I’m glad TWW is addressing this movement. Honestly, I wish I’d known about over 5 years ago before I (unknowingly) ended up in it. My former church was semi-FIC (they didn’t call themselves FIC, were not affiliated with NCFIC, and did have Sunday School after the service; however, all children except infants sat in the services and the leadership and members essentially taught and followed the movement) and I also (unknowingly at the time) had some other encounters with NCFIC-affiliated churches. Thankfully, in the latter case I paid attention to my God-given “spidey sense” and got out.

– What is it with their Gothard-esque authority fetish?
– They idolize the (20th century American nuclear) family, without regard for anyone who doesn’t fit their little mold (singles, divorced parents, kids whose parents don’t attend church, and really anyone other than white middle class nuclear homeschooling “biblical” families)
– In my experience, since they’re the only ones being “biblical” and getting it “right,” they tend to end up very cultic and isolationist. Point number 3 is dead on.

I liked how the author of the article presented the problems or issues as real concerns, yet, the church becomes issue-oriented and they can miss the fact that they should simply be preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Apparently, marriage and divorce are an issue in the church, as well as family life being in balance, etc… But like Amanda said, focusing on issues so much that they become idols is what we are seeing in the church. My church wasn’t a FIC but yet, these issues were certainly idols that need to be seen for what they are. Repeatedly, the singles are always being warned for their idolatry of marriage and family when the ones who are warning us/them are those who really need to hear that message. They are the idolators. The entire church is set up to cater to men, ministry (still men), marriage and family. It leaves out the greater single population, as well as the elderly who are widowed or whose children do not attend the same congregation, divorcees, and single parents, especially single moms. People in the stages of life that do not fit the mold will always feel ostracized, unwelcome, disenchanted, lonely and neglected. That’s what happens when you focus on an issue rather than simply focus on Christ and His love for the church. To go so far as to call singles ministry an abomination but yet have marriage conferences and ministry all the time lets you know where these men’s minds are, what they value and how they see life in general.

Sometimes, I think if they’d have their way, they’d try to create a perfect society just like other totalitarian leaders have done in the past: everyone looks the same, acts the same, performs the same, but all with perfection. There really is nothing new under the sun. I’m young, but I think I’m learning a lot here as I read daily and participate. It’s helping me to see the same play written a thousand times, it just has different characters. It’s important to be able to recognize these recycled themes in Christianity and acknowledge them for what they are. At the end of the day, most of it is entirely unnecessary to live a life pleasing to God.

Amanda: “Gothard-esque authority fetish” ROFL, i love that! I need some kind of folder in my computer for cool and useful phrases like this. 🙂

Ted “FIC pastors use Christ-centered language, similar to the way Mormons do, so that a newcomer initially believes the group is Gospel-focused, but once a person gets to know these people on a deeper level, their misguided focus on works becomes evident. The man-made rules and burdens they place on families show that in truth, they believe people must measure up to their man-made standards or they are none of Christ’s.

That’s it exactly. That’s exactly what drew me into the group, and it wasn’t until I was out that I realized just how messed up they really were.

My family lived far from aunts and uncles. My Sunday School teachers, RA leaders, VBS teachers became aunts and uncles for me, and contributed to me coming to Christ, helping me with moral development and growing in faith. My Dad and to a lesser extent Mom did the same for my friends. I cherish the memory of some older widow ladies who always greeted me, asked about school, etc. — they had taught me in Sunday School at different times.

When I was away at college, my friends still visited my folks, even continued the Thanksgiving tradition of the group, which was to play football in the afternoon late, and go to my house and clean out the frig, do the dishes and then do a movie. They would not let Mom in the kitchen until it was all cleaned up! My folks were a part of an environment that led to several of my friends, two of whom had lost their father to work accidents, finding faith.

Dee/Deb–

Thanks! ; ) I’m glad other people see this stuff and I am not crazy. If I hadn’t found these blogs, I’m not sure that I’d be sane at this point. I’m sure I’d be highly medicated. I love the no-nonsense approach on the blogs to get down to the bottom of things and see them clearly for what they are… I just posted over at Survivors (I hadn’t read there in quite awhile) regarding something that has made me uncomfortable since day 1 of finding out Mark Dever’s relationship with CJ, but I couldn’t just say it and now have the courage to. I hope that we will be talking about this more here as I have some things I would love to discuss and think about. Here’s what I said: Hi All,

