think you are right..

Ephesians 5 opens us up to walk in love for a specific reason, and then it offers on how one can live and interact with other people in our lives, including our husbands and wives.

I believe “walking in love” as “Christ loved us” is basically a way to witness and point others to the love that Christ has for us in the Gospel…It is a witness opportunity. I believe in marriage, we have a potential witness opportunity.

Now whether one follows a Comp viewpoint in this or Egalitarian is up to interpretation I suppose…

The Calvinistas affirm the Comp viewpoint is that witness, you just affirmed a different type…This is why these reasons are secondary right?

“In my comment, I was speaking directly to your last comment which was broad swath. Secondly, I have never said it was a “heresy” to sell books. I just think it is a way to make money and we should stop spiritualizing that we are changing the world with each book that is being pumped out at rates that exceed the speed of light. People rarely read their Bibles. My guess is that most of these book are read even less.

Finally, I think it is important for people to express their opinions. I think it is most important that the Calvinista brigade listen carefully to how they are being perceived on the outside of their chummy little band. Perhaps they are just being unfairly painted. But, then again, there are so many examples, there is probably some truth in their somewhere”

I think it is important too..but to be honest, I have no clue if the Calvinistas are paying attention to your blog or not…

And I do believe there is truth that you and others paint here at times…I have affirmed that, but likewise, I have felt that things are often unfairly painted here as well too…Not necessarily by what you or Deb writes, but with some of the comments…

And again, you certainly have your rights to express these things, no matter how I disagree or “feel” about it.

Regardless of whose interpretation is right, I believe Ephesians 5 points us to live in a way with others that can potentially point others to the Grace of Christ…Love others as we have been loved..

But Ephesians 5 needs to be put into context, in particular, that there were many household codes of the day, and this one is so far more egalitarian than any of the others, it was a huge step in the direction of mutuality in marriage! So it should not be used to re-enslave women in the 21st century. As I have said, the husband is to be mutually “submitted” (bad translation, btw) to his wife per the preceding verse, then the wife “submitted” to “her own husband”. Perhaps the suggestion is not the word we focus on, the mis-translated “submitted” but “her own husband”, suggesting a lesser form of “submitted” to other men than the previous verse could be taken to mean.

The “submitted” in this verse is closer to the idea that we should not be ego-driven in our relationships, but should hold others in higher regard than we do ourselves. If everyone does that, no one becomes a dictator. A woman should look up to her husband, as he should to her (preceding verse), and he should be willing to die for her, as well. It really goes back to Jesus’ teaching that no Christian should be “lording” it over another Christian, but we should all be servants of each other, holding their best interests above our own.

Not easily lived, and impossible in a patriarchal or authoritarian structure. It basically only can occur in a place where all are equal within the community, and not some of lesser status.

“Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh…”

Dee,

“That ‘idiot’ riding the ass that day in Jerusalem, was none other than the Lord of All!  ” -Sopy

b of good cheer!

…keep up da good work!

Vous êtes tout à fait impressionnant !

S㋡py
___
TWW – “Dinner Out, is a Go!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZvyxnTxuuk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Bonus: ”-Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.” How quickly the cries of ‘Hosanna!’ were turned into ‘Give Us Another! ‘…but the Father said : this is my Son, Jesus, surely they shall receive Him?

No?

Another they will receive?

Humm?

The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? 

For they will feed on God’s pure words and sit down in the congregation safely, with no pastor to make them tremble.  My sorrow, turned to joy, because He is the one who holds my hand, He is the one who holds the lampstands, He is the one who says to the gates of hell, no further!

—

Dee,

“It is the truth but is our message supposed to be more, peppered with the love of Jesus? Truth is rarely accepted when it is said in an ugly fashion. One of my pastors once said that God is not concerned with the end result. He is a God of the process and is far more interested in how we get there.Love is important.”

Dee, I understand what you are saying.

Chandler should have stated his words better when he presented this..and I agree with you that love is important, but I am not quick to think that love was not included in this sermon.

Just because it came across as a bit abrasive by no means implies that Chandler was not speaking in love towards the Village Church…

Like I said, I think Chandler was stating this in a “tough” way to get their attention of the severity of the problem. You and I both know that many young singles are consumed with finding someone who completes them…sometimes this takes them away from finding their ultimate hope in God.

I would say that this consuming problem often falls into marriage as well in the first few years, and when your spouse fails your expectations of “completing you”…problems arise that could ultimatley lead to Divorce. This is a serious problem, and Chandler was speaking to this serious problem in a serious way.

