I think we’ve just gone from “so spiritually minded, no earthly good” to “…earthly dangerous.”

Shaking head . . . Piper would be fit to be tied if a Muslim had done this in front of the White House. Piper may be drawing some soon-to-be-unwanted attention to himself. I’m curious to have TW’s take on this advertisement. Do you think Piper wants to be martyred?

@ dee: though to be fair, he is *far* less offensive here than many people who stand in the pulpit week after week spreading misinformation and lies about Islam and all Muslims! It makes me sad and very angry.

“Go ye into all the world – and take ’em down!”

Did he just put himself into the crosshairs?

elastigirl wrote:

I think we’ve just gone from “so spiritually minded, no earthly good” to “…earthly dangerous.”

Don’t you know if this sparks an Islam-vs-the-West war, that just means End Time Prophecy is Being Fulfilled?
“Rejoice for Thy Redemption Draweth Nigh!” (any minute now… any minute now… any minute now…)
“This World is not my home; I’m just passin’ thru…”

Is Piper's comment off-the-cuff, impromptu? Or is it rehearsed? If it is impromptu then where is the great wisdom and thoughtfulness that Piper gets credited with? And if it was pre-planned then what the heck? Who writes nonsense like this?

They are so caught up in sounding good about their passions that they don't notice their own stupidity.

why do these guys smile at this? His smirk reminds me of the CJ Mahaney video with him saying “I’m the worst sinner in the world…”

Dee: I think this is their Twitter handle: https://twitter.com/CROSS_con

I just tagged you and them in a tweet and requesting them to remove the video (linking to this post).

In my previous comment “Paper” should be “Piper”.

What if Piper had a dream that the city was coming down unless it repented and turned to Christ in repentance and faith, and he is standing in the same shoes Jonah did (God’s prophet) when he told Ninevah to repent? I don’t recall reading anything in the biblical record that Jonah said “and all the nations with you” to make them feel less single-out or targeted. He told them God would destroy them, and them alone, for their own wickedness. That probably wouldn’t have made the rest of the world feel too good if they could have youtube-d and watched the announcement.

The beginning of the video ascribes God with “omnipotence”, not John Piper, nor the rest of those who claim to love Christ. Granted, he doesn’t give a lot of context, so the reader is left to wonder about the details.

Just my initial thoughts, subject to change at any given moment.

Someone above referenced Piper as a ‘clown’. I know we have our own unique, individual measuring sticks when it comes to categorizing someone, but I wouldn’t call him a clown (at this point). I think he’s my brother in Christ even though I strongly disagree with him on some major theological issues.

This forum is a place that has a good amount of truth floating around it (thanks Dee and Deb and those that help), but at the same time it has some very ungracious attitudes that show themselves in the comments (speaking with an eye to myself as well). Yes, I know Jesus didn’t mince words when it came to the Pharisees, but there is a enormous difference between Divine Perfection and the rest of us (in process), when it comes to our ability to *rightly* judge. HE was FULL of grace AND truth. All truth and no (or little) grace is no good.

Why does he always smile when he is saying something horrible? I feel sick watching this.

I have just had the awful thought that there are a bunch of CROSS guys on a conference call right now discussing this issue and their response is going to be “We will not be letting a bunch of women tell us what to do! They should have come to us in private. Sic the lawyers on them!”

__

Wartburg,

His Excellency Yousef Al Otaiba, Ambassador of the United Arab Emirates to the United States of America,can be contacted, directing correspondence to:

Contacting the Embassy : (Direct correspondence to:)

e-mail contact information: (link)

http://www.uae-embassy.org/contact-embassy

*

Embassy of the United Arab Emirates · 3522 International Court, NW · Suite 400 · Washington, DC 20008

http://www.uae-embassy.org/embassy/ambassador-yousef-al-otaiba

—
Notes:
Contact/information for:
President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave Nw · Washington · (202) 456-1414
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/submit-questions-and-comments
http://www.whitehouse.gov
Customer service (202)-456-1111
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog
http://www.facebook.com/WhiteHouse
http://twitter.com/whitehouse
http://www.youtube.com/whitehouse
http://www.flickr.com/photos/whitehouse
http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewArtist?id=299652047

—

I agree with Moxie, why is he grinning when he calls judgment down? It was no connection to what he is saying and it’s creepy.

And how is predestination shown in the story of the rich young man? Piper gives that word to the necessity of salvation, which all Christians believe. His use of it makes no sense to me. It only adds a feeling of exclusiveness in reference to a city that defines “exclusive”. And it has the same hard edge that is also in fundamentalist Islam.

And why would they want to “flood” Dubai, of all places, that paean to wealth and elitism in a desert built by oil money? I am suspicious of the motives in the same way that I am suspicious when so many US church plants are in wealthier suburbs.

@ dee:

I missed them. Couldn’t you put them in the Troll Zoo so we can all have a good laugh?

@ elastigirl:
Yah, I don’t know how it works either. You could go over to SSB and ask her. She’s written a follow-up comment.

I suppose one would have to admit that the system-as-it-is has become too corrupt to find honest place.

No good way to make money, either, on the outside. And one does need to eat&such.

dee wrote:

Another comment unapproved due to serious insensitivity.

Getting a lot of those lately, are we?

When the CELEBRITY gets dissed, all the Fanboy Worshippers come out of the woodwork to defend their God.

@ ken:

I can see your point, however:

1. We have no evidence that Piper’s had such a revelation and he never claims that he did.

2. Piper’s not Jonah or a Biblical prophet. In fact I’m not sure how we’d go about determining if anybody was one of those nowadays.

3. He may be correct that judgment will come to Dubai (and any city) if it doesn’t repent, but for an American to stand in a city in a Muslim country, point to its tallest building, and say that it’s “coming down” is a pretty clueless thing to do, for obvious reasons.

4. That being said, I doubt there was any nefarious motive here or that it will actually cause any problems. I suspect Piper was, as usual, oblivious. To those who doubt someone could be that clueless, the pastor of the PCA church I used to attend literally forgot about 9/11 on the 10th anniversary and chose “Day of Judgment! Day of Wonders!” for the opening hymn. DOJDOW is a graphic, pointed hymn about the end of the world (see text here) and a perfectly fine song…but NOT for the 10th anniversary of 9/11. He was patently offensive — I actually cried about it out of anger when I got home even though I have no personal connection to any 9/11 victims at all — but it was nonetheless accidental.

Link screwed up in last comment.

Seems to be the latest trend – going to some far-flung country (preferably a Muslim one) and pontificating about bringing the gospel there and being a ‘radical’ Christian.

Pastor Platt preached from a hidden location somewhere in the Arab Emirates didn’t he, at the risk of persecution if he was found out. Perhaps Pastor Piper thinks he’s even braver by openly condemning Islam in a public place in an Islamic country, and then publishing it all over the internet?

elastigirl wrote:

so, if Jonah did it, then this is something worth emulating because it’s in the bible, therefore biblical.

Do these guys know Jonah is NOT portrayed as a hero in the original text?

1) God tells Jonah “Go to Nineveh” (modern Mosul, to the East of Israel).
2) Jonah takes passage on the first ship to Tarsus (Tartessos near Gibraltar, as far West as you can get?).
3) God has to send a storm, then some sort of sea monster to EAT Jonah and spit him out on the riverfront at Nineveh.
4) Jonah bitches and moans and does the bare minimum of what God wanted done.
5) It works anyway.
6) Jonah gets mad at God, goes off alone, and sits down to sulk.
7) God catches up and asks Jonah a question. There the story ends.
8) We are never told Jonah’s answer. We have to answer the question ourselves.

Nelson Mandela has passed away 🙁

Patrice wrote:

And how is predestination shown in the story of the rich young man? Piper gives that word to the necessity of salvation, which all Christians believe. His use of it makes no sense to me. It only adds a feeling of exclusiveness in reference to a city that defines “exclusive”. And it has the same hard edge that is also in fundamentalist Islam.

Both Calvin and Mohammed were VERY into Predestination. I would expect their theologies to have some similarities. Including similar side effects.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

IN’SHAL’LAH

WOW! But true … so very, very true.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Both Calvin and Mohammed were VERY into Predestination. I would expect their theologies to have some similarities. Including similar side effects

So perhaps they are attracted to both the oil money and the similarity of mindset. Blech

Mullah Piper. Not long ago he was the new global John Calvin filming from Geneva

   This is very odd. I was just posting a comment over on Spiritual Sounding board in the Mefferd thread, and it went "poof." Now the blog post has vanished. Was Julie threatened also?

Platt and Piper are perfectly safe in Dubai, which is why they went there. Also, it is essentially a first-world city and one of the wealthiest in the world.

Leila wrote:

This is very odd. I was just posting a comment over on Spiritual Sounding board in the Mefferd thread, and it went “poof.” Now the blog post has vanished. Was Julie threatened also?

Same here. What the heck?

@ BeenThereDoneThat:
Yes, post and comments from right side feeder, too. Gosh, I hope not!

Hester wrote:

Honestly I’m actually more curious why all these neo-Calvinists appear to be suddenly descending on Dubai of all places.

Reminds me of Caroline Aherne’s famous interview (in the character of “Mrs Merton”) with Debbie Magee, when she asked: So, what was it that attracted you to millionaire Paul Daniels?

dee wrote:

7 comments by a threatening and theologically superior commenter deleted.

And, on reflection, I’m theologically superior. (I must be, since unlike any Christian before me, I worked out by God’s grace that my doctrine should be based on the Biblescriptures.) Why aren’t my comments deleted?

Oh… I suppose I’ve never threatened anyone.

dee wrote:

also be mad.

Already there.

In my opinion, there’s really only one publishing company that has the power to silence Janet Mefferd and remove articles off Christianity Today:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2011/october/harpercollins-buys-thomas-nelson-will-control-50-of.html

Hmmm. The conference is in Louisville, Kentucky near the end of this month. Most of the big names are lined up – but not Mahaney. It’s taking place at some convention center.

I agree with a lot of what has been said here about Piper, but, taking him out of the equation for a moment – At what point do we stop being afraid of offending Muslims? Must videos be taken down because someone in it speaks harshly about Islam? What does that say about us or about any non-Islamic country?

Yes, I know it’s easy for me to talk like this, because I’m probably not in any immediate danger of reprisal. But if the price of no further lives being lost is the abrogation of free speech where Islam is concerned, isn’t the price too high?

Yeah, Piper is continuing on the path of foolishness he’s been on for some time. (I agree with what he broadly says about Christianity and Islam, but his bravado and self-aggrandizement are foolish.) But free speech allows even foolishness – up to a point. Maybe I’m naive, but I doubt that even a militant Muslim would think that this aging preacher is threatening military action.

@ Eagle: fwiw, there is *nothing* in the Quran that relates to FGM, even though some Muslims claim it’s mandated. same for clothing: both men and women are commanded to dress modestly. the extreme versions of this (chadors, burqas) are of entirely human origin.

Re Julie Anne’s decision at Spiritual Sounding Board (which I support entirely), my brief two cents’ worth:

https://twitter.com/tim_fall/status/408738590168870913

and

https://twitter.com/tim_fall/status/408739048165892096

By the way, one of the PDF files with the evidence about MD’s plagiarism taken down from Janet Mefferd’s website can still be downloaded from Archive.org.

Visit the following link to get the evidence about “A call to resurgence” and a section of “Trial”: https://web.archive.org/web/20131203032816/http://www.janetmefferd.com/wp-content/uploads/MATERIAL-SCREENSHOTS-HERE.pdf

I used the information in the first Evernote link presented by Janey.

We are bearing witness to the blasphemous Gospel of Oppression being unleashed on the wider world

@ Headless Unicorn Guy: I think you misunderstood me – also that you assume that Muslim women are not interested in fashion, makeup, etc. Nothing could be further from the truth! There are tons of Arabic-language fashion mags; I think we’ve been given a very distorted picture of Islam and further, one that’s focused solely on extremism and its adherents.

I’ve spent a fair amount of time with women and girls from the ME and N. Africa… you should see their wardrobes! Even those who are very conservative are quite stylish.

@ Headless Unicorn Guy: you’ll have noticed that traditional men’s clothing from many Muslim-majority countries covers the entire body, face and hands excepted, yes? And a lot of those men always wear hats or skullcaps, much like some orthodox Jewish man, with their black suits and fedoras…

@ Martos: probably yes, though indoors. Women fro SA, veil and wear long dresses in public, but not otherwise. I have known some lovelynSaudi women – not rich by any means, but still style-conscious and possessed of very good taste in clothing.