I haven’t posted in awhile. I’ve caught up on most of the posts in the preview column. Many of you know that I used to attend CHBC and left for many of the similar reasons that you would find in your SGM church. I left. After all this stuff came out about CJ and then him going to CHBC, I began to wonder. I’ve had a difficult time accepting the implications of Mark Dever’s involvement and his response to the situation because I have struggled with wanting to believe the best about him, especially after having dialogue with him on many occasions and at one time, trying to develop a relationship with him as my Sr. Pastor at the time. To me, CJ seems much like the narcissitic psycho that he appears to be, and with all his goodies exposed, espeically his discipleship/sheparding past, authoritarian beliefs and control etc… I’ve tried my best to separate him and Dever–even though I knew it was coming. I can no longer think the best about Dever, and as one still-CHBCer posted regarding Dever’s comments, what I thought was going to happen is happening. ANd I’m glad I’m gone.

People have said to me that they are surprised that there isn’t a CHBC survivors blog. I have always said that CHBC isn’t half as bad as CLC/SGM but could definitely be on it’s way. Others have projected that this very well might be the case and soon. And I’m sad to say that I definitely see that in the making. CJ is preaching at CHBC. Mark makes his statements about the stiuation. And life will go on there. But like Pilgrim stated in the post above, I’d be worried too. Because as people leave CLC and go to other churches, they will bring these bad practices with them.

CHBC does church planting and ministry in the same way through sending pastor’s and elders, and sometimes members out to local churches and others in the area to try and help them become “healthy” as per 9Marks. What I see isn’t some exchange where a little good goes in and changes the atmosphere, but the reverse–what appears to be “good” actually isn’t, and a little leaven goes a long way. I think ultimately, it will be bad for these churches and the members, especially if they dont have a strong stance on what they believe and allow for differences in the cultural and individual espressions of Christianity.

Carolyn and CJ will taint CHBC in the same way. CJ will not become more like the majority there, which already isn’t far from where he is, but moreso, their ideals and visions will spread like unhealthy leaven through the congregation. Both churches are very similar in many of their practical ways of living and thinking patterns. Cognitivie dissonance is familiar for both. And even though they might disagree on polity, it doesnt quite matter when both pastors are hierarchial and authoritarian. I’d put money on it if I had some, because I believe firmly that the problems at CHBC that are apparent discipleship doctrinal patterns will become even worse and given some years time, they will have their own set of survivors. I am one of few that I know of–it’s not like many peopel around there are using discernment either. But birds of a feather definitely comes to mind, and it’s rather hard now to separate Mark from Mahaney without struggling to make it fit when it doesnt.

Ted, Your comment at 11:18 is right on. You echo so many of the concerns I have had for years.

“These people take something as natural as a child being taught by his parents and they turn it into the prime emphasis of the church. ”

And there we have ONE example of an issue driven church. And we must be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It is not either/or. There is a total lack of balance in most churches these days because “issues” sell and bring in customers.

They take something good and make it extrabiblical. That was my point on another thread about expecting your kid at age 5 to be able sit quietly for an hour or so. It is not about the sermon. It is about learning you are not the center of the world. It is about sitting quietly at a dinner, not just church…and listening to OTHERS for a change. Children are being raised expecting to be entertained. Learning HAS to be fun? At all times?

Now, saying the above, I will be cast as like those in the FIC by some. But nothing could be further from the truth. We take good things and make them bad because some people go way overboard with them.

I totally agree with you about Rick Warren and Tony Campolo. In fact, my contention for years is that the Calvinistas are taking strategies that worked so well for Warren to gain followers and implementing them in the Reformed movement. Warren was a pioneer in membership covenants, for example. And that is just one example. For those around the Saddleback movement from back in the 90’s knows that no one dared disagree with Warren. He would be very kind in public about it, but afterwards, you were dead meat….quietly of course.

Don’t get me started on Campolo.

BTW: The beards are patriarchal accoutrements

Lin, your observation that many of the Reform Big Dogs are borrowing from the Rick Warren playbook is amazing. I think you’re right. I had not thought of that before.

Last I heard John MacArthur is not liking any of their antics. That’s good news at least.

Thank you for this post!

The pastor’s letter is incredible. It reminds me of some things that my pastor has said, but the letter is much more powerful.

I have already emailed this to our church staff, the 2 churches we have planted in the last year, the elders and friends of mine who are on staffs at other churches, including Forest Hill in Charlotte, NC.