Yeah, it was abrasive and bit “tough” on the ears, but I would disagree with you that truth would be ignored in the way he spoke. I have heard this sermon on podcast before, and I took the truth rather well…Others have heard this sermon with me and they took it rather well too.

Like I said, even Jesus, with all of His Love, said some things intentionally at times that eventually ticked people off. He was tough, harsh even, in the truth he spoke to the people on certain occasions…This is why so many of the “crowds” stopped following him and his disciples questioned why he would say such things…Even in this, I believe Jesus was speaking in love.

Point is…Sin is a serious issue, and I think it is necessary for Pastors/Teachers to speak boldly against sin at times…even if it comes across as “harsh”…

Even so, I wish Chandler would have used a better phrase than “Lauren is just a girl”…and would have thought better about how he said this…Perhaps he regrets what he said…I would.

“And love is not really emphasized with many of the Calvinistas, is it? They produce a God who is chronically miffed off at us poor slugs and He is only interested in His own glory and darn it if it isn’t tied up with these ingrates. That is my opinion of much of what I am reading and seeing these days.”

I can’t speak for many of the Calvinista’s…but Platt and Chandler I can speak for…and yes Dee, they do emphasize the love of Christ…quite frequently I may add.

You percieve them teaching such things above, I have never perceived that…

They speak on God’s wrath, and are not ashamed to do so, many who incessantly claim to speak on God’s love barely speak on God’s wrath…I agree with the Calvinistas on this one..How can we even begin to speak on God’s love for us until we understand His holy wrath against us?

But they also emphasize quite frequently the love of Christ…I am saddened that you think otherwise, I have been encouraged often by the sermons of Chandler and Platt and their emphasis of the grace of Christ…but I am also reminded that God is holy, who does not take sin lightly…This may come across as “God being miffed off” to many..

Bridget2,

“Your comment about Sopy’s “cutesy comments” was interesting to me. It seemed like you were comparing my comment about Candler using the term A29′s DNA being “cutesy” to Sopy’s style of writing on blogs. I don’t see them as similar at all.”

No..I really wasn’t…Just referring back to Sopy’s “unique” way of posting..He/or She has a rather “cute” and “cryptic” way of bring his point across…

” Jesus said to “follow me” (replicate him). Chandler is very public and wants a public audience to pay attention to what A29 is doing. The point is, who or what is Chandler directing people to? The “way” to do things or the person (Jesus Christ) who will bring about a changed life. In his statement about A29, I read very little about Jesus.”

A29 is a church planting organization. Chandler’s first post of many was to describe the A29 goal of churches planting churches…Which is not a bad thing.

You won’t believe me, but Chandler consistenlty points people to Jesus…Often…But you would have to read a lot more than one little blog post, and you would have to listen to quite a bit of his sermons before you jump to that conclusion…You don’t have to take my word for it, but Chandler promotes Jesus just as much as anyone who loves Him.

As far as His statement, he makes it rather clear the ultimate goal of “churches planting churches”

From the website:

“We are a network of churches that are theologically aligned and philosophically diverse. I pray that the Spirit would keep us all deeply dedicated to the word of God and walking in a glad submission to the Spirit, but A29 must not become a theological club where churches and plants get involved because of theological alignment without the desire to plant other like-minded churches. There are places for that, but we are a church planting network. May the Spirit draw men who share this passion and shine his face on us as we seek to see millions of people who are far from him reconciled to him through Jesus.”

The whole reconciled to him through Jesus part….yeah…that sort of corresponds to the person Jesus who brings about a changed life.

“PS – If you go back and look at Sopy’s comments you might find that he/she shares the Gospel and scripture more than anyone on this blog.”

I never said he/she didn’t..That is certainly a good thing…and I commend said poster for that!

“I don’t think Matt Chandler, you, me, or anyone “brings anything” to the Kingdom of God. I think we are transformed by the renewing of our minds and the Kingdom of God, by the work of the Holy Spirit, expands further into our lives as we live the Truth.”

I agree with what you have said here, but I would add: we ourselves make an impact on this Kingdom, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, as we take part in the Great Commission and make much of Jesus to the nations..

The Body of Christ is part of the Kingdom of God..and we have been given a Great Commission by Jesus Himself to take part in the expansion of this body as we “make disciples” of all nations..

That is what I mean by “bringing something” to the Kingdom.

“I am not cynical, upset, angry, or any such thing”

Good to hear!

Anon1,

“Seeker, Do you realize you spend a lot of time here translating for Chandler and parsing his meanings. Do you know him that well?”