Tina wrote:

I will be interested in seeing that post when it comes back up.

Hi Tina,

The post is live again and here is the announcement i posted:

Announcement:

Although you all know me as a ranting redhead and I’m not afraid to go after spiritual bullies, this blog’s first purpose is defending and protecting. It is in light of the blog’s first goal, that I needed to remove some comments, tweets, and related responses. This is unprecedented for me and was a difficult decision to make.

I am unable to discuss this any further and will be moderating carefully to remove related comments. I am absolutely fine. Thanks for the e-mails checking on me. 🙂

I really dig the Witches of Wartburg and may their tribe increase! Not since the Gutenberg movable type press and the Venetian booksellers has Christendom been shaken up as much. The internet is making it harder and harder for the old guard to hold onto power.

Bridget wrote:

@ dee:
I thought we lived in a country with freedom of speech? I didn’t see any names mentioned at other places . . . feels like I’m in East Germany during the Cold War.

This may be a case where the responsibility to not exercise free speech outweighs the right to exercise it.

@ Julie Anne:

I’ve been refreshing your site for two hours!!! 🙂 Glad to know you’re doing well, and eager to read your next post!

ken wrote:

@ dee:

Got tied up with a couple customers, Dee. Wasn’t intending on skipping out that long. I’m very glad you post the majority of people’s comments and show the real world, but it wasn’t really what I was getting at.

Maybe this would help explain my concern: there is a difference between a genuine comradery that develops when people are drawn to this site because of their painful/wrongful experience with authoritarian leadership in the church (I commend you guys for this) and comradery that results from being analytical and critical (not so good, imo). The latter is my concern in that it produces extremely fertile soil for the seeds of self-righteous banter to take root. I’ve seen it in my own life when I started seeing and identifying the huge problems in “church” as I knew it years ago. I’m still guilty of it at times and need to repent of it. I am no better than they are, will always have error in my thinking regarding Christ and His Kingdom, and am in desperate/continual need of the grace of God in all areas of my life…especially my attitude towards others with whom I disagree.

So, yes, I realize not everyone who comments is professing to love Christ here, but among those (a rather large group) that have claimed to love Christ there seems to be much joy and satisfaction in finding fault. Just my humble opinion, but it seems your comments frequently incite that aspect of response, rather than curb it with a graceful reminder.

What do you think – does that make any sense? I know there is a fine line here, and am not sure I have the ability to articulate it. Thanks for your patience with me!

Dee and Deb,

The above comment by Ken (whom I do not know) is worthy of our serious contemplation. The spirit in which he writes gives evidence of the Spirit possibly speaking through him. Nobody has commented on his comment, so I thought I’d highlight it lest it be missed. What he’s written, in my estimation, is very profound.

Now to a couple of other issues at hand. It should be obvious to everyone what happened to Mefferd. When someone’s livelihood is at stake, one’s silence is understandable. However, in the end, truth will always win. I think everyone needs to take a deep breath and reflect on the truth that in the age of the Internet, stunning silence speaks ten times louder than ten thousand blogs. It has the REVERSE effect intended. So, hang on – its only beginning.

Second, to the two of you (Dee and Deb) – your labor of love in running a blog that has hundreds and thousands of daily readers is amazing. Don’t get discouraged. It’s difficult to walk the line between truth and love. I see you doing it well. Continue – loving people where they are, including those who disagree with you theologically, and you will continue to make an impact with your truth writing.

Praying for you guys and Rachelle and I love you both!

Wade

As far as Mefferd goes, please listen to the Dec 5 episode of Fighting for the Faith “This was not a boating accident” to hear Chris Rosebrough’s analysis. He has experience dealing with radio shows that mysteriously disappear because of things they have said for which they refuse to recant. (Not saying that’s what happened here for sure but it seems highly likely). It’s time for real Christians to Exodus the evangelical machine. It is plain that all it is interested in is money and buffoonery and chewing up and spitting out and trampling anyone who gets in the way of that goal.

@ JeffT: Sometimes it really is laughing to keep from crying, although tone is *such* a difficult thing in text-only communication… it’s easy to read something meant as deadpan/dry as completely serious, and vice versa.

@ Patti:

I’m not sure if this is the same Ken. I’ve been a bit confused about the flag/no flag Ken.

Bridget wrote:

@ Patti:

I’m not sure if this is the same Ken. I’ve been a bit confused about the flag/no flag Ken.

Patti,

I agree with Bridget. I can’t recall reading anything from the “other” Ken (flag Ken?), but it would be hard for me to see how this Ken (no flag Ken?) would be someone with whom we could not have a hearty, respectful dialogue, discussion, and possibly even disagreement. I’m not saying everything Ken says needs to be agree upon (JeffT is an example of respectful disagreement), but I am saying I see validity in his point about being careful how we disagree and with what we disagree. Some disagreements should draw us closer in bonds of love, while others deserve a hard line in the sand (abuse, authoritarianism, etc…).

Thanks for commenting and discussing!

William Birch wrote:

@ Julie Anne:
I’ve been refreshing your site for two hours!!! Glad to know you’re doing well, and eager to read your next post!

Thank you, William. Wow, what a day – I”m pooped!

@ Hester:
Because they are too sexist and fatalistic for North American audiences?

Bridget wrote:

‘ken’ on this thread as opposed to ‘Ken (German flag)’ on another thread where the the discussion has been centering around complementarianism and feminism
‘ken’ will need to set us all straight, but I sense they are different persons.

There is at least some circumstantial linguistic evidence that they are different people. Flag Ken is based in Germany (hence his flag) but is English. Permit me to draw your attention to the following phrase used by No Flag Ken above:

Got tied up with a couple customers

In UK English this would have been “a couple of customers”. Although American English does cross the pond, this one is very rarely heard over here.

@ numo: err, German Men.

Heather wrote:

In my previous comment “Paper” should be “Piper”.

I think I’ll step out and pick up the morning piper off the porch.

If a widely known radical Muslim imam (comparable to Piper in Christianity), had stood outside a major Western city and said the equivalent things, he would be targeted for arrest and incarceration or droning, because it would be seen as a terroristic threat likely to be carried out by extremist elements. Piper is behaving the fool and it may have unintended consequences.

Bridget wrote:

@ Patti:
I’m not sure if this is the same Ken. I’ve been a bit confused about the flag/no flag Ken.

I’m the ‘no flag’ ken.

@ Moxie:
“That tower and this city are coming down. This city is rife with sin for the judgment of God..” Piper says in a triumphant tone, smiling.

Does Piper realize what he’s doing? I’d say every word was scripted and rehearsed. Did he think it would cause controversy? As they say in Minnesota, “You betcha.”

Piper wants to become a target, that’s my opinion. But how much courage dies it take for a guy to stand safely in a big open space away from the hustle & bustle of city life and shoot a video in which he says something people will find controversial? Then, if he receives negative attention, what’s he going to do? Act like he’s being persecuted for his faith? And if someone threatens his life, you know he’s going to use that to validate his ministry and use it to ask for more support as The Apostle to the World.

If he had any real guts he’d take his muscular gospel right down into the streets of Dubai and loudly proclaim, “This city and this tower are coming down!!” Unless he doesn’t really believe that’s true. Unless he’s just saying that to get attention like a drama queen. Unless he’s saying that to sell something other than the gospel; something, for instance, like his conference because he needs the money.

Weak!!

Evie wrote:

“That tower and this city are coming down. This city is rife with sin for the judgment of God..” Piper says in a triumphant tone, smiling.

Maybe the tower was added post-production and he was actually standing in Seattle.

Darn. I can’t watch the video because our office blocks it.

But I have to ask this question. Please do not take offense by my asking it. There is a good question that this will come up at a party that I am attending tonight, and I want to be ready.

Jesus said about Jerusalem that the Temple will be destroyed and that Jerusalem will be destroyed and that not one stone will be left upon another. Jesus was criticized for this by devout Jews at the time.

Is Piper’s intent to say the same thing? Does he say God wlll destroy this city, or does he say Christians or the USA is going to destroy this city?

Muslims are super sensitive types (e.g. the cartoon fiasco), so we shouldn’t be driven by a fear of what “they” might think.

But if what we say is confused and people hear something other than what we say, that is bad.

A transcript would be really helpful, and I would have a more definitive feeling. Without that, I am only speaking in general terms.

Look foward to some help from you guys.

Thanks.

@ dee:
Dee, thank you. To read those right now will make me cry.

Evie:

If your quote from Nick is what he said – Christians flood the city and preach the Gospel to save the city from destruction, that’s not even right theologically.

All cities are going to come to destruction, regardless of how much of the Gospel is preached in those cities. That will happen, as they are temporal.

If he is claiming some special judgment is coming to Dubai because of its lack of the Gospel, then he is saying something that he cannot possibly know. Jonah said it about Nineveh, but that’s because God told Jonah.

If Piper is claiming God told him that, he has bigger issues to deal with than insensitivity.

@ Anonymous:
Exactly. He speaks authoritatively and matter of fact you but one important element is missing: He’s not speaking for God.

Which is pretty serious.

Because he’s not speaking the truth.

And why should anyone follow his message if he says things like this?

“Come on, babe
Follow me
Come on, babe
Trust in me
Come on, babe
Can’t you see
Come on, babe
Follow me
I’m the Pied Piper”

@ Wade Burleson:

ken: “there seems to be much joy and satisfaction in finding fault. Just my humble opinion, but it seems your comments frequently incite that aspect of response, rather than curb it with a graceful reminder…I know there is a fine line here…”
++++++++++++++++++

Wade and Ken,

as I see it, what is happening is a collective sigh.

very long overdue

While God, Jesus, and Holy Spirit are the bees knees where life in all its fullness and free indeed are concerned, church and Christian culture are oppressive. in a totalitarian sense. usually with a kind smile. as good-hearted and fair-minded as you are, wade, it exists even in your church, too.

I agree, ken, that there is a fine line. but really — there is some liberation going on here, of people, of pain, of having been muzzled, of principles, of what is fair & right & just. there will be a collective expression of “finally. at last.” the dawn of a new day prompts celebration as well as highlighting the grotesque & twisted contortions that were and still are.

be careful here.

Moxie said: ‘ how much courage dies it take for a guy to stand safely in a big open space away from the hustle & bustle of city life and shoot a video in which he says something people will find controversial? Then, if he receives negative attention, what’s he going to do? Act like he’s being persecuted for his faith? ‘

Sadly, I’m inclined to agree with this.

RE what Ken and Wade have said about the danger of lapsing into criticism for criticism’s sake, I have to say I’m guilty of this sometimes.

I love TWW and it has been very helpful to me personally, but sometimes on threads when nearly everyone is in agreement, I think posters don’t bother to moderate their language or try to respectfully engage with those who disagree. I’m sure Dee and Deb only delete posters when absolutely necessary, but sometimes I think it would be healthier for us all to have more dissenters on here. It keeps us all sharper.

@ Nick Bulbeck:

I should’ve said, Ah didnae ken tha’.

Along with the fact that Piper’s words may be viewed as threatening, his entire presentation seems awkward and jumbled. I get the sense that he’s just talking whatever jumps into his head. His story about the rich young ruler, the missions student and the seasoned missionary just don’t seem to fit together well.

What bothers me more is this conference on training young students to be missionaries. My fear is that they are training young people to go out as missionaries to introduce their “brand” of Christianity. What I don’t think they will be trained in is how to assimilate into a new culture and introduce Jesus in a way that is relevant to those they are serving. Instead, they will introduce the rules and regulations according to their brand and expect it to work in a different culture.

@ elastigirl: preach it, sister!

@ Kathi:

What also concerns me is that it doesn’t appear those working with Piper are bothered by what he says. For instance, does the person filming not get any kind of internal check (whoa, what did he just say!?). Maybe such people are so indoctrinated jn the ‘Piper way’ that they don’t hear what others might be hearing.

@ Patrice:
Patrice you are right…….we are dealing with people who are sociopaths and narcissists today. These men are hardened and consciences are seared. The Bible talks about these men….and Christ use hard language to describe them- vipers, snakes, terrible; “how will you escape”? The Pharisees were men who had no compassion for those around them. When we call these men out, it is not out of vitriol, but out of seeing evil for what it is.
When we see Jihadists do what they do, do we sit back and say loving words? No we call out the evil that they do because what is in their hearts are apparent. They mean evil instead of just merely sinning. When a husband continually abuses his wife without one ounce of love for her, do we sit back and say lovely things? No, we confront his wickedness, because there is no evidence of a contrite heart. We have to realize that in our world we are surrounded by those whose hearts are cold and have no capability of turning (unless by a miracle) because their intent is for evil only. This is why David and Paul was impassioned in his speech about these kinds of men.