Ted said (in a nice way) “Dee and Deb, the topic of “issue-driven” churches is at the top of this thread. I’m hearing some begin to discount Wartburg Watch because they suspect the focus is on right-leaning churches, as opposed to “issue-driven” leftist churches like those driven by Tony Campolo or Rick Warren. Some are saying it appears this is a hit site aimed at disenfranchising the right by people on the left. I’d like to answer these people with a reasoned response, but I don’t see any left-leaning churches covered on this site even though many of them also have cans of worms. I thought you might want to respond to this publicly and put concerns to rest.”

I think Wartburg Watch tends to go after conservative theologians and conservative churches giving a pass to churches or organizations that do not stand for the inerrancy of Scripture.

Dee (12:09 pm): Right on. And yet they turn around and deride others for thinking they have the “secret” to following God. It’s all about appearances and keeping a squeaky-clean image. They’ll deny that they’re following a formula, yet they are. It’s very deceptive, at least until you’ve been sucked in.

Seneca said,

“I think Wartburg Watch tends to go after conservative theologians and conservative churches giving a pass to churches or organizations that do not stand for the inerrancy of Scripture.”

What a ridiculous claim. The same could be said about Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc. I guess we should be going after them…

Seneca,

If you don’t like what we discuss here, why not go elsewhere?

I’m wondering what happened to the FIC church I visited in Pineville back in 2005? There were probably five or six family, but since they were QF families that meant a full church. Racheal Carman, whose family bought Apologia texbooks, is the member who invited us. I don’t see anything like that on your list. I know they have moved; I heard they built their own building in Waxhaw.

If so, the movement is a little bigger than your sources report.

“Ted, PS, If I do the post, and it meets certain “criteria” will you defend our honor?”

Hah! Of course, with the hope that you will continue to post more articles on the Campolo and Warren types slithering through the tall grass. 🙂

“I learned that true change comes from an encounter with the Christ. And I want to expose the essential Christ-not one colored by our societal or political biases. Then the Holy Spirit can begin His convicting work.”

I heartily concur!! A critically important point.

Shadowspring, I would have thought the same thing you do at one time. But after researching socialism, I now see the social justice/gospel effort as a way that some aim to merge Christians in lockstep with the state. Tony Campolo and Rick Warren are every bit as deceptive as C.J. Mahaney except their tentacles spread out much farther.

I have a friend who grew up in Cuba. He has lived through a lot. He will tell you that in the end, socialism is the same thing as communism. Some time ago it entered into our institutions through the back door, so it’s harder to recognize than it used to be. My friend sees it better than most, and he’s concerned for our nation. This is the reason Campolo will be speaking in a Southern Baptist church this Sunday.

Dee,
People confuse socialism and communism, and also confuse economic systems with governance systems. The first century church in Jerusalem was economic communism — everyone gave everything they had and were fed by the church — from each according to what they have and to each according to what they need. Dictatorship is not a requirement of economic communism, but other than the one example of the first century church, economic communism has not existed without dictatorship.

The Soviet system was as much state capitalism as communism btw, as in the state owned the enterprises.

The Nazi’s in Germany were National Socialists — a dictatorship from the right that worked to make the industrialists as profitable as possible as long as they cooperated with the regime and did its bidding without complaint. Again, a form of state control of the means of production (as in Soviet communism), just that a select few who already had wealth maintained some of it with the blessing of the state.

Socialism is an economic system where there is an effort to meet the needs of people through societal systems, of which the largest and most powerful is the government. Most socialism in the world occurs in democracies.

Capitalism and socialism can co-exist in the same society, and do in Europe.

When people argue for absolute free market capitalism, as in deregulate, I usually respond that the criminal justice system is socialism to protect the wealthy — taxes (real estate and sales taxes, which all pay directly or indirectly) pay for the justice system and those with the most to protect are the wealthy. So are the roads that keep commerce moving (being cut), the weather service (being cut), the FAA (being cut), and, btw the military (also being cut).

The recent health care law is not socialism, but regulated market capitalism.

Whenever anyone starts calling people socialist, I quit listening, because they generally have no idea what the words actually mean and are talking totally out of their hat. Alternatively, they are willfully misrepresenting the situation.

Btw, the best single sermon I ever heard preached was by Campolo and it was in part in opposition to abortion.

shadowspring,

The list of churches in this post are affiliated with NCFIC. Perhaps the church you attended does not associate with Scott Brown and Vision Forum.

BTW, I also believe that a lot of us have very loose meanings for the term “liberal” and “conservative”, to the extent that they are almost meaningless.