Maybe so.

Do you realize you take his words (often times out of context), his actions (attending conferences, writing books), and his (and others) silence on the Driscoll situation to create your assumption that he has NO integrity and credibility?

Do you realize you committ the latter while disregarding the fruit that can be found in his teaching, church, and life?

I am not the only one “parsing” and “translating” his words. You and others are quite guilty to do the same to bring forth your assumptions as well…You take him calling his wife a “girl” and you assume that he is demeaning to his wife.

You say that he does not consider his wife equal. You say that he claims the women’s role is to “complete the man”..You say that he claims for women to not “expect much from the men”, when that is not at all what he said…

In addition to all this, you assume that his conference attending and book writing is a prideful, selfish ambition and not something that he does to make much of Jesus. Based on what, because other guys are like this?

You also assume that he is an Authoritarian like Driscoll, when there is no evidence that he has committed the actions that Driscoll has committed.

The only thing you and I agree with, is that he needs to speak up against Driscoll, but I would disagree with you that he fully supports everything Driscoll has done because of his silence and him not backing away from Driscoll…

Point is: I don’t know Chandler that well, but I have listented to his teaching for the last 3-4 years. Hence why I “defend” him in light of some of these assumptions. Many times I speak up because I feel yours (and others) assumptions on him are in opposition to some things that can be seen from his teaching alone!

Just curious…How often do you listen to his teaching? You seem to think you have him “pinned” down in your enlightened view from…what exactly? Maybe you just get all your information on him on a few blog posts and what is said about him on the blogs.

Some quotes taken out of context? A sound byte? A youtube video? His partnership with Driscoll? Your experience with “guys like him”…How do you know he is what you say he is?

I have listened to Chandler’s teachings for several years..I have had the opportunity to meet him and talk with him in person…I have heard others closer to him describe his humility and love for Jesus, why would they lie? IF he was not the latter, then I think we would have heard something by now from the Village…I can’t find a thing..

I believe the man loves Jesus, I believe the man wants to make much of Jesus, I believe the man is not the authoritarian that you say he his, nor do I believe the man attends conferences because of some selfish or prideful pursuit..

But silly me, I am the blind naive one….I cannot compete with your vast enlightened view on Chandlers intentions and motives..

Regardless of what I believe he has done right…I also believe he has made some mistakes…He needs to speak out against Driscoll’s actions as the new head of A29…He hasn’t and he probablly won’t…

He needs to learn from David Platt and tone down his abrasive approach at times…He has taken some things too far before in certain sermons and has gotten carried away with his description of things…

I question the whole complimentarian position myself, but to be frank,I find the whole debate to be mind boggling and tiring….I don’t know where to land on this yet, so I can’t fully say Chandler is making a “mistake” following this doctrine.

When I defend Chandler, it is because I think the accusations and assumptions tend to blow things way out of proportion, confuse and take things out of context due to generalities or something else, and ultimately paint a picture of Chandler that is entirely unfair in my eyes…Maybe this is why I have to give a different take, or “parse and translate” as you say, his words…

I give this different take based on the context I have had listening to his sermons over the last 3-4 years, listening to him at conferences, meeting him in person, following his trial with cancer, and reading things that he has written..

I barely know him, but I feel like I know him enough to bring a defense against some things that have been said about him around here…

“It is a losing game they will have to give up some day.”

Maybe so…I have debated quite frequently with myself to just leave this matter alone at TWW…I thought bringing another side to the discussion on Chandler and others would be helpful to the conversation on this blog…I even had this weird idea that some might actually see the good that has occurred in his life in regards to the Body of Christ…

Instead, there is the refusal to acknowledge this…only an acknowledgement that he has 0 credibility…That is fine..you have every right to feel this way..

Maybe it is fast approaching the time where I leave you and others to continue your assumptions without a different take…

“Nuff’in Stuff’in…”

Psssst!

… Youze “StrawMan” is loos’in itz stuff’in….

(grin)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSFQy_cLvLU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Yo! Seeker,

Hurry up!  -snicker-

We’ze a way’tin fer da tee-shirt…idea!

(grin)

hahahahahahaha

S㋡py

The Chordettes – “Mister Sandman”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xMCNmUaGko&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Bonus: (Comic relief)  “Old Lace n’ & a can O’ Mace…”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev_v3xgxMTg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

—

Seeker,

I value what you have to say, although I may not agree. I also acknowledge you know Chandler much better than I do- which is only via sermons and articles, blogs, what I can read about him and by him…who he associates with and promotes, etc.