JeffB wrote:

I agree with a lot of what has been said here about Piper, but, taking him out of the equation for a moment – At what point do we stop being afraid of offending Muslims? Must videos be taken down because someone in it speaks harshly about Islam? What does that say about us or about any non-Islamic country?
Yes, I know it’s easy for me to talk like this, because I’m probably not in any immediate danger of reprisal. But if the price of no further lives being lost is the abrogation of free speech where Islam is concerned, isn’t the price too high?
Yeah, Piper is continuing on the path of foolishness he’s been on for some time. (I agree with what he broadly says about Christianity and Islam, but his bravado and self-aggrandizement are foolish.) But free speech allows even foolishness – up to a point. Maybe I’m naive, but I doubt that even a militant Muslim would think that this aging preacher is threatening military action.

I’m going to respond to this because I think the issue of free speech is used quite a lot, particularly in the U.S., to defend, or at least mitigate, some of the stupid things Christians say publicly. Free speech is a legal right in the U.S. and much of the western world. No one would dispute that. However, the question raised by Piper’s speech and others like it is bigger than that: it involves the image and reputation of Christianity in Muslim lands, and that indeed is something to be safeguarded and for which we should be willing to sacrifice much, including an untempered right to say whatever comes to into our heads without considering the broader consequences for the gospel, and including the kind of spiritual hubris that seems to come across in this video. I can tell you from having grown up as an MK in a Muslim country, Piper’s statement is something that will have a lot of long-time missionaries cringing and hoping their Muslim friends don’t hear. Like it or not, the perception in Muslim lands is that Christianity is monolithic and western, so offense taken at Piper’s words will be often transferred to anyone who identifies as Christian and western. It’s the kind of speech that can set back years, or even decades, of carefully cultivated relationship and trust so crucial to mission work in Muslim lands.

Wayne I disagree with your assessment of Mandela. He was actually a communist in his ideology and sat down with cold hearted murderers like Castro (who killed thousands of his own). Christ did not say that we are to sit down with these kind of men. He did not with the Pharisees actually, they came to him to knock him down and trap him. These kind of men are dangerous and clever. Whenever have you witnessed a sociopath become changed?

elastigirl wrote:

@ Wade Burleson:

ken
+++++++++++++

or, to put it another way, church/Christian culture has erred on side of this and that according to some principle (including “for the greater good”) but at the expense of human lives. And with much nonchalance. And tolerance.

Seems to me you can afford people some tolerance if they may err a bit on this side now.

I agree with you elastagirl.

Understanding and compassion to the hurting is essential. I have such a high view of the power of Christ to heal, that a word of encouragement to those hurting to look to the enthroned King and rejoice and find healing in Him–and not celebrate the moral downfall or failure of others–is a good word of encouragement to us all.

Heaven knows I have no problem pointing out what I believe to be wrong – it’s definitely my desire not to celebrate the moral fall of a brother or sister in Christ, but to be saddened by the loss of integrity.

I must leave now and will have no access to a computer. If someone wishes to address me, please be understanding on a lack of reply.

Off topic, but regarding the Challies header above. I visited Challies.com and read about the 5 typical gossips. I offered another:

Janet • a few seconds ago
I offer a sixth type: church leaders who slander from the pulpit. It could look like this: target a problem church member, (possibly one who refuses to be complicit in an injustice hidden by the church leaders), tell the congregation that Paul combined steps three and four of the Matthew 18 process (so that you don’t have to explain the supposed offense, or allow them to get involved), then tell them that any contact with the sinner would be gossip. Last, feign sorrow during the announcement, then shroud yourself in “humility and integrity”. Apparently this scenario is common enough that these (typically) gentlemen deserve a category all their own.

@ Wade Burleson:

“not become joyful and celebratory in finding fault in the body of Christ.”
+++++++++++++++++++++

perhaps it’s a matter of perspective. example: if a person has been feeling bad in their body for a while, and a doctor finally diagnoses what it is, the person’s response will be part “oh no” and part “oh yes! deal with it and take it out!” Which way a person leans in their response is a matter of their experience with the trouble, their personality, their viewpoint, several things.

“joyful and celebratory in finding fault” as an observation is missing the big picture of what is really going on.
———————-

I loved what you said about Nelson Mandela. Corrie Tenboom also comes to mind. I guarantee you they had their day(s) of emotional reckoning and it wasn’t pretty or “christlike” (whatever that really means, i think it is more what Robert powell would have done in “Jesus of Nazareth” circa 1977 than anything else). but we only hear about the beautiful conclusion.

trust4himonly- Faith wrote:

Wayne I disagree with your assessment of Mandela. He was actually a communist in his ideology and sat down with cold hearted murderers like Castro (who killed thousands of his own). Christ did not say that we are to sit down with these kind of men. He did not with the Pharisees actually, they came to him to knock him down and trap him. These kind of men are dangerous and clever. Whenever have you witnessed a sociopath become changed?

Who are you? Joe McCarthy? It is silly to use ‘communist’ as some kind of bludgeon to condemn others without any context.

Given the context in which Mandela grew up and lived, his attraction to communism (he was never a party member) was understandable and not uncommon. Do some research on the history and politics of decolonization and third world Marxism. I wonder who you would be growing up in Africa under a racist colonial regime?

Of course Mandela wasn’t a perfect man and of course the media will laud him endlessly right now. Nuance isn’t something they are capable of anymore. But hollering in concert with Bill O’Reilly that Mandela was a communist and opposed to Christ and thereby implying (it would seem) that he is undeserving of admiration is unhelpful. Or at least that is one word for it.

I know of many an American capitalist to sit down with and abet cold-hearted murderers, too.

And I am not defending any capitalist who does the same thing, for true conservatism does not dabble in alliances with those who want to control

In his speech Mandela said:

“Long live the Cuban Revolution. Long live comrade Fidel Castro… Cuban internationalists have done so much for African independence, freedom, and justice. We admire the sacrifices of the Cuban people in maintaining their independence and sovereignty in the face of a vicious imperialist campaign designed to destroy the advances of the Cuban revolution. We too want to control our destiny… There can be no surrender. It is a case of freedom or death. The Cuban revolution has been a source of inspiration to all freedom-loving people.”

ken wrote:

We’ve been reminding each other is that we all are in the same boat and desperately need grace and respect from each other, no matter how foolish one’s actions may seem. My wife and I can’t expect the kids to initiate these reminders, so we take the responsibility on ourselves. If I were to start a blog like TWW that is desinged to be analytical and critical (a dangerous undertaking in one sense), then I would think I would be duly responsible to maintain the spirit of grace so that self-righteous flavors are constantly being stifled and held at bay.

So Ken, would it be helpful to start every comment stating what horrible sinners we are and we are just like those who promote and defend those who protect child molesters and make bank off Jesus?

What you have done, Ken, is to be very vague. Can you be specific as to comments that you think are offensive or not communicating in the way you think appropriate? I am seeing a lot of chiding the messengers of their great sin and self righteousness but little outrage over child molestations, plagurism, spiritual abuse, etc.

Let me add that I would never see Driscoll, Piper and many others as my “brothers in Christ”. And not becauwse I have the right to make a salvation determination. But because I am to be wise. How am I have to spiritual bond of fellowship with people I could never trust and for whom I think use Jesus’ name for their own self interests? If their actions over a period of years has not proved that to folks, then there is little to discuss. We simply have different standards. I would never trust them and see them more as wolves or hirlings. If that is Christianity then moral chaos reigns. And I am seeing that become the focus. We are to put ourselves in the same category as horrible sinners on par with child molesters, those who protect child molesters, those who spiritually abuse others, etc. Your religion is moral chaos. There is no real standard of right and wrong because we are all just continuous sinners all the time. And how dare you not admit you are as that makes you self righteous. With that in mind, exactly where is justice for all the victims? You do realize this is how SGM approached the child molestation situation.

And I found it a but amusing your example consists of how you deal with your children. Kind of says it all in how you view the commenters here.

I think you and Wade might have a “tyranny of niceness” that is so vague we can hardly deal with real evil in what passes as Christianity these days. Instead we just see it as Christians behaving badly but you are just as bad so be careful what you say.

Why not be very specific on what comments you found bad or gleeful or whatever. Cut and paste them and be very specific on why they are wrong. That would be a much more constructive exercise than the vague exhortations that really tell us nothing.

@ Wade Burleson:
Yes, indeed “…truth is truth regardless of the experiences of the truth-teller…” But if Ken has been trashed by Christian leaders, I then must simply disagree with what he learned from his experience on this. I think he is only partly accurate, as stated.

I’d like to hear how else we might righteously respond to exposures of long-hid evil, especially in light of the psalms that were openly delighted by enemies’ losses.

What does it mean to give the evil-doer the respect of his humanity while also rejoicing when he falls by exposure of his actions? How does that parcel out on comment threads?

And I’d still enjoy a discussion about how/where we are to apply the different approaches to enemies: turn your cheek and seventy times seven versus leaving family, dividing the truth, knocking over money-changer’s tables, etc.

@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
I have a bro named Ken, too. And who could mistake Headless Unicorn Guy for anything but himself? I especially enjoy your initials, “HUG”, which I hereby give you.

@ Patrice:

Patrice, I will most defintily rejoice when they lose followers enmasse and there is no more celebrity or wealth associated with their cult of personality. My hope is that people will grow up, mature in Christ and not hang on the words of these celebrities who are growing more bizarre and bold with their behavior/words every day.

I will rejoice when more and more people see them for what they really are. Frauds using Jesus Name and those same people run to Christ alone and realize they don’t need the gurus anymore.

Caleb W wrote:

Given the context in which Mandela grew up and lived, his attraction to communism (he was never a party member) was understandable and not uncommon. Do some research on the history and politics of decolonization and third world Marxism. I wonder who you would be growing up in Africa under a racist colonial regime?

My thought as well . . . context

@ trust4himonly- Faith:

You want to know the irony of Mandela and his love for communism which is well known to many of us history lovers? Apartied came from Dutch Calvinists. The “Christians” who colonized. I agree with Bridget, context please. Sometimes Christians are their own worst enemy.

Nick Bulbeck wrote:

Last time we beat Italy in a competitive fixture, we built Stonehenge to celebrate; so if we’re in the knockout stages we’ll almost certainly deserve to be.
I hope this is helpful.

How did you decide which posts were for scoring goals?
In other news, glad to see you survived the storm.

Estelle wrote:

How did you decide which posts were for scoring goals?

Scoring goals?

SA television is showing non stop tributes to Mandela. Growing up in SA at the end of apartheid, to me Mandela was very much an unknown quantity, a terrorist who had been jailed instead of receiving the death penalty. On his release, he showed grace and dignity, forgiveness towards his oppressors and united the country in ways one could not have imagined just a few short years before. I pray his legacy endures for many years to come.

Most Muslims who see this will consider it a threat. Islam is a political ideology masquerading as a religion, and is an ideology of war and conquest. To them, they will see it as a threat of violence and war. I can imagine how Muslim jihadists will use this in their propaganda. But I am also disturbed by Piper’s endorsement of charismania too.

Whether whatever anyone wants to call it – right wing, nazism, communism, socialism-
All have a common goal- control over the freedoms of others. Many come in the guise of freedom but actually live another message. My mother-in-law escaped from Cuba during Castros take over, so I do know a little about the dictatorship of Castro.
My 1/2 cuban husband could give you a great history overview of this man, he has studied him quite a bit.

@ John: Not just mission work, either…

And I do not mean to step on anyones toes- I just do not give my praise to men who even may have done one right thing- does not mean they are justified in being conjoined with dictators who have killed thousands. Ends do not justify the means.
Mandela did write an article about how to be a good communist- that is enough for me to gather what his belief system is.
this also goes for Piper and Driscoll- their philosophy is of control. So therefore their belief system is communistic – meaning that the common people don’t have the means to think for themselves, but must be beholden to men who “supposedly” do.

@ Kathi:

Many fundagelicals are quick to use missionary work to create a guilt trip. Meaning the only ones who are serious are those who travel to a third world country, etc… I’m not saying there is anythign wrong with going….but sometimes people go for the wrong reason. I’ve heard stories and know of one personal situation where a person heads of to country x “for the glory of God” goes there expereinces culture shock, get sick, has cultrual problems, difficulty adjusting either due to cultural or health reasons, and a faith crisis on top of all that. The last place a person needs to have a faith crisis is in the middle of Rwanda, Chad, Nigeria, China, etc..