‘The recent health care law is not socialism, but regulated market capitalism”

That is a good one! So, where is the ‘choice’? Well, I guess one could “choose” to pay the fine or not….with consequencs.

Ted and Seneca:

I have found that people write about what interests them. Dee and Deb are interested in what they believe to be aberrations and abuses in the faith from their backgrounds. That’ pretty natural, really.

I, and you, might like for them to write about other topics. But they probably don’t find Campolo (who makes completely ridiculous assertions like – Jesus would not own a BMW, or something like that) or Jim Wallis all that interesting.

They come from conservative Christian backgrounds, so they tend to write about stuff from that perspective. That’s all it is.

And there is really no merit in trying to claim one group is better or worse than the other etc. It’s just a matter of whether one wants to write about it.

I have had concerns about Doug and Scott for years. Before Trinity Baptist, Scott was at North Wake Church. He was well liked and very popular. But when his “direction” departed from the path North Wake was following, he took his ball and started Trinity. When that didn’t go his way, he took his ball and started Hope. It seems like a pattern of division that is indicative of a problem.

As for Doug and the whole Vision Forum style of ministry, like so many things, they have taken a good thing and twisted it into something sinful. There is absolutely nothing wrong with calling today’s men to lead instead of follow, to be qualified to teach the word, to be strong instead of weak. But when this becomes nearly father worship and a return to the patriarchy of the old testament, they have gone too far. The biblical accounts of patriarchy aren’t meant to be normative for behaviors today. They simply recount the social structures present (and required?) for safe development of future generations in those times. Those same people holding to a new patriarchy wouldn’t advocate a return to animal sacrifice or keeping kosher, but they’ve chosen the parts they really like, those that make them (feel) powerful and hold those out as moral absolutes.

The biggest trouble I have is that my wife is enamored with the illusion of the pure, safe family Phillips holds out in Vision Forum stuff. It is an illusion of sorts, kind of like looking longingly at Norman Rockwell paintings or watching old movies. I will not play God and decide that my three daughters have anything less valuable to contribute to His world than my four sons. If God wants them to marry and parent children, hallelujah! If God wants them to become doctors or nurses and serve him that way, hallelujah! They can go places and meet people my sons will never be able to. Example: if all women are supposed to stay home and raise a Christian army, who will bring Jesus to Muslim women?

While I am not in agreement with Seneca’s point of view, I am also not in agreement with personal attacks. It is one thing to attack a doctrine, it is quite another to directly attack someone’s character and air their dirty laundry. Are we loving our enemies by doing that, or are we repaying evil with evil?

“When people argue for absolute free market capitalism, as in deregulate, I usually respond that the criminal justice system is socialism to protect the wealthy — taxes (real estate and sales taxes, which all pay directly or indirectly) pay for the justice system and those with the most to protect are the wealthy. So are the roads that keep commerce moving (being cut), the weather service (being cut), the FAA (being cut), and, btw the military (also being cut).

This is so silly and part of the rhetoric that keeps people from talking. I have yet to meet a Free market capitalist that does not believe we need basic services from the government. Military, roads, protection, etc. But it is fun to pretend they are really anarchists.

We have a bridge closed in our city for needed repair. One problem with the transportation budget is that there is money set aside for squirrel sanctuaries and some turtle habitat but we cannot use that to fix bridges. Now, there is plenty of money if the bridge falls down and people die.

Arce and I have a different definition of socialism but he has made it clear he is not listening. 😮

Lin:

Good observation about how dogmatic liberals can be.

Human nature isn’t really different because of one’s political convictions. Humans will always try to force conformity and see that their opinions rule the day.

We really are not comfortable with people having their own opinions.

Lin,

So perhaps my church is not so liberal after all. We do not encourage homosexuality and there are no open homosexuals, other than one who was celibate and has since left, in the membership or leadership as far as is known. The church and its leadership do not make a practice of inquiring into anyone’s sexuality, and we are not on record as accepting or affirming gays, but we don’t spend time talking against homosexuality as a sin either. It seems more that we are busy trying to serve God and to share his love with those in our neighborhood and in three other countries.

“It seems more that we are busy trying to serve God and to share his love with those in our neighborhood and in three other countries.”

Anyone who has been reading here for a while knows how godly you are since you constantly remind us of your works. Perhaps others just don’t like to brag about what they do and take Matt 6 seriously.