I would like to ask you a question which would help me to understand better. Are you also “Reformed and Charismatic” like Chandler is? (I mean to inquire about the Charismatic part…I gathered you are Reformed.)

Thanks, seeker.

Anon1,

I don’t know what else to tell you…If you don’t want to take the time to read my responses (no matter how long) then there is not much I can do for you here, but I tell you what, let me summarize it the best way I possibly can:

I take ALL his words and actions at face value…I see A LOT of good, and I see some critical problems that raises concerns.

I would say you take only a FEW of his words and actions at face value….(Pretty much the ones that reveal the critical issues, while you ignore the good to support your disdain against the Calvinistas)

This wouldn’t be so bad if you would at least acknowledge some of the good things that Chandler has done..But you refuse to do this, crying out, “He has NO credibility”…

This tells me:

1. You have never really listened to Chandler’s teaching outside of the blogs and the occasional “ripped out of context” snippet of a sermon that “proves” to you he has no credibility.

2. You are determined to ignore the good that you have seen because your past experience tells you that all Calvinista’s=Worthless, No Credibility…Thus the “good” must be false.

3. His association/partnership with Driscoll shows you that Chandler has no credibility…(That would be called a generality to me)….

All of the above things I would disagree with you on…I am just wondering how much of Chandler you have paid attention too outside of the negative over the years?

Have you even bothered to listen to his teaching on a regular basis?

Anyway, I explained all of the above and more in my previous post if you care to go back and look….Hopefully this length will cater to your needs a bit more…

Diane,

Appreciate what you said, and it is ok that we don’t agree.

I guess I am just baffled as to how so many can deny seeing things that is so pretty clear to see…but I am sure you all feel the same way about my perspective.

To answer your question,(it might be a bit long, hope that is ok) I have been on a progressive journey over the years in where I stand on the whole “reformed” issue.

First let me say that I am Charismatic in the sense that I believe in the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the work of the Holy Spirit and the Gifts of the Holy Spirit. I believe the Holy Spirit can do as much as was done in the past, and that the Spirit has by no means “diminished” today.

As far as the reformed issue itself, I have wrestled with the 5 points of Calvinism time and time again, and I am not fully sold on it, nor am I adamently against it. I probablly lean closer to it than I have in previous years, but I am not dogmatic on claiming it as THE DOCTRINE to follow.

I have seen the debate on both sides of the spectrum when it comes to the Five Points and Reformed Doctrine in general. For me personally, I find it hard to fully accept the full meaning of “limited atonement”…That is probablly the one pill that is toughest for me to swallow.

I am still seeking the word and praying on this doctrinal issue, but I don’t place this as a priority in my life, and frankly, I am at peace about the fact that I don’t have this issue and others all “figured out.”

I care much more about the “practical” side of the Church. If you don’t mind, I am going to open up a bit so hopefully you can better understand where I am coming from.

To be continued on the next post:

Rene,

Thank you for a kind, objective, and fair response.

I too hope for the things you mentioned…and I agree, we need to call out the hypocrisy and mistreatment of others..

Dee,

I would be cautious if someone told me that the Holy Spirit raised someone from the dead or “vanished and showed up elsewhere”….

I think all too often these claims are promoted in light of some extreme charismatic “revivalist” circles, and it is an eccentric lie to promote an agenda.

However, I want to be clear about something, I do not ever want to deny something that God has done in the past, and could very well do today, just because it seems a bit far fetched for me.

I am not dogmatic to say that the Holy Spirit, who obviously has done some miracoulous things since the advent of the church has started, will cease to do some of those miracoulous things.

I obviously think those miracles were occuring frequently during that time to promote the spread of the Gospel and the expansion of the Church, but to say that it is impossible for it to happen today in certain contexts in the world is hard to come by.

I could be wrong though, and I always edge on the side of caution on these things…

OK… that whole 10/40 Window thing is seriously suspect, imo. Invented by people like George Otis, Jr. to promote his own agenda; ditto for other “stars” of the so-called Third Wave/New Apostolic Reformation.

I’ve spent more time than I’d have liked around people who believed and practiced so-called strategic level spiritual warfare and have to say that the amount of cognitive dissonance is shocking – or should be, to those who believe in such things. (Generally – in my experience – very well-educated folks.)

Why can I say this? Because, for a while, I was one of them, though definitely not on the far fringes.

The superstition is overarching; the misinterpretation of the Bible – ditto.