@ Nick Bulbeck: btw, my pronunciation” just now is actually a Philly/south jersey thing. (My dad came from the Philly area, and his sister never quite lost the distinct pronunciation of certain vowels that’s characteristic of the area.)

@ Wade Burleson: socialism/communism means something quite different than what was done in its name in the totalitarian regimes in the former USSR, Soviet Bloc nations, China, Cuba and elsewhere.

The actions and propaganda of the extreme right (fascism) and the extreme left (Leninist/Stalinist and Maoist) are pretty much identical when you come right down to it.

@ Nick Bulbeck: OK, I’m missing the reference re. Stonehenge – unless you mean that there was a prehistoric win over Italy! 😉

Help a girl out here, OK? 🙂

@ Caleb W: Thanks so much for this, Caleb. Very much agreed.

“Funny” thing: we have a new TV show down here about Dracula, where he’s in London in the guise of an American industrialist (self-made man, like Andrew Carnegie) who is ruthlessly buying out competitors in order to undermine some of the competitors’ other dealings (killing vampires and the like).

it’s very campy and silly, but there are some interesting points and a fairly good cast. Setting looks like Prague, though…

numo wrote:

@ Nick Bulbeck: OK, I’m missing the reference re. Stonehenge – unless you mean that there was a prehistoric win over Italy!
Help a girl out here, OK?

In point of fact, we’ve never beaten Italy in a major tournament. The point was just that Stonehenge was built thousands of years ago and in all that time we’ve not beaten Italy.

Maybe I’ll just go and make a spiced apple sponge instead. (Literally this time – the oven’s already on as I’ve made one cake this evening. But I couldn’t put the spiced apple sponge in at the same time because it needs a cooler oven.)

@ trust4himonly- Faith:

Ronald Reagan did the same. It doesn’t mean he agreed with everything they did. The physical wall did come down though.

Patrice wrote:

but I don’t think you understand what it is like to have been trashed by leaders in the name of God, and then also have it buried/ignored/unaddressed for long periods of time.

Thanks for the response. I’ve posted here in the past regarding some of our experiences with authoritarian leadership (which are many…the Master’s Seminary grads, Reformed Baptist leadership, Covenant Life Church’s leadership, etc.), so I do know what it’s like to be abused and run over unjustly.

My wife and I know personally quite a few folks from abroad that have gone through similar circumstances. We have gone through intense difficulties with both sides of our immediate families concerning abusive authority and sinful manipulation. We constantly fight cynicism, but we are more in love with Christ (and each other) than ever before. Thanks be to God!

@ Estelle: Your comment deserves to be highlighted, I think.

thanks so very much for it!

@ Nick Bulbeck: ah… I thought maybe that was your point, but the reference to Stonehenge threw me a bit.

Your cake sounds yummy!

@ Eagle: Dude! We love you. I’m so very glad you’re here.

The Bible says to beware of wolves in sheeps’ clothing. I am happy when wolves are exposed and sheep are released from bondage.

Eagle wrote:

Last night in a Bible study one of the members talked about how her daughter became agnostic. Her daughter feels like Christianity is harmful and hurts more people than it helps. And she is so full of rage. This mother feels like she failed with where here daughter is today. I very much empathized when I heard that story because I remember those days.

Maybe that’s your purpose in the Body, Eagle. You’ve been there, maybe you’re the one to minister to those other Take-Your-God-And-Shove-It burnout/abuse cases.

dee wrote:

@ Wade Burleson:
I apologize for being late to the table here. I went to bed last night at 10PM in order to get up very early to bring my daughter to the airport and then I had a lengthy hair appt. The older you get, the more work it takes.

So, I read this when I was “processing” at the salon and decided to chew on it for awhile. I think the issue is most complex and I fear I have not arrived at a conclusion. Most importantly, I want to thank you for always being real and loving with us. I think that is why you do so well in your community. It is a rare person who can combine tact with love and grace.

So here are some thoughts with precious little conclusion.
-Everyone here is different. Through the years I have watched patients with a similar serious diagnosis respond differently. So, for some, the anger is present for a long time. For others it is grief and depression. For me, when Abby was so sick, I had an odd thing happen to me. For the first two weeks, I thought her tumor was benign. When a doctor called her tumor malignant 2 weeks later, I almost fainted. Bill told me I had been told for 2 weeks it was malignant. Bill Wilson, the chairman emeritus of Duke University Medical Dept of Psychiatry and a dedicated Chrisstian (he just passed away-look him up) heard me give a talk a couple of years ago in which I mentioned this. He told me that such a response is normal-the brain was protecting me until i was ready to deal with the trauma of my little girl with a high likelihood of death.

So, how others express their anger, depression, frustration,etc. is so individualized that I am hesitant to say much. This is one place in which they can express themselves and, for the most part, feel safe and not ridiculed. I have stepped in a number of times to calm things down but I am usually not comfortable doing so.

-So many of these posts deal with the problems in leadership. And so many of those leaders will never listen to negative comments, often deleting them and only publishing the “Oh blog editor, you are so wonderful” comments. They live in a Christian la la land in which a simple question is treated as if the person asking should be excommunicated. I still think that it is good that they see and hear the depth of the pain and disgust within their own community. Will they listen? I don’t know but I know they don’t listen even with a gentle reminder.

-Everyone is in process, me included. When I compare myself to many people who comment here, I am humbled by what they have endured and how they keep on enduring. Where are they on the trail to wholeness? I have no idea. I am not sure where I am and I keep on checking.

Look at Eagle who came here with such anger that it caused some people to leave the blog. But I felt something deeper and allowed him his process. Watching him be baptized two weeks ago was amazing and will always be a highlight of my life. I cannot wait to tell his remarkable story which i believe you know. You probably know what I mean when I say 130+.

-As you know, Deb and I do not shrink from criticism of us. We allow many harsh things to be said about us so I am not asking of others what I will not take for myself. However, direct threats will not be tolerated.

-Can all of us be more loving? Yes-no question. I think of Mother Theresa who harshly judged herself and think of all she did. Compared to her, i have miles and miles to go. And yes, I am a sinner and will be until that Glorious Day. I can always do better, much better.

And, although Ken’s comment was not responded to, it does not mean that it wasn’t read. We are getting so many comments that I am finding it difficult to keep up. But, you have to at least give us credit for allowing critical comments of us.

I shall continue to chew on this.

You, Dee, are a gifted leader in His Kingdom. As is Deb. It’s never about “telling others” to pipe down, as it is a tasteful and gracious reminder to those who pipe up after years of silence that we cannot and must not be like our abusers.

Keep up the tremendous work. Love people where they are. Accept people as they are. And keep on reminding people that the Christ we serve will ultimately set right the wrongs in this world, and until then, we will confront with love and grace.

Frankly, this discussion and Patrice’s outstanding questions (see below), have motivated me to write a post entitled: “The Ethical Dilemma and Moral Justification for Treating One’s Enemies Differently According to One’s Kingdom Allegiance.” I hope to have it up later today.

Dee, you make one final point: “One final point. So many people who have come here have been abused and/or marginalized. Sometimes the happiness at a leader being found out is a way to say “You know, I wasn’t crazy after all.” It is a happiness that springs from relief that finally there is some evidence that others are seeing the same thing.”

Completely understand! My point is we help those who’ve been marginalized to never become the marginalizer, for then we become what those who abused us were.

Great discussion. As promised, here’s Patrice’s questions that I will address in my post:

Patrice writes, “I’d like to hear how else we might righteously respond to exposures of long-hidden evil, especially in light of the Psalms, where (God’s people) openly delighted in the enemies’ losses.

And I’d still enjoy a discussion about how and where we (Christians) are to apply the different approaches to our enemies: “turn your cheek” and “forgive seventy times seven” versus “leaving family,” “dividing the truth,” “knocking over money-changer’s tables,” etc…”

Patrice, I will take a stab at answering your questions. Don’t know how well I will do, but you have articulated some excellent starters for conversation.

@ Eagle:

I am so grateful you were able to work through your struggles. I know you have been an encouragement to so many, and I’m proud of you.

@ ken: Yes, ok, Ken. I regret writing that because it caused the rest of the comment to go missing.

See also response to Wade: @ Patrice:

Wade also wrote: “I think the caution for us is that those who’ve been muzzled and have found their voice… should do everything in our power to ensure we do not become joyful and celebratory in finding fault in the body of Christ….. Rather, we are saddened by such displays of grotesque and twisted contortions by evangelical leaders, and will remain resolute in confronting evil while not celebrating its presence.”

It is not joy in finding fault in the body of Christ, but that the hidden infections are finally being noticed and lanced. We don’t celebrate evil in evangelical leaders but that their evil is brought down because it has been continually destructive. Occasionally we improperly mock the persons themselves, which is rude and out-of-place, but it is offensive to me when people then wonder whether we go in the direction of delighting in evil.

I think we Christians are sometimes deeply uncomfortable with anger (and the relief that occurs when anger is dissolved by justice). Sometimes we use ideas of forgiveness to push others’ anger away. It is healthy to feel anger (just don’t sin!). It is normal to have forgiven and again feel anger spill out when we see yet another rendition of the same old stuff that hurt us. We who have been victims will be both most useful at helping others who are suffering such, and most angry about it, and most glad when it is exposed.

Justice comes first, mercy afterwards. Justice is required for those who continue to hurt others and mercy is given after they’ve come to terms with their sin and are working on restitution.

And since mercy is not a limited thing but is huge as God, slatherings of mercy are for those who’ve been harmed and who are trying to find healing (and such people don’t come here unless they are working at healing, at whatever stage they are, with whatever level of damage they carry).

Eagle wrote:

Many fundagelicals are quick to use missionary work to create a guilt trip. Meaning the only ones who are serious are those who travel to a third world country, etc… I’m not saying there is anythign wrong with going….but sometimes people go for the wrong reason.

For whatever reason, “Missionary to Darkest AFRICA(TM)” became THE prestige bragging rights for Missionaries, above and beyond elevating Foreign Missionary to the ONLY True Calling of a REAL Christian (contrasted to all you Lukewarm Apostates). Just like mandatory celibacy/cloistered monasticism in the Middle Ages, you got a LOT of Christians who weren’t cut out for the position/lifestyle who felt they HAD to go into it.

Wade Burleson wrote:

-So many of these posts deal with the problems in leadership. And so many of those leaders will never listen to negative comments, often deleting them and only publishing the “Oh blog editor, you are so wonderful” comments. They live in a Christian la la land in which a simple question is treated as if the person asking should be excommunicated.

Remember the above comment about “Fascism of the Right” and “Fascism of the Left”?

Well, this is “Fascism of the Cross”. All but puff-piece propaganda for the Regime is forbidden, and what is not forbidden is Absolutely Compulsory. Just like the long ignoble list of Left-wing and Right-wing dictatorships.

So if someone were to stand in front of One World Trade Center and say the same thing, and lace his speech with Koranic references, do you think people would be calm about it? Even my most irreligious Noo Yawker friends would be horrified and calling for the preacher’s arrest.

What gets me is that with just a few words, John Piper’s probably destroyed missions (such as it is) in Dubai for years to come. Do you really think the emir of Dubai is going to be all that favorable to the next church that someone wants to build there? Seriously, I doubt it. What I really want to know is what the $%^&*()!@#! was Piper and his friends thinking when they (a) recorded that snippet of video and (b) then decided it was worthy of being put up to broadcast the Cross Conference.

I’m hoping the emir of Dubai and his government are bigger people than John Piper and the Cross Conference and ignore this obvious attempt to stir up trouble.

@ Patrice:Patrice wrote:

@ ken: Yes, ok, Ken. I regret writing that because it caused the rest of the comment to go missing.

See also response to Wade: @ Patrice:

Wade also wrote: “I think the caution for us is that those who’ve been muzzled and have found their voice… should do everything in our power to ensure we do not become joyful and celebratory in finding fault in the body of Christ….. Rather, we are saddened by such displays of grotesque and twisted contortions by evangelical leaders, and will remain resolute in confronting evil while not celebrating its presence.”

It is not joy in finding fault in the body of Christ, but that the hidden infections are finally being noticed and lanced. We don’t celebrate evil in evangelical leaders but that their evil is brought down because it has been continually destructive. Occasionally we improperly mock the persons themselves, which is rude and out-of-place, but it is offensive to me when people then wonder whether we go in the direction of delighting in evil.