The other is that we are seeking ways to engage the lower and lower-middle class neighborhood where our church has been located for over 80 years, in evangelism and social ministries, including social justice activities, with a goal of everyone being involved in some mission oriented activity, from meals on wheels, mentoring at the nearby elementary, supporting neighborhood associations, ESL classes, Zumba, tutoring, etc., as well as participating in our three foreign missions projects, in China, Lebanon and Ghana.

Amen! The church is is a great venue for these social ministries, and more churches should do likewise.

I’m not a fan of the phrase “social justice”, because true justice is by definition impartial, whereas social justice conveys (to me) the idea that some should receive special consideration by virtue of their lowly position in society, and because the phrase is so often associated with a liberal political agenda.

I fully support individuals, churches, and other organizations attempting to address these social concerns — just not when government does so. Not only are such activities not the proper role of government under the U.S. Constitution (nor the proper role of government biblically speaking), the brutal truth of the matter is that government is not particularly good at them.

Dee said: It is my perspective that the enforcement of a state sponsored church had just as much to do with the decline of the faith as socialism.

They are intertwined. The socialism of European nations is in no small part an outgrowth of their lack of separation of church and state. When the church and state are not kept separate, the state is naturally seen as having the role of carrying out the social responsibilities of the church.

When the state takes on roles intended by God to be performed by the church, such as caring for the poor, this hinders the religious liberties of its citizens. The state has no right to tell me what to believe, or how to implement my beliefs. Government should not tell me that I can’t worship, or pray, or serve and give to the less fortunate. Likewise, government should not tell me that I must do any of these things, either. When they do, they have taken away my liberty to voluntarily practice my own religion by virtue of mandating it.

Legalistic, authoritarian churches rob people of the joy of their faith and often end of damaging and destroying that faith. The same damage happens to people’s faith when governments, under the authority of law via taxation, implement social programs and redistribute wealth.

So it is not one thing (socialism) or the other (state sponsored churches) that caused faith to decline, it is both — for socialism and state churches are inextricably connected.

Well said, Junkster!

“Whether it be cells, or FIC, or tongues speaking, or Reformed theology, or any other focus on anything other than Christ crucified and resurrected, the danger of making an idol of a pet doctrine or practice is great.”

‘It bothers me that churches think that to have small groups meeting during the week, they must give up the most effective small group ministry that has ever existed, Sunday School. Quite frankly, about half of the churches I have joined during my wanderings over the last 40 years or so, I joined and stayed because of a good Sunday School class, and not the preaching”

It is funny that mostt people I talk to who are very upset with the direction of their church will not leave because they love their Sunday School class! I hear this all the time. Many do not even attend the service. Just Sunday School.

“BTW, from Constantine to today, with the exception of the United States, there has been a state church or state favored religious organization in nearly every country in the world. Even in Soviet days, the Russian Orthodox church was tolerated and all others were not.”

There is a reason the Cathedrals all over Europe are for the most part tourist attractions now. In Germany, the Lutheran church is a joke. (One German family who attends told me they pay their “tithe” to the state who then gives a portion to the church). A good friend who emigrated here in the 90’s from Moscow gave me a run down of how the Russian Orthodox church operated in the USSR and it was totally subservient to the state. She said it was mostly attended by very old grandmothers. In other words, she said it’s message was never a threat to the state god.

So, to try and paint a picture that church/state entertwinment did not affect belief is a bit disingenuous. It was not entertwined in the 1st to 3rd Century and it was quite vibrant. The Ana Baptist were outlawed during the Reformation days and they had the most vibrant faith of all as they hid in caves and moved from place to place because they were breaking the law by re baptizing adults. Reading about them makes Calvin look like the tyrant he was.

In the U.S., some states still practiced de jure favoritism to a single church body (denomination) as late as the Civil War. Keep in mind that the extension of the bill of rights to the states did not occur until after the Civil War, so that many states had laws or constitutions that favored a particular denomination. Now all we have are de facto favoritism, such as is practiced in much of the rural and small town South, including passing out Bibles and tracts at public schools, prayer time in classrooms, etc.

The issue in Dearborn was that the event was a closed event unless one paid for a booth. The passing out of any brochures without prior registration and payment of a fee was against the rules and the rights of the organizers. When Christians refuse to accommodate the the rules that apply to everyone else, they display an arrogance that is unbecoming and suffer consequences like anyone else behaving that way would.