I know people who “prayer walk” in D.C. every year, trying to “reclaim” it for God. They speak of how buildings and boundary stones were dedicated by godless Masons – not only that, basically dedicated to Baal (aka the devil), and they keep throwing prayer after prayer at the so-called “demonic curses over the city.”

Thing is – NOTHING changes. And their rituals of prayer remind me a LOT of things they claim to be against (i.e., Wicca, etc.).

I could go on, but will stop here for now, except to say that C. Peter Wagner, Otis and their ilk have done a great deal of harm and seem to think nothing of it – right down to their claims that they “killed” both Princess Diana and Mother Teresa with their prayers. (Yes, that’s true; Wagner has written about it and the books in which he discusses the so-called “Queen of Heaven spirit” are still in print.)

Dee @ 1:41 P.M.

I am assuming your response was meant for something I said on a different post in regards to me not agreeing that ALL Calvinistas show a “doom and gloom” gospel.

I am not trying to duel here. And yes, you have revealed quite a few problems with the Calvinista movement, including Chandler himself…I agree with some of these problems you cite, and I by no means discount the stories that have been told..(Still waiting on the abusive stories from the Village and Brook Hills though)..

Revealing problems is a good thing, but in your zeal to do so, I think you and others at times claim generalities that I think can be lacking..

This is why I responded to what you said…By the way, I am not implying that you are stupid, mistaken, or not insightful…I am disagreeing with you…Sorry it is not the fun you were hoping for…(Although I have been accused of being naive)…

I have no doubt your points are valid in certain contexts, and I have not doubt that abuse has occurred from certain Calvinista’s…It is good to talk about this, and it is good to help those who have been abused…

I just want to show that not “all” abuse and not “all” teach “doom and gloom”…Not all are wounded by Calvinistas..I have tried my best to show that, and then you respond with this.

I appreciate your post on Platt and Chan…but here is my question..You claim them Calvinistas, you cite the good things that they have done, and then in another post you claim that Calvinistas teach doom and gloom, you even go as far to say that this is NOT the Gospel…..Really? You are going there?

How else am I to interpret things when you make these generalities? Your statements make it sound like ALL Calvinists preach “doom and gloom”, “False Gospel Heresies”..when I see that Platt, Chan, and Chandler do not..

I disagree, and I even took the effort to show you why I disagree, but do not assume I am trying to attack your intelligence because I disagree.

Seeker – In all fairness, while you may not be “trying to duel,” I feel like a lot of your posts come across as dueling (or refutation, or whatever).

Not trying to stifle you or your comments – just reflecting back how it looks to me. Others’ mileage may vary. 🙂

@ numo-

“The superstition is overarching; the misinterpretation of the Bible – ditto.

I know people who “prayer walk” in D.C. every year, trying to “reclaim” it for God. They speak of how buildings and boundary stones were dedicated by godless Masons – not only that, basically dedicated to Baal (aka the devil), and they keep throwing prayer after prayer at the so-called “demonic curses over the city.”

I had some friends who went to a hyper-charismatic spiritual warfare “gonna claim the city for Christ” church like that…some extended family still go there. They are so sadly deceived. One friend told me she could never go into a Pier One Imports store because of all the statues there that have evil spirits on them. She could feel their presence and then would have to “go to battle” against them.

She also got very freaked out whenever birds would come close to her, as she was convinced they were signs from God that the Holy Spirit was trying to show her something and then she would fret and fret about what she was supposed to see that she was not seeing. Everything is a sign from God. Don’t even get me started on how their beliefs paralyze their speech. They are prisoners of their own mouths. Can’t say this…don’t dare say you are sick, don’t let the enemy steal this or that…decreeing and declaring this or that…just horrible.

“They act more like drill sargeants. Now, I need to go prepare for the rebuttal”

:). No rebuttal this time, the guys you mentioned act like Drill Sargeants in many ways, and in the case of Chandler, he deserves this in light of his narcissistic Zero comment…

He can certainly sound angry at times on certain issues he speaks on, and has taken it too far on what you mention above… He is also witty in his approach at times, which may rub some the wrong way..I personally find it funny..

I could go on, but will stop here for now, except to say that C. Peter Wagner, Otis and their ilk have done a great deal of harm and seem to think nothing of it – right down to their claims that they “killed” both Princess Diana and Mother Teresa with their prayers. (Yes, that’s true; Wagner has written about it and the books in which he discusses the so-called “Queen of Heaven spirit” are still in print.) — Numo

They killed Princess Di and Mother Teresa with their prayers. As in they prayed for them to die and they died. (Were those prayers or spells?)