I think we Christians are sometimes deeply uncomfortable with anger (and the relief that occurs when anger is dissolved by justice). Sometimes we use ideas of forgiveness to push others’ anger away. It is healthy to feel anger (just don’t sin!). It is normal to have forgiven and again feel anger spill out when we see yet another rendition of the same old stuff that hurt us. We who have been victims will be both most useful at helping others who are suffering such, and most angry about it, and most glad when it is exposed.

Justice comes first, mercy afterwards. Justice is required for those who continue to hurt others and mercy is given after they’ve come to terms with their sin and are working on restitution.

And since mercy is not a limited thing but is huge as God, slatherings of mercy are for those who’ve been harmed and who are trying to find healing (and such people don’t come here unless they are working at healing, at whatever stage they are, with whatever level of damage they carry).

Excellent!

Two thumbs up.

You write, “Occasionally we improperly mock the persons themselves, which is rude and out-of-place, but it is offensive to me when people then wonder whether we go in the direction of delighting in evil.”

I apologize if you think in any form or fashion I implied you or anyone were delighting in evil. I know you don’t – no believer in Christ ever delights in evil.

Your acknowledgement “we improperly mock the persons themselves, which is rude and out-of-place” is the only thing I’m addressing, but your words are even much stronger than what I would use. “Rude and out of place” are your words, “Understandable and regrettable” are mine. Hopefully, fresh reminders that we need not be rude and mock people simply act as a check in my life, for I am prone to mocking and being rude and I find it refreshing when people like you help me with clear language.

By the way, I continue to give you a hearty amen on the difference between justice and mercy.

@ Patrice:

Patrice, you are a woman of wisdom.

Dee, I’ve complimented your ability to articulate so well, and once again you’ve exhibited that gift.

I agree with your comment about different stages of dealing with traumatic events or treatment. Wade understands that process as he dealt patiently with a new believer who wore beer t-shirts to church over a period of time.

At the conclusion of trials, the survivors of victims are permitted to express thoughts and feelings in an impact statement directed at the perpetrator. Those I’ve heard were none too gracious, but rather much anger and resentment which no doubt led to a long period of healing. Anger is a normal expression. Hatred is different.

My own observation is that if victim’s voices are not being heard, understood, and taken seriously, they begin to speak louder until someone listens. But when the victim’s voices are ignored completely, others begin to voice their outrage on behalf of those who are seeking justice from those who should be offering it voluntarily.

Instead, “stay sweet” is echoed along with a multitude of “buzz” words designed to silence, not only the victims, but those who speak for them.

I have a close friend who reminds me often that “anger masks pain.” I agree.

@ Wade Burleson:
I do love an occasional good argument with you, Wade. Will enjoy reading your post.

As for rudeness, I think it useful now/then to use against people’s behavior/words but never to their persons, which God made beautifully even if they have trashed themselves badly. It is, really, out of respect for God, not them, that I work hard to maintain civility (don’t always succeed.)

And if, out of that, I develop some affection for them, being around them a lot, that’s gravy and grace. But always reserving the right to be clear-as-required regarding bad behavior/words lol

elastigirl wrote:

@ Nick Bulbeck:
“…spiced apple sponge…”
++++++++++
2 cakes in one day? you’re a wonder. general recipe, please? spongecake isn’t popular here — what is it, really?

It’s a rather grandiose title for a fairly basic cake, really.

Sponge is butter/margarine, self-raising flour (or whatever it’s called over there!) and sugar in equal quantities, with one egg per 12 ounces or so of everything else. That’s your basic sponge mix (bake at about 170 C until a skewer pushed into the cake comes out clean). If you add cocoa and vanilla, that’s chocolate sponge; vanilla alone works fairly well; the zest and juice of as many lemons as you can be bothered to grate makes lemon sponge; but for spiced apple sponge, it’s some apples chopped into smallish pieces and a teaspoon full of nutmeg, cinnamon and similar.

In the event, as it’s getting a bit late, I changed my mind and decided to do the chick pea curry and the sausage casserole for the w/e. Sorry, that should be tough dude pea curry.

@ Southwestern Discomfort:

All I can say is damn!! Where is the like button!! 😀

@ ken:

Ken, Are you suggesting Piper is a totally different person in private anddoes not agree with his own public words and behavior?

@ TW:

Thanks TW. I had no idea. Explains a lot.

@ Headless Unicorn Guy: this comment troubles me. Sometimes it’s good to try and look at things through the eyes of others. And using Uncle Remus-style stereotypes his just… well.

@ An Attorney: not in Philly, though it’s hard to find the best way to write it out!

An Attorney wrote:

@ Nick Bulbeck:
My hair cuts take 3-4 minutes, once every two weeks or so, in my bathroom, in a state of extreme unclothedness

That’s 33% more information than I needed!

Beakerj wrote:

At least Nick is here to cheer me up, you make me laugh several times a thread Mr Bulbeck.

In other news, there will be no need to discuss cricket for the foreseeable future.

Nick Bulbeck wrote:

They want the person to return to a passive and contented state and let go of their anger when, in fact, their anger may be an echo of God’s own heart and trying to anaesthetise it away may be wrong on every level.

I don’t for a minute perceive your comment as nitpicking! I appreciated it.

But just because there are those who would use pain or hurt in order to marginalize someone, doesn’t mean it isn’t real. Rather than understanding that pain and hurt is a normal reaction to cruel, insensitive injustice, they use it as a tool to, as you say, infantilize them. But recognizing that as a ploy should enable the wounded to stand strong and maintain their dignity and refuse to be silenced by such tactics.

Anyway, you’ve given me food for thought.

Victorious wrote:

Instead, “stay sweet” is echoed along with a multitude of “buzz” words designed to silence, not only the victims, but those who speak for them.

I wholeheartedly agree with what you wrote, but there is also the dimension of an inner circle of those who frequently post here who seem to be ‘beating the dead horse’ with the same flavor of comments directed towards the same people over and over and over. To me, this incites more of the same and cultivates the self-righteous attitude. If I read the comments for too long, I often find myself going away and doing the same. The solution for me is the more I breathe and understand grace found in Christ, the more I exhibit it in my responses. I frequently fail.

anon 1 wrote:

@ ken:
Ken, Are you suggesting Piper is a totally different person in private anddoes not agree with his own public words and behavior?

No, I’m not suggesting that. Take the focus off Piper and swing it on me for a second. You’ve developed a judgment of me (rightly or wrongly) based on my posts alone since you don’t know me personally. Wouldn’t you agree that personal knowledge of someone greatly affects/tempers your judgement of them vs. a judgement solely based on their writings or activities judged from afar? We love to assume we know *for sure* what they mean and what drives them.

In my quest for truth and perspective I’ve been delayed often at the Minneapolis airport and was always on the lookout for Piper (since I knew he flew quite a bit) in hopes to pick his brain. Never happened. No, Piper’s not my hero…Christ alone is.

In fact my view of Piper has changed somewhat since then. But, I learned early not to assume I know beyond a shadow of doubt what a person is saying based on their writings or sermons. My view of certain people often changed a good deal since I took the time to engage them personally, and I am more in love with Jesus and others because of it.

dee wrote:

 It is hard to be a woman fighting these issues because many of the men involved do not believe that women should ever question their authority.

That’s one reason I like stopping by here – lots of women with a ton of wise perspective. I was sheltered from that for most of my life.

Victorious wrote:

Their voices are validating and supporting one another in their efforts to be heard. I hope they don’t stop until their mission is accomplished.
Justice, and only justice, you shall pursue…Deut. 16:20

I hope they don’t stop either, but you’ve made no mention of the dangers of spawning self-righteous attitudes along the way. I find that interesting. Would like to hear your thoughts.

@ dee:

Dee,

I understand. Been where Janet is. Understand the threats. Realize more than many what people are capable of doing when out to destroy one’s reputation and career.

You and I are friends. We’ve been around the block a time or two. Justice will prevail in the Janet Mefferd case. More importantly, I believe God is going to use you, Deb and me (and others) to help justice prevail.

Janet has been silenced by authorities and the “powers that be.” There are people in this world who can take on those powers without fear of losing income, prestige or reputation. The three of us are included.

I think you will see when I finish the post I’m preparing my call remains for all of us who love Christ and His Kingdom to pursue justice, confront evil, and to love people, but to steadfastly avoid taking on the temperament of those who abuse others.

You and Deb and I are in a position to invoke real change. When we take no pleasure in the downfall of any ministry, be it a friend or a person deemed an enemy, but we steadfastly pursue justice–an action which may ultimately involve the closing of a ministry in order to prevent future harm to other Christians–then we work with the moral authority and power of our King.

“Do not repay evil for evil, or insult for insult” (I Peter 3:9). We simply go about our business of loving people, revealing the truth, and providing a safe haven for those who’ve been hurt spiritually, emotionally, and physically–while never excusing anyone who takes an approach similar to an evil-doer.

You two are Rock Stars!

🙂

Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but Jezebel did an article today all about Mark Driscoll. He’s getting some mainstream critcism now, for whatever that is worth.

@ ken:

“That’s one reason I like stopping by here – lots of women with a ton of wise perspective. I was sheltered from that for most of my life.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

ken– I doubt you realize how stunning & breathtaking it is to hear that from a Christian man. and how totally awesome it feels.

  __

“Follow Da Proverbial Rabid Righteous Religious Rankers?”

hmmm…

Dee…

  That your imaginative stories about da Religious Kool-Aid Dispensers and crõõked talk’in, and a mystical place called NefariousR_land ends up getting everyone’s  attention?

hmmm…

Knock knock, Wartburg…

…follow da proverbial White Rabbit…

What?

  No one could have really guessed how deep dis proverbial rank religious rabbit hole goes, huh?

PU

Having turn their ears from the truth, Kind Folk have been skooker’d unto fables,huh?

could b.

(sadface)

Preach the word, Wartburg!

  For the time will come when they will not suffer wholesome godly women presenting God’s truth, but will heap upon themselves Calvinesta teachers, and shall be given unto conference table fables.

…the fruit of Wartburg Watch, is always in season,

YaHooooooo!

Thank-you for all da sweeeeeeet longsufferin’!

(heav’in knows.)

hum, hum, hum…
…we’re gonna cause talk n’ suspicion, display da facts in striking exaction… finding out what it’s all about? 
…after reading Wartburg, we’re gonna…let it all hang-out! **

(grin)

hahahahahaha

Sopy
__
Comic relief: Eric Clapton/JJ Cale- ** ‘After Midnight’ +
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WUeOEkl270

—

@ Nick Bulbeck:
That did cross my mind but I thought I’d play up the sporting ignoramus persona. I once saw a cartoon of Stonehenge as the original prototype for a soccer field.

@ ken:

“spawning self-righteous attitudes”
++++++++++++++++

hi, again, ken. having my own share of lots of thoughts here.

I think it’s possible to confuse self-confident, self-assured, decisive, direct, & plain-speaking conviction with “self-righteous” in someone who is pointing out a person’s/group’s error & wrongdoing.

My experience of Christian communication over my lifetime is that it is so loaded with self-deprecation and hyper-deference (as well as flowery sweetness) that their absence in someone deemed “Christian” can be jarring and off-putting.

In my view, communication wherever it lands on the soft to abrasive scale is largely a cultural thing, and no indicator of attitude or character.

Patrice wrote:

trust4himonly- Faith wrote:

Patrice you are right…….we are dealing with people who are sociopaths and narcissists today….When we call these men out, it is not out of vitriol, but out of seeing evil for what it is….When a husband continually abuses his wife without one ounce of love for her, do we sit back and say lovely things? No, we confront his wickedness, because there is no evidence of a contrite heart….

Yes, there are some who are sociopathic, although I suspect most are garden-variety narcissistic types. I agree that we do need to confront them. But when I give them a tentative label, I immediately retreat to a picture of God making them, of how beautifully designed each one is, and how immensely sad S/He must feel that they have become such a mess. This helps me keep from treating them with total contempt, which my heart sometimes finds easier to do. Not that easier is necessarily bad but, in this case, I find I cannot forgive them if I dehumanize them.

I am not at all conservative but whether from the left or the right, any time any where that people try to take over others and misuse them, I am against them, no matter what name they give themselves, no matter in whose name they think they can proceed.