Not to get into an argument, but there are many Arab Christians in Dearborn and the greater Detroit area. A lot of them are recent immigrants, but by no means all – I think there is a tendency to misrepresent the reality of religious pluralism in the Arab American community as a whole…

Some of the historic (ancient!) churches that Arab Americans belong to: Maronite Catholic (predominantly Lebanese); Byzantine Catholic; Syriac Orthodox; Coptic (primarily Egyptian); various other orthodox churches; the Roman Catholic church… and some Protestant churches as well.

Lin.

I am very tired of your assuming things about me. I reported what the legal media have been saying about the event, which usually is down the middle. I am aware of the large number of Arab Christians in much of the country.

I do not defend Muslims. What I do is argue for truth and not bias, and a whole lot of fundegelicals instantly jump to dis Muslims in any situation, much as you did, and that is counter productive in reaching Muslims for Christ.

Quit posting LIES about me with a little wiggle. It is a tactic that would make Joe McCarthy proud.

I have a sneaking suspicion that walking into a festival in an Arab American community that is largely Christian already and proselytizing might not be the smartest idea. 😉

Numo, Most of us are aware that not all Arabs are Muslims. Thanks. But it seems you are only trying to interject a red herring.

Dee, sorry just got back to the site. In answer to your question regarding why Piper is buddying up to Rick Warren, that’s a good question. It appears that a desire to pull all religions into one global entity underlies some of the networking we’re seeing.

Caryl Matrisciana produced a 4-hour long DVD called Wide is the Gate: The Emerging New Christianity which I’m going to order. You can get a glimpse of how she’s tying all the threads together by scrolling down to the two Sept. 17th broadcasts. I think she’s onto something.

http://www.olivetreeviews.org/radio/mp3/

Dee said: So, here is the eternally debated problem. How to fix it?

The debate will go on, but I am confident of this — what we’ve been doing for the last 50 years or so hasn’t worked.

And Peter — the Observer interfered in Walternate’s experiment to cure Peter, then Walter brought Peter to this world to save him, but Walter and Peter fell through the ice and almost drowned, and the Observer interfered again and saved Peter. All this messed up the timelines in both universes, but the device that Peter used to create the bridge between worlds “corrected” the timelines, resulting in Peter having died by drowning after all.

But it looks like he is somehow being pulled back into existence — by his connection to Olivia and/or Walter, perhaps?

“The Arab American community in the greater Detroit area is largely Christian.”

Sorry, but you inserted a red herring into the discussion for a reason. I was discussing the Dearborn Arab Festival which should be renamed the Muslim Festival. Perhaps you should read outside your liberal media. It is a good thing to read both sides on all issues. What happened to the Christians witnessing at the Festival should concern all Americans who revere their Constitutional rights. It was NOT a closed Festival.

Dee, Most of us are sick of politics. I certainly hope that does not mean they are sick of our Constitutional rights. As one cop told those jailed for witnessing…they know that Sharia law has been imposed on one woman in Dearborn by her family. We know this is happening all over Europe, too. So, when the police force, for the most part, is sympathetic to Sharia carried out in a community and others fear to speak up because they are accused of hating Muslims, we have a serious problem.

It harkens back to the days when domestic violence was considered a private matter in the family. If we care about women as egals, we cannot ignore such things happening in our own country simply because we want to be seen as “loving” Muslims. One can love a person while being totally against what they do and calling them out on it.

Dee,
I agree about not seeking answers in politics. Which is exactly why I am oppsed to the social policies of political liberals.

I have studied constitutional law and have represented Christians when it was clear that their rights were being abused. Even while in law school, I challenged and changed a local school district policy that did not allow Christian students to write and speak about their faith in appropriate contexts, including English class writing assignments, “Meet me at the Pole”, etc.

There are some “Christians” who seem intent on causing confrontation. That is not effective evangelism, any more than the JWs who used to show up at my door, until I began meeting them at the door with my Bible. The group that went to Dearborn are of that ilk. Intent on seeking confrontation and causing trouble, they got what they went there to get. Their antics are counterproductive and stupid.

If a Christian witness to Muslims is to be effective, it needs to start with respect. There are Arab Christians in the Detroit area who could be developing relationships with the Arab community in Dearborn and become a part of the Arab festival there, and could make an effective witness.

And Arce is not pronounced as “arse”. And Junkster, you jump on the side of these stupid, confrontational Christians in knee-jerk fashion, with the emphasis on jerk.

Deb: yes, I agree.

The video may or may not have been doctored. But that does not matter. The whole approach to the matter is wrong, counterproductive and guaranteed to turn off the prospective converts they were seeking to engage. They went loaded for confrontation and that’s what happened. That kind of “evangelism” is of the lowest likelihood of having any success and is more likely to permanently turn people off to Christians and Christianity.