Isn’t hexing someone with a death curse commonly called Witchcraft? (And I’m NOT talking about Wiccans.)

Also, most of the time in the past where I’ve heard the term “Queen of Heaven” used like that, it was usually an attack on St Mary. Give ’em five years, and it’ll probably refer to Princess Celestia from My Little Pony instead.

I would further add that one of the “leaders” of the D.C.-area prayer walking, etc. thing tried to “curse” me – quite literally. — Numo

As in he tried to put a Hex on you.

As said above, isn’t that Witchcraft?

HUG – right you are!

The other term I’ve seen is “imprecatory prayer” (to describe praying for bad things to happen to someone).

Diane – I ehar you, though thankfully, I was not that far gone. but I *was* fearful of many things, and overly superstitious. It’s taken the better part of a decade for me to be able to see that for what it is and put it aside.

Now I can watch “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” reruns and enjoy them – the funny parts, at least. The show balanced serious and silly pretty well.

Anon1,

I really appreciate your concern for me, as well as others, and your convictions behind it.

I understand your fears…I really do, but I don’t know what else to tell you other than I AM following Jesus and not man. Man is not my Savior. There is no “good news” in man. There is no Redemption foundm in man. There is no Resurrection found in man.

I don’t look to Chandler, Platt, and Chan for my salvation, and until I am convinced that the “primary” things they teach contradict the word of God, I have no reason to stop listening to their teaching.

I know you will not believe my words when I say that.. I hope you at least hear me when I say that I appreciate your concerns, but they are not needed on my part…I also understand the only way that you could fully understand the latter is by you REALLY knowing me, and that is impossible..(One of the drawbacks of communicating with people via the internet)..

I just know in my heart that I am doing everything I can to follow Jesus, I try listen to the Holy Spirit’s guidance as I read and study His word, and I listen to the counsel and advice to people who are more mature in the faith than I that I know PERSONALLY in my life..I also do everything I can to impact the world around me for Christ..as I have mentioned above…

I do not find me listening to their podcasts, or reading the occasional book written by these guys, to be in opposition to me following Christ as mentioned above.

I listen to these guys because in many ways, they encourage/edify me to pursue Christ harder, to appreciate the Good News of Christ more, and to serve Christ better due to their passion for the latter things…They are not alone in this edification..

They are a bonus in my journey that helps in my pursuit of Christ…many other things help as well…

I have told you before, and obviously not convinced you, that I see the problems of the associations/partnerships with these guys in relation to Driscoll and others…

I just have not fully reacted to it in the way you have..Perhaps one day I will…One day I may eat all my words that I have written on here as I come to the conclusion that these guys are the way that has been presented here…

Thanks again for your concern.

HUG – if you remember the Cabbage Patch doll panic, you must surely also recall the “My Little Pony is demonic” idiocy as well… — Numo

They say that a dying horse makes a terrifying scream. I have no wish to hear that scream from the throats of Fluttershy and/or Rarity as they burn at the stake courtesy of some Witchfinder-General. And any Witchfinder-General who tried would have to get through a couple thousand Bronies (adult MLP fans) first.

Oh, and “Transformers are demonic.” Not sure why, but that’s something I heard from the pulpit back in the mid-80s.

Come to think of it, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle was highly suspect, too. — Numo

Here’s the weirdest I’ve heard along those lines, back when I was listening to Xian radio back in the Eighties:

Spiritual Warfare preacher-type was being interviewed about his book. Started out with the usual denunciations as Satanic — He-Man/Masters of the Universe and D&D. Then he switched to Thundercats as “Egyptian Paganism” instead of the usual “encouraging bestiality”. He ended up Proving from Scripture (TM) (with proof-text zip codes) that Aslan was a Satanic False Christ and C.S.Lewis was obviously demon-possessed. (To the interviewer’s credit, you could tell he wasn’t taking the guy seriously by the time he’d gotten to this point.)

Ever since, I’ve called that approach “Aslan-is-the-Antichrist Syndrome”. And I understand the Cosmic Lion of Narnia gets very soggy and hard to light when you call him Tash.

Seeker – I think Dee has written some wise words a few comments up.

Listening to someone on the radio, TV or internet is *not* the same as being in their church. It can make all the difference in the world.

Signed by
numo, survivor of an abusive church, and friend to others who are in similar situations

Seeker – thanks so much for your concerned, very thoughtful post above.

I hope you will continue to comment here. We’re all standing under the same umbrella (which is pretty darned big!)