It seems to me that any system can be (and has been) corrupted. We have found no best way to structure ourselves that can keep the hearts of some humans from grabbing power over others. But surely we can find better ways than we have tried so far?! :-/

Bingo. Bulls Eye. Brilliant. 🙂

Victorious wrote:

ken wrote:
I hope they don’t stop either, but you’ve made no mention of the dangers of spawning self-righteous attitudes along the way. I find that interesting. Would like to hear your thoughts.
My understanding of self-righteousness is those attitudes exhibited by the unregenerate human nature. I don’t see that here. Most, from what I’ve read, are Bible-believing Christians who freely admit to their failures and weaknesses. But at the same time expect Pastors and elders to maintain the same standard that is imposed on the members of their churches and the holiness they preach from the pulpit.

Thanks, Victorious. How are you defining self-righteousness in order to make it exclusive to the unregenerate?

Merriam-Webster defines self-righteousness as ” having or showing a strong belief that your own actions, opinions, etc., are right and other people’s are wrong”

Wikipedia: “Self-righteousness (also called sanctimoniousness, sententiousness, and holier-than-thou attitudes[1]) is a feeling or display of (usually smug) moral superiority[2] derived from a sense that one’s beliefs, actions, or affiliations are of greater virtue than those of the average person.”

@ ken:
Ken, a better solution would be not to read here since you recognize it influences you negatively.

@ ken:

yes, I had second thoughts after typing that. I think it would be correct to say that wherever communication lands on the soft to abrasive scale is largely a cultural thing, and isn’t necessarily an indicator of attitude or character.

having some relatives & many friends from cultures very different from own has made this clear to me. All have hearts of gold, and some are as direct and abrupt as can be.

@ ken:

Ken, they make their living as public communicators with platforms. .would knowing you personally change the meaning of your words here? Would I be expected to agree with vague exhortations because you are a nice guy in person? I would ask you the same questions over coffee and nicks sponge.

elastigirl wrote:

You’ve mentioned grace, seasoned with grace. That, to me, is quite a cultural thing. What is seasoned with grace to one person is nauseating saccharine fakery to another. What is brusque and direct to one person is polite conversation to another.

You’ve got me thinking. “Let your speech at all times be gracious (pleasant and winsome)… Colossians 4: 6a

My downfall in my speech at times is to get irritated or ‘irked’ with someone that doesn’t understand what I am trying to communicate to them in the time frame that I think they should grasp it. Irritation isn’t gracious, imo. Irritation can be easily conveyed through the keyboard as well. Is this a merely a cultural thing?

Patrice wrote:

I have found that a few people who talk/act destructively were better close up but most were worse.

I don’t have much experience with those types. Guess I was referring to those that are a bit more sane (understandably a relative thing to measure).

anon 1 wrote:

@ ken:
Ken, they make their living as public communicators with platforms. .would knowing you personally change the meaning of your words here? Would I be expected to agree with vague exhortations because you are a nice guy in person? I would ask you the same questions over coffee and nicks sponge.

I understand where you are coming from (Hitler being the extreme example…do I really have to personally know him to understand the evil that surrounds his ideology), but still think there is a benefit to personally knowing someone (to some degree or another) when trying to accurately understand controversy that exists because of what they write or say.

@ Victorious:

Remember, I’m slow…so you’re saying that a believer cannot be guilty of self-righteousness?

ken wrote:

I don’t have much experience with those types. Guess I was referring to those that are a bit more sane (understandably a relative thing to measure).

Well, I’d include Piper in the group who talk/act destructively, since he doesn’t allow women the same privileges as he himself has because of genitalia rather than talent/gifts (or is it because he has subordinated the Son in the Trinity?) And he recommends that women stay in domestic abusive situations “for a time”, in case the man stops it. And he calls down destruction on a town across the world as he grins, while mistaking the word salvation for “predestination”, with all that entails. Plus he has declared natural disasters to be God’s judgement against things such as approving gaydom. Then there’s his fierce idea that God is a God of wrath and that we humans are despicable and must do everything to bring God the glory, as if God keeps needing more and more glory handed to him or else he just won’t feel like God (or something).

But I find him to be one of the less offensive of that bunch because he has been careful regarding extravagant use of money, as far as I can tell, and also has lived in a poor urban neighborhood in his past.

@ ken:

“Irritation isn’t gracious, imo. Irritation can be easily conveyed through the keyboard as well. Is this a merely a cultural thing?”
+++++++++++++++++++++

no, irritation is common to every human being. what one does with it is cultural.

a story from travels (all travelers have a story similar to this one):

on a 3-week European trip many years ago, I spent a few days in Switzerland, Stayed with a friend and her family. Lovely people. In going around the city interacting here & there, the people in general seemed buttoned-up and extremely reserved. Feelings kept down under wraps. I knew I was wearing out my welcome with the mom of my friend, irritating her, but she covered it with a smile of sorts. It was uncomfortable.

Then I took the train down to Florence. People wearing their heart on their sleeve all through the day and night. Lying in bed in the middle of the night, outside noises of loud laugher, arguing, singing. I have a feeling if I had had a friend in Florence and the mom was irritated there would have been a more direct approach. I personally prefer this.

Neither approach to irritation was wrong or “unchristlike”. Just a reflection of a different locale.

Patrice wrote:

It seems to me that any system can be (and has been) corrupted. We have found no best way to structure ourselves that can keep the hearts of some humans from grabbing power over others. But surely we can find better ways than we have tried so far?! :-/

In my opinion the Enlightenment era humanists who founded the American experiment have come very close to just this. Perfect? No. But it’s still the best damn world system yet conceived. It restrains the worst in us as humans and yet still allows for a wide latitude of the best in us.

Let me weigh in on the issue that Monica has risen. Monica if you are referring to me then my apologies. However let me also make some observations about Christian culture.

1. Many Christians are thin skinned and easily offended. Many don’t have the love, patience, kindness, or intellectual rigor to engage with those outside their community.
2. Many Christians want ministry to be pleasurable, fun, and most important clean. There needs to be results and needs to be quick response.
3. Many Christians operate in their own cultures and communities and don’t engage with those on the outside. The judge the world based upon the culture inside the bubble that many live in.
4. Many Christians want to be nice. They would rather known for being nice, than upfront or asking hard questions. Now its one thing to avoid needless conflict but its another thing to avoid it all together. I would suggest that many Christians are guilty and implicit for many of these problems that Deb and Dee raise on this blog. If Christians demanded accountability then this blog post wouldn’t even be needed.

Unless many of the above are addressed then many Christians and churches are going to be marginal in reaching people. So an atheist swears or is crude…the sad thing is that more Christians are upset that someone is swearing and fail to realize the opportunity and searching person beneath all that.

I learned its easier to find the bad, sensitive Christians than the good ones.

Hester wrote:

Most blogs would have devolved into an all-out flamewar 200+ comments ago.

True enough Hester. TWW is an island of sanity that way. Sooner or later, many of the others start blowing up each other’s Mosques so to speak.

@ elastigirl:

I loved Florence way back in the day of my footloose and fancy free youth. Your comment made me think of how the folks there have a whole different outlook and life-ethos than Americans. Oddly enough it also made me want to revisit Joni Mitchell’s song Free Man in Paris.

@ ken:

more on irritation:

I get the feeling you feel irritation itself is wrong, a sin. I see it as stimulus and response. if something is irritating, we are irritated by it and are irritable. it is natural and normal. we can do our best to be patient, but we all fail at times.

I get something of an impression that perhaps your standard is perfection. that the experience of feeling irritated is a flaw. I don’t see it that way. that colossians verse is a loaded one: “let your conversation be always full of grace”. an impossible, unrealistic ideal that not even Paul or Jesus followed. Always full of grace? I can think of numerous circumstances where harsh words are needed to get a point across.

I may very well be reading much more into your comments than is remotely accurate. I have observed many times, though, a propensity in many Christians to be intolerant of imperfection in themselves (& others?), keeping their emotions and thoughts in a vice grip of sorts. thoughts and feelings that are simply indicative of a normal healthy human being are viewed as suspect. I would expect such people to have ulcers with the pressure they put on themselves.

i think you’re a genuinely nice person. i really don’t think Jesus gives a flying fick about when you feel irritated. I think you can relax about that one.

@ Daisy:

That should have been “avoidant” not “avoidance” in my last post.

Anyway, here is a little more on the topic I was just talking about, being good vs being “nice”:
Q&A With “No More Christian Nice Guy” Author Paul Coughlin

@ elastigirl: very much agreed.

numo wrote:

One thing I went through was being told by well-meaning people that I should put on a nice, “godly” mask after being booted and shunned. The rage and pain were with me for years, especially because even mentioning “I feel so angry!” brought reproof and insistence that I hide my pain, even from my closest friends.

That, in a nutshell, was our experience too. And I agree about the Psalms – many of them are shockingly un-Christ-like, especially the one Jesus shouted from the cross.

http://www.desiringgod.org/blog/posts/when-we-send-a-person-to-his-death

Muff Potter wrote:

In my opinion the Enlightenment era humanists who founded the American experiment have come very close…still the best damn world system yet conceived….

I think the Constitution and Bill of Rights are the best documents ever. Our nation has had the longest run of largest middle class in human history (coinciding with rise of engine, electricity, etc and seemingly bottomless natural resources.) But since the beginning there have always been people who have run away with power, which in this country has been defined as money. So we’ve also had a long history of repeated financial crises that have ruined millions at a time and were caused, ever single time, by shenanigans.

Put that together with 100 years of corporate propaganda (injected especially into our national media) plus the long slow demise of rules limiting the power of money, and we are now in a real pickle. There is an unholy alliance between finance, corps, and gov’t. In broader society, the median wage is 25-27K. Social services are being given to people who already work (Cf Walmart, McDonalds) because they are paid so poorly. Inside our gov’t’s NSA/military, actions have retreated so far from Bill of Rights that even basics of the Magna Carta are being ignored with impunity.

So we need an overhaul and I am worried because we are not a country of people who love each other. Instead we exist apart because the ideas of individual primacy (also derived the Enlightenment) have been concentrated in our psyches to the point that we think it righteous to get rid of anything that we might do together for the greater good.

Tribalism is the end result (something which I hear that Driscoll addresses in his latest infamous book). Warring tribes, ugh! Both right and left know we have huge problems and there is much overlap in diagnosis too. Yet there is a constant contempt each side for the other, and in each group there are splinters and splinters of splinters. Sometimes I feel despair.

This is one of the reasons why places like TWW (and Julie Anne’s SSB and internet Monk, etc) encourage me. People come from many different political/social positions. Under Dee/Deb/Julie Anne/Mike’s watchful eyes and constant labor, we are talking to each other with growing affection, and learning/experimenting/playing. If it can happen here, surely it can happen elsewhere and in larger places. Right? Please? May it happen in time!

My opinion. Waddaya think?

Wade Burleson wrote:

I am almost finished with a post that articulates the need to confront evil with the ability ‘to be angry and sin not,’ the difference reaction between responses to evil done to you and evil done to others, and the reason the sword of justice is not in vain.

Looking forward to it!

Wade Burleson wrote:

I am almost finished with a post that articulates the need to confront evil with the ability ‘to be angry and sin not,’ the difference reaction between responses to evil done to you and evil done to others, and the reason the sword of justice is not in vain.

Wade, I’m looking forward to it! I come here to learn more than anything else, and to Deebs and all the posters here I can say that this is one of my most valued websites because I learn so much about the ways in which we need to make Christianity part of our daily lives and about the damage that is being done to others under the guise of ‘Christianity’.

This has been a very enlightening thread thanks to you all.

@ dee:
Yes, and that’s why I thank you, because I know the comments you delete are done reluctantly and with careful thought, even to offering future involvement if people will focus on the disagreement underneath their attacks. Your goals for the group are honorable and needed, and that you always keep them in front of you is just plain dear.

I also appreciate you letting us know when you’ve deleted comments. Transparency is a treasure, especially since there’s so little of it in our society these days.

Good on you. And blessings. And get enough breaks from it, too, please. It’s a hard job!

Patrice wrote:

Tribalism is the end result (something which I hear that Driscoll addresses in his latest infamous book).

Indeed, I have every confidence that Fiscal will eloquently denounce the tribalism he practices! To give what credit is due, he knows how to be seen to say the right things on occasion.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, I really am hopeful about the “rise” (not an ideal term, because I don’t think we really want to rise anywhere, but it’ll do) of those who openly declare ourselves “nones”. There are no risk-free ways to approach the narrow gate to the steep and narrow path Jesus talked about, and nones can easily become isolated and ineffectual. But there is great potential freedom for the Holy Spirit himself to lead and build. And because we don’t have the option of building denominational walls to isolate ourselves, we can’t be tempted to do it.

There’s a big community of believers out here who are digging into some important practical theology.