If you set out to prove that Christians are discriminated against in this country, and confront people on that basis, guess what, you can created that.

I have had people from the Middle East in my home, both Muslims and Christians. Most were students who needed a place to stay over the Christmas holidays when the campus dorms were closed. A couple of them expressed amazement that they were not continually confronted while in the home of Christians, because that’s what they thought that’s what all Christians do. Instead, they received a warm welcome, came to understand something about Christian hospitality and inquired about our faith, so we had an opportunity to share our beliefs about Jesus and learn their understanding of Jesus (Issa to a Muslim) as a basis for further conversation.

I was not the one injecting Lin — YOU DID. And please quit calling me names.

And my brand of social justice does not mean more government, but it does mean the Christians have to be active in their community, helping people in need. When they come to my door, they are fed and the gospel is shared. And I chose to live in a poor neighborhood with a high crime rate. We volunteer in the local elementary school, do Meals on Wheels, transport disabled neighbors to the clinic and grocery, and provide professional services for free or at a deep discount to help people when that is necessary; sometimes it involves clearing up a misunderstanding by a government office, as in getting an elderly woman the proper social security amount so she could pay the rent and utilities on her apartment.

Dee, Arce said I reminded him of Caner…who is a pathological liar. I suppose that gets to stand? Because Arce said it?

Today, I took 2 mentally disabled young adults to volunteer in a hospital so they can feel useful in society. I do this every Tue. They are full of love and promise. it never occurs to me to mention this on blogs except for here. But I feel dirty as if I just violated matthew 6!

Deb,

I do not know how long Scott Brown was at North Wake. He had already gone off to start Trinity by the time we started worshiping there in December of 2002.

My remark referencing Caner had nothing to do with his prevarication but with his absolutely counterproductive approach to Muslims. Jumping out against anyone or anything that tries to be the least bit fair to Muslims in this country, and jumping onto the side of anyone who is targeting Muslims. My remark regarding Junkster was to the strength of the reaction and the need to tamper it down. My intent in both instances was to allow two interpretations, and you proved my point by your reaction. You jump to a predetermined, by your own earlier choices, position that may or may not be aligned with the facts, but with your prejudices. I apologize for giving both of you the opportunity to over-react and display your prejudices.

Following in the footsteps of Jesus is hard, and everyone of us will fail at it, no matter how hard we try. But it is counter-productive to stir conflict between Christians and Muslims.

Unfortunately, movements hijack words and phrases. The NCFIC is not representative of all churches who desire their children to be part of worship and vice-versa. My family attends a church that desires and encourages parents to include children to be part of worship but would not preach things like you have mentioned here from the pulpit. The reason we choose to attend here is not because of its inclusive worship style but because it preaches the Gospel; period! Having our four children (ages 2,5,12,14) with us in worship is a great blessing.

Dee,
Sorry for your personal troubles; I hope things get better and you feel better soon. You can, and should, set whatever rules you feel are appropriate to maintaining the kind of discourse you prefer.

I generally don’t bring up my negative church experiences because I prefer to focus on the issues being discussed in the blog posts and comments than on my own personal issues, but I will confess that, due to my experiences with churches and church leaders over the past decade, I have been discouraged and disillusioned, and haven’t been a regular church participant in many months now. So I have enjoyed being part of the discussions here at TWW. The stimulation and opportunity to freely and openly exchange thoughts, including differences of opinion, to encourage and challenge others, and to be encouraged and challenged by them may be the closest thing I have in my life these days to what I think church should be about.

I have experienced more than enough heavy-handed authoritarianism, personal favoritism, and emotional manipulation in churches. As TWW has well pointed out, these things are damaging to a person’s faith, and I am no exception. But perhaps I need to just accept that such is the way things are in any collection of Christians, including those here at TWW. I’m not sure whether to thank you for that realization, or cry. I’ll probably do both.

Arce,
Hello, Pot, nice to meet you; my name is Kettle. I probably don’t behave as a Christian nearly often enough in how I communicate with others. I also don’t feel it is very Christian behavior when someone calls orthodoxy doctrines “heresy”, or denigrates conservative political positions, or judges the motives of other Christians attempting to share their faith and defend their constitutional rights. But maybe that’s just me.