Nick Bulbeck wrote:

Patrice wrote:

Tribalism is the end result (something which I hear that Driscoll addresses in his latest infamous book).

Indeed, I have every confidence that Fiscal will eloquently denounce the tribalism he practices! To give what credit is due, he knows how to be seen to say the right things on occasion.

This is what I don’t get about his newest book. I’ve heard he speaks agains tribalism in it, yet he has fervently practiced it. I find it hypocritical that he now writes against it, when up to now he has propogated it. So now he wants people to pay money to buy a book where he speaks against it. If he thinks what he has practiced and taught others to practice is wrong, then why doesn’t he make a public apology for it and say he is no longer going down that road? Instead he wants people to by his book!? What is all this really about? I won’t be trusting him anytime soon, nor buying his books. I’ll stick to the words that were written long ago 🙂

@ elastigirl:

Thanks for your thoughts on irritation – I will keep pondering it, but at this point I still see my tendency to become irritated as a fleshly, sinful response that needs to be mortified. The antidote is the constant reminder of God’s grace in Christ towards me. Are there times when acting on irritation is godly? Probably.

@ ken: OK… do you ever get cranky and irritable when you’re tired, hungry or sick?

It’s a natural response to many things, and not (imo) inherently sinful. Snapping at people, being rude with them as a result of feeling irritable (etc.) is another thing, though also an understandable result.

Not to undermine what either you or elastigirl are saying, but I bet a lot of irritability would disappear if Americans were more serious about dealing with our collective sleep deprivation.

Bridget wrote:

This is what I don’t get about his newest book. I’ve heard he speaks agains tribalism in it, yet he has fervently practiced it. I find it hypocritical that he now writes against it, when up to now he has propogated it.

You might want to listen to Chris Rosebrough’s podcasts where he discusses Driscoll, because in 2 or 3 shows, he’s mentioned more examples of Driscoll’s hypocrisy.

In the last few months, he’s done podcasts mentioning Driscoll’s hypocrisy, so if you do a search for “Mark Driscoll” on Rosebrough’s blog (Fighting For The Faith), you might want to stick to 2013, in brodcasts from around Oct 2013 to the present.

Driscoll mentions on Fighting for the Faith

I cannot remember the exact shows where he talks about Driscoll in general as opposed to hypocrisy specifically, but it might be under one of these headings:

DECEMBER 02, 2013
New Evidence Suggests Plagiarism In 4 Of Driscoll’s Books

NOVEMBER 21, 2013
Allegations That Mark Driscoll Plagiarized Dr. Peter Jones

dee wrote:

Beakerj wrote:

I find some of this immensely frustrating because it means that Christians are backing off from the rest of the (very needy) world because their poor little ears are too delicate to be around the bad naughty words.

I came to the same understanding when visiting blogs written by those who were very different than me. With each of those people, I clearly saw those who are deeply love by their Creator. I refused to let the words cloud that for me. Sometimes it was hard. I really hated being called foul names. But, I kept telling myself to preservere beyond the external.To love that person under the words that are used to express pain or to keep people out.

Over time, I became, for the most part, immune to the words and could focus in on the important stuff in that individual’s life. So many people use words to isolate themselves from pain or to protect themselves from another Christian who might hurt them.

Please forgive me when it appears that I encourage the roughness. I don’t. I just want to find the person that is in there.

Dee- you encourage honesty. Roughness is occasionally a side effect of that, just as fakeness is a side effect of encouraging niceness. So be it.
So much of what Christian culture seems to offer is an anaemic oppressive version of Victorian properness & prudishness rather than truth & goodness. Can’t stomach it myself.

@ Daisy:

It’s not just Fiscal, to be fair, but he did come into ministry very young and stopped submitting to anyone else at roughly the same age.

The best observation I’ve come across on this style of religion was by Molly Worthen in her article Who would Jesus smack down?, in the New York Times magazine

At one suburban campus that I visited, a huge yellow cross dominated center stage — until the projection screen unfurled and Fiscal’s face blocked the cross from view. Fiscal’s New Calvinism underscores a curious fact: the doctrine of total human depravity has always had a funny way of emboldening, rather than humbling, its adherents.

Beakerj wrote:

I work with ‘difficult’ teenagers in a secular setting & I much prefer those who swear at me to my face, or make inappropriate remarks out loud because it gives me something to work with in actually communicating with them, rather than those who are inwardly cursing me whilst outwardly sticking to all the conventions of politeness.

I grew up with a sociopath who was ALWAYS Oh-So-POLITE. To me politeness = sociopath, no exceptions.

Though my age, profession, and income should put me solidly in the Yuppie pool, I hang out with redneck types. If a redneck has a beef with you, he’ll punch you right in the face; not smile sweetly to your face then call his lawyer behind your back to ruin you with lawsuits.

@ ken:

ken — wow. i’m sure you’ve walked a unique path through that illness. i’m sure it was very hard. i expect you have found some treasure, though, also unique to you.

@ elastigirl:

thanks, yes – gives one much needed perspective.

Beakerj wrote:

I much prefer those who swear at me to my face, or make inappropriate remarks out loud because it gives me something to work with in actually communicating with them, rather than those who are inwardly cursing me whilst outwardly sticking to all the conventions of politeness.

I agree – you can’t have a dialogue with someone unless you can understand where they are coming from, which at times involves them expressing their experiences and feelings in harsh language.

The guys that really give me the creeps are the ones who preach with a smile on their face seemingly politely talking about those who disagree with them when you can just feel that they would really rather torture them into submission.

The fascist model of church leadership we see spreading today is putting Delores Umbridges into pulpits across the country.

@ ken:
Ken, I have rheumatoid arthritis and when I was put on biologics (which shut down part of the immune system), latent Lyme and Epstein-Barr grew out of control. Took a looonggg time to push them back and they still haunt.

It’s fascinating to me that you found Piper’s writings helpful. What did he say that was useful for you? I’ve found his writings to be too harsh for comfort/understanding (they echo a childhood spent inside Calvinism).

@ ken:

Ken, Why do you keep avoiding giving specific examples? Perhaps not everyone agrees on what is mocking Or if parody is a sin. So please give some specific examples by cutting-and-pasting comments that show what you are referring to. Thanks

Whoops, hit the “Post Comment” button too fast.

Anon1, thank you for bringing up this very important point about the role of the Dutch Reformed church in the development of South Africa’s apartheid system. Am sure Estelle could comment on this as well.

Rest in Peace, Madiba.

@ Mara:

Thanks for the thoughts! Part of me sees what you’re saying. Will have to chew on it.

Muff Potter wrote:

It restrains the worst in us as humans and yet still allows for a wide latitude of the best in us.

Agreed MP.

Patrice wrote:

So we need an overhaul and I am worried because we are not a country of people who love each other. Instead we exist apart because the ideas of individual primacy (also derived the Enlightenment) have been concentrated in our psyches to the point that we think it righteous to get rid of anything that we might do together for the greater good.

Also agreed strongly, Patrice. And back on the topic of Mandela, I think the response to his death from the U.S. political right illustrates this point exactly.

Back in the 1980s our government (and that of the U.K.) viewed the struggle in South Africa strictly through the lens of the greater Cold War global chess game. The apartheid regime WAS fighting – real, honest to God shooting matches – Soviet proxy governments and Cuban troops on multiple fronts in Africa (Angola, Mozambique).

Cold War machinations countering the Soviets were the ultimate strategy driving U.S. policy, not human rights nor justice in the face of a repressive violent apartheid regime.

Just as the “Global War on Terror” is the ultimate strategy driving U.S. policy today, as opposed to human rights, despite lots of pretty rhetoric. The end result? Mixed messages about what America is and what our nation stands for of the very worst kind. But I digress.

Bottom line is that it would seem that Mandela was on the right side of history after all, demonstrating mercy, reconciliation, and justice (albeit imperfect as with any human endeavour) toward his enemies that has been embraced by South Africans and the world. Those Cold War calculations seem so small, irrelevant and distant, don’t they?

Back to the point of this thread – the Piper video.

I am continually dumbfounded by Piper’s pronunciations, and that anyone (myself included foremost) ever gave this man the least attention.

Unbelievably inappropriate images and inflammatory language as noted by others, particularly in light of the suffering of 9/11. I agree it has the potential to set back Christians of all stripes in the UAE to simply and quietly practice and live their faith.

Hey John Piper, when did you become Supreme Judge of Who Is and Is Not Sinful? Hmmmmm? Argh.

TW, do keep us up to speed if there is any local fallout from these recent evangelical jokers visiting Dubai. Sheesh.

@ anon 1:

Yes, my initial concern was that this thread was going to end up having comments like other threads in the forum. I like specifics too, but headaches in the past week have prohibited me from a lot of chair time in front of the screen.

ken wrote:

I understand people heal in different manners, but my concern is when those manners breed attitudes and actions that are in direct opposition to the goal – the preeminence of Christ in all things.

Aren’t we to imitate Christ?
Here’s how he showed anger:
Threats – Matt 25
Name-calling – Matt 23
Warnings – Matt 23
Physical – John 2
Insults – Mark 7

In fact, I think most of the people on this board are far more gentle than Jesus was. What’s a little snark?

I am curious if it is keeping Christ preeminent by teaching wife to take abuse for a season. Or by teaching women that they should view their husband as their leader even though he asked her to be a part of a threesome? There are plenty more where that came from but I would not call that keeping Christ preeminently

Hyperlink: http://www.eaandfaith.blogspot.com/2009/09/john-pipers-ignorance-is-killing.html

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

To me politeness = sociopath, no exceptions.

Just be aware that it’s not true for everyone you meet.

If you read my posts above, my mother very much ingrained in my to be super, super nice to other people no matter how shabby they treated me, and no matter I became. And I’m not a sociopath 🙂 (I was codependent, an introvert, and very shy.)

@ ken:

It’s just the nature of the web that people get ticked off and snipe at each other on occasion. It’s not a big deal

As for videos that mock – some people have a sense of humor that is different from yours, doesn’t make it wrong or bad or anything.

When “the least of these brothers of mine [Jesus]” are given permission to speak out, or even just be themselves after years in a religious setting that imprisoned them, Christ is pre-eminent.

@ An Attorney:

Ho Chi Minh and Castro were always Communists. They did not “go communist” after being snubbed by the US. And yes, the USSR was communist.

@ An Attorney:

The naivety is yours, my friend. Every attempt to implement Marx’s ideas has resulted in dictatorship. The problem is the ideology itself.

Do you support “true communism?” Do you think the current government of Cuba is a dictatorship? Are right-wing dictators worse than left-wing dictators? Do you actually consider Fidel Castro and other Marxists as people “who value freedom and justice?”

ken wrote:

so you could take your vengeance out on your abuser with a firearm, another for sarcastic poems and parodies for mockery and laughter, another for venting all the vile and vulgar language you could muster, etc..

You have missed the entire point.

It takes time to disentangle oneself from an abusive situation AND ALL of the repercussions, aftershocks and thought patterns of having been subject to those who claim to speak for God and who used our desire to please Him against us for their benefit.

It is not vengeance. It is and on-going process of escape, cutting of the ties that bind. AND it is a warning to others against these spiritual death traps, through humor, parody, sarcasm, and showing how ridiculous these cults are by going to the end of that ridiculousness.

Smiling and keeping things sweet and walking on eggshells for fear of not keeping Christ ‘preeminent’ (whatever the heck that means) will not make the points that need to be made in the fight against sociopaths in the pulpits.

Patti wrote:

Daisy, I agree that you are not a sociopath, you are not sickeningly polite here on the blog.

I did used to be very, very, extremely polite and sweet, but I’ve had to unlearn that in the last 2 – 3 years, as I mentioned on some other thread here.

My Mom raised me to believe that being a good Christian girl meant forever being super, super sweet and sugary nice, no matter what.

I had to learn via life experience and from reading books the last couple of years that you can be polite to people within reason, but you do not have to be a doormat.

That has been a revelation for me. 🙂 It makes life ten times easier, too.

@ ken: you’ve really been through it, and I hope you and your daughter are much, much better now.

@ ken:

That’s a good question. I have often wondered if it was godly or not that Paul cast a demon out of a slave girl because the Bible only records that he did it out of irritation. It landed him in jail.

+1, Mara.@ Mara:

@ numo:

That the USSR wasn’t “truly communist?” That, of course, is delusional. It is also the propaganda of modern Marxists. And if no Communist regime in history was “truly communist,” then “true communism” is meaningless. And I find any attempts to defend Communism or Communists to be abhorrent.