Your progressive political ideology is a matter of considerable record in the comments on the blog, so I don’t see why you would think I know nothing about it. I understand that you, like many liberals, consider your politics an outgrowth of your Christian beliefs. But perhaps you should consider that conservative Christians may feel the same about the relationship between their beliefs and their politics. My views on personal responsibility, individual liberty, and limited, constitutionally defined powers of government are all a result of my understanding of the Bible and how God relates to us. My belief in separation of church and state also comes from my understanding of Scripture, and along with that my firm belief that government has no appropriate role in “social justice”.

If I am insinuating falsehoods by taking your words at face value, you are free to set the record straight. But you’re no more likely to convince me that your political or theological views are correct than I am to convince you of mine, so why bother? Why not just accept that we disagree, and that when you say something I think is wrong, or someone like Lin thinks is wrong, we are within our rights to state our disagreement? Why make it personal and insulting?

One of the reasons I like this blog is: the comment section is for open discussion, not attacking other commenters and refuting their points of view.

At least, I think that’s what Dee and Deb want here, and it’s one of the reasons I feel comfortable (for the most part) commenting here.

The thing is… sometimes things escalate into (in my opinion) unwarranted attacks on others and their views.

Junkster: I don’t think Dee or Deb are under any kind of obligation to “refute” the views of those with whom they disagree (speaking of commenters, not of Dee and Deb’s posts).

I think a little common sense – and politeness in discussion – go a long, long way toward helping us step past our own personal prejudices to see where others are coming from, regardless of whether we agree with them or not. I don’t think anyone here has to agree with anyone else – nor do I think any single person here (very much including myself!) has THE inside line to God and the Gospel.

As for the right of whoever hosts/runs/writes a blog to redact comments – it’s their blog, right? If you [plural] have your own blog, you might be faced with dilemmas, too – especially when the subject matter of posts is such that people tend to get into passionate discussions, even arguments.

I think that’s unavoidable when discussing religion (passionate discussion), since it hits most everyone so close to home. But there is a huge difference between listening to someone with whom one disagrees and feeling like they have to be confronted – even told to stop talking, called names, etc.

Please, let’s look at the bigger picture, OK?

My apologies for being a bit too quick at jumping into the fray…

Numo,
If you’ve read my comments, you’ve probably noticed that I prefer not to argue with another person’s point of view — I simply state my own and state when I disagree with theirs. But there can’t be much of a discussion without some differences of opinion and nuances of thought coming through, can there?

I completely agree that things can escalate into unwarranted attacks. And Arce’s protestations otherwise, he made an intentionally snide and personally denigrating remark toward Lin (apparently the blog hosts agree with that assessment since they deleted it). I admit I responded in kind, but only with the intent of making it clear what Arce had done by way of the extreme. I even offered Arce an apology if he was offended, and he indicated he wasn’t — but Lin indicated she was, and I’ve seen no attempt by Arce to do anything but defend his indefensible acts.

Why do you think it is acceptable for one person to call something “heresy” but unacceptable for another to respond by saying “no it isn’t, and it isn’t appropriate for you to say it is”? Wouldn’t it be better for the first person to avoid using the inflammatory, and factually incorrect, word to begin with? You didn’t chose to say that it would be better for the first person to say “How do you square your belief with such and such view or Scripture?”; instead, you chose to criticism my way of responding to being called a heretic. Your idea of tolerance seems selective. The hostility you see here is a result of the intolerance of some toward conservative opinions.

And I’ve already violated GBTC latest edict, so I’d better stop there.

Arce,
You insulted Lin. You know you did, because she said she felt insulted. And now you are arguing with me because you like to win arguments. I’m sure that trait makes you a good lawyer. But some of the things that make people good lawyers are things that cause so many jokes about lawyers not being in heaven. I’m sure you’re aware of this.

You are wrong about what constitutes heresy. I have no desire to defend Calvinism, nor to explain to you the difference between double predestination and hyper-Calvinism. You’ve made it clear that your mind is made up, and not in any way open in the matter. And to me it is a secondary matter, but you want to elevate it to a primary one by calling it heresy. If you can make the false claim that it is heresy, I can assert that you are incorrect and also that I think it’s wrong for you to be allowed to do so without correction. Until I get deleted or banned or whatever.

Numo,
Didn’t mean to drag you in — was just responding to your comments about my comments. I’m perfectly calm. People can disagree, even passionately, and not be angry. Conflict isn’t always a bad thing; it can drive us to the truth. Expecting others to always say things “just so” so that no one has the potential to be unhappy with what was said or how it was said it a bit unrealistic. No response necessary.