@ numo:

Yep, I know. There is still a lot of pressure in the church, and out, for women to be sugary nice all the times. I have been down that sugary sweet path. I lived it ever since I was a kid.

You can get blow back from people for not sticking to the expected gender role path of being ‘Miss Sugar,’ but now that I’ve thrown that yoke off, I am a billion times more happy, and less afraid of people now than I was before, because I know it’s okay to stand up to them if they are rude or mean or whatever.

Here’s a commercial that shows how men and women are treated differently for being assertive (and for other things):
Labels Against Women

@ numo: gah! I shouldn’t be using an Android keyboard for this.

@ numo:

What’s interesting is that although from the time I was a very young girl I was shy, insecure and quiet, I none- the- less was willing to stand up for myself, if someone bullied me really bad.

I did stand up for myself when bullied a few times before I got to around age nine or ten.

However, as I got older (around 9, 10) and went to my mother for guidance on how to handle the bullies, she began giving me the message that it was wrong, un Ladylike, or un Christian, to stand up to bullies, no matter how mean they were being.

I was expected to be totally empathetic to bullies, to let them off the hook, because I was supposed to imagine they came from horrible families, or whatever. I never did see how that excused their bullying, or how it was relevant.

(It never crossed Mom’s mind that some people are mean because they enjoy it, not because they came from bad families.)

My mom tended to show more compassion to the bullies that were punching me in the face daily, or calling me names, than she did me! I never understood that.

I mean, she would hug me if I came home crying, but at the end of the day, she would coach me to just sit there and take harassment from people, even as an adult.

(I didn’t realize as an adult I could make my own choices, so I still listened to her about this stuff.)

Yes, in her own way my Mom loved me, but she had misplaced loyalties in bullying incidents, which I never started, by the way. I was so afraid of people I went out of my way to avoid ticking them off. I got picked on anyhow.

It’s not just my Mother who does this, other females are the same way.

I remember after being bullied by a boy in my class for four days straight in eighth grade, I screamed at him one day to “back off and leave me alone.”

My teacher over heard me, and asked to see me alone in the hall.

Once in the hall, she said, “I know he’s been picking on you all week.”
-okay, she knew but did nothing to stop him!

She pleaded with me not to get him into trouble. Why? Because his brother brought a gun to school two years prior and shot himself in the head and died.

I’m sorry the guy’s brother was gone, but to this day, that attitude bothers me: I was supposed to endure verbal abuse off some bully because of some crisis in his family life two years prior.

A lot of women do that; they think you, a female, should always, and automatically, excuse bad behavior, or be nurturing and loving to a bully because the bully had a bad home life or bad work day.

At what point are those types of females going to hold such bullies accountable, what does it take, when the guy is 30 years old and robs a bank?

Do you think the FBI would let him go on bank robbery charges when they find out his brother died when he was ten years old? Probably not.

But a lot of women let guys (or gals) coast through life with bad behavior over stuff like that. They expect you to be someone else’s punching bag because the bully had a bad home situation or something.

@ ken:

Ken, I understand what you are saying, but I for one am grateful that sometimes the dead horse keeps getting beaten. Reason? People are looking for help at different times. This blog and other survivor type blogs are pricelss help. Most of us have told our stories and received help and advice. If the same thing needs to be gone over and new people carrying on the stories and those of us who have been there can help, we must be there for them to see the horse get beaten. If we deal with these issues only once and leave it alone, where will the help be for those still being abused by wayward church overseers. I agree with you on the premise that no one should be mocking anyone and if you feel the need to
beat that dead horse” then that’s ok too, if there is someone here who is open to that constructive criticism then your comments will have done good also.
\

An attorney has a very left wing view of history. Both the left and right wings Rewrite history to fit their narrative. In reality history is very nuanced.

@ dee:

In the back of my head throughout this entire discussion, I keep thinking to myself that some of the people who are constantly in your crosshairs are the ones that really need to come to this site and get a different perspective to understand how they are hurting people. IF they did that and change eventually took place, less people would get hurt and Christ would be exalted. That idea was why I stated (mistakenly maybe?) the goal of your efforts was the preeminence of Christ in all things (not just people healing).

I’m sensing some of the attitudes that develop here would seem to keep those people away because you’ve possibly lost credibility in their eyes. Does that make sense?

@ Patrice:

thanks for the thoughts and suggestions!

@ numo:

I have a post, a long reply right above yours that I’m replying to now, but it’s in moderation.

I hope you can read it sometime later, whenever it’s approved (assuming it is; I did not say anything bad in it) 🙂

@ Daisy: will be sure to check – you probably hit the spam filter.

@ Daisy:
Yah, we all need to find some meaning in suffering but “it’s making me a better person” is inadequate and can take on a masochistic edge.

Suffering from abuse or disease (for egs) is a completely different issue than “suffering” the consequences of making a mistake or doing wrong. The latter we can learn from: action, reaction, cogitate, new action. Maybe Christians can confuse the two??

Often, when we don’t get compassion from others during hard times, we will feel stingy for a long while afterwards because we are still starving a little inside. It’s happened to me, too. I hope you eventually found what you needed. You are a lovely woman, Daisy.

Whoa, whoa, WHOA An Attorney!

Was this comment directed at me? And if yes, why? Where in my post did you ascertain that I have “hatred” for Mandela?

I stated that the U.S. was on the wrong side of history with its Cold War-centric strategic focus and subsequent foot dragging regarding sanctions against SA!

And OBVIOUSLY Mandela’s politics and ideology grew and changed over the course of his lifetime, as happens with many many people. As a leader, however, he was clearly grounded in the timeless qualities of justice, mercy, and reconciliation which frankly transcend ideologies of all stripes.

Perhaps you made an error and meant to respond to another comment. If so I completely understand but I’d appreciate if you’d kindly clarify, please.

I’ve always respected your P.O.V. on TWW and I’m a bit disturbed that you feel that anything I wrote demonstrates “hatred.”

An Attorney wrote:

If you insist that he could not change, then you cannot have changed from unbeliever to believer either. Get over your hatred of a successful, respected black leader who went where he could to get the support he needed, when the USA was in bed with apartheid.

ken wrote:

the goal of your efforts was the preeminence of Christ in all things (not just people healing).

How do you see these as two separate things?

What the heck did Jesus do and how was He exalted during His earthly ministry? He healed and healed and healed and then healed some more. And then guess what? He healed on the Sabbath which ticked the religious folks to no end. How dare He dishonor the Sabbath (and in so doing dishonor God) by the lowly work of healing on the Sabbath?

What did Jesus read when He stood up in the Synagogue?
It was Isaiah 61:1&2. This is recorded in Luke 4.
It goes like this:

Luke 4:8 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

You say, ‘(not just healing people)’ as though it is of no importance and that it is not near and dear to the heart of Jesus and not part of keeping Jesus preeminent.

When people are healed, we ARE keeping Christ preeminent and we ARE doing the work of ministry.

When we are warning people away from the wolves in sheep’s clothing, we ARE keeping Christ preeminent and doing the work of His ministry.

Your separation of the two is rather disconcerting.
It makes me wonder what the gospel and ministry, and keeping Christ preeminent means to you.

anon 1 wrote:

I am curious if it is keeping Christ preeminent by teaching wife to take abuse for a season. Or by teaching women that they should view their husband as their leader even though he asked her to be a part of a threesome? There are plenty more where that came from but I would not call that keeping Christ preeminently

Imo, the answer would be no.

Mara wrote:

How do you see these as two separate things?

I see healing as part of the preeminence of Christ.

@ Patrice: st. Lawrence on the gridiron is worse, in my opinion…

Patrice wrote:

If some among them do come here with a pang of guilt and a modicum of humility, they will read carefully and discover the truth of it soon enough.

I’ve asked myself if Jesus did a parody of my life would I be more inclined to run to him or from him? That’s not how he treated me. Btw, I think grace is far beyond niceness and sweetness. I find myself constantly praying for those people that have hurt myself and the members of my family, and would not see the need or the benefit of how a parody which mocks and ridicules and scorns would result in reconciliation/and or change in their life.

@ Patrice: so am I! Equally true of myself, BTW…

To Patrice, Dee, and Mara: Your elastigirl wrote:

@ Wade Burleson:
“not become joyful and celebratory in finding fault in the body of Christ.”
+++++++++++++++++++++
perhaps it’s a matter of perspective. example: if a person has been feeling bad in their body for a while, and a doctor finally diagnoses what it is, the person’s response will be part “oh no” and part “oh yes! deal with it and take it out!” Which way a person leans in their response is a matter of their experience with the trouble, their personality, their viewpoint, several things.
“joyful and celebratory in finding fault” as an observation is missing the big picture of what is really going on.

Patrice’s wise words, echoed by Dee and Mara, were like a healing balm to me, as I too, am gladdened when yet another leader’s hidden sins are revealed. I wasn’t going to comment this morning but I read this quote by Doug Wilson regarding the Doug Phillips scandal:

“The second observation has to do with the snark shown by those who see such things as an occasion for venting their spleen. One of the reasons why men in Christian leadership have to be so careful in their lives is that this response is so entirely predictable. When Nathan the prophet rebuked David for his great sin, he referred to this response as one of the obvious and predictable consequences — “by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme . . .” (2 Sam. 12:14).

And that is what they do. But for those who know how the story goes, this is one of those occasions where the enemies of the Lord can be readily identified. By their glee ye shall know them.”

I am incensed that the very men who have set up the evil structure that props men up in positions of false authority, then hides their abuse of that authority, then accuses those injured of bitterness and anger, and then has the unmitigated to call these victims “enemies of the Lord.” Maybe these are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness. Dougs, I am elated when another brick falls off this monstrous system. May she be reduced to her chief cornerstone.

Nicholas wrote:

John Piper blasts David Instone-Brewer for saying that divorce is acceptable in the case of spousal abuse: http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/taste-see-articles/tragically-widening-the-grounds-of-legitimate-divorce

It’s so sad that John Piper makes a straw man out of “emotional neglect.” He seems to see the topic as all or nothing: Arguing that if the church opens the door to divorce for abuse, then any minor thing can be called abuse.

There are many churches that allow divorce for a broader ranger of serious offenses: The 4 A’s —
• Adultery
• Abandonment
• Addictions
• Abuse

@ M. Joy:
Way too risky. Just like shooting a video in downtown Dubai would have been for Piper, esp given the context. He doesn’t want to risk losing his visa. So, he invites other Christians to come do the work of risk taking while he simply goes there to visit. My opinion? He and his wife (a self-proclaimed world-traveler who lives to travel) are doing just that: traveling. As tourists they shot that video (I’m guessing Noel Piper filmed it) and then they could claim the trip as a ministry expense.

How hard is it to go somewhere for a visit and announce to others that they must go where he is (not that he intends to stay) and risk their lives sharing the gospel in a place he says will be destroyed if they don’t?

That kind of thing pisses me off. I’m tired of the way these guys use the gospel so disingenuously.

Dr. Bradley wrote an expanded piece here: http://www.worldmag.com/2013/05/the_new_legalism

ken wrote:

I keep thinking to myself that some of the people who are constantly in your crosshairs are the ones that really need to come to this site and get a different perspective to understand how they are hurting people.

An afterthought on a previous comment.

By the time these guys have made the great accomplishment of getting in our “crosshairs”, a great host have already tried to confront them concerning their error. If they had any desire to change, it would have come through someone on their elder board (but, that’s right, they fired that elder for being divisive), a concerned church member (but they ran that church member out and accused them of gossip and called the police on them), or a more local blogger/concerned website etc. (but they have warned their congregations that those places are the spawn of satan and the blog hosts have been taken to court).

One of our Crosshair guys was actually confronted by a Christian radio journalist for plagiarism. But the Christian Mafia shut her down somehow. I’m sure we’ll hear more about that.

All manner of reaching these sociopaths has been tried and exhausted. Most to all who have tried have been thrown under the bus and have suffered deeply and terribly.

Can these Crosshair guys repent and turn around? I suppose.

But little ol’ me out in the middle of nowhere… I’m far more concerned with finding and comforting the myriad of walking wounded left in the wake of these on-going tragedies.

You aren’t going to hear “oh, poor sociopath in the pulpit. he must be reached,” coming out of my mouth

No, you are going to hear a fanfare for the common man(woman) who only wanted to serve God in a home church but instead got the ever-living snot beat out them. Yet these average Joes and Josephines still love God and want to find Him in this somewhere, anywhere, in the pile of crap they have found themselves in. I will sing my song of healing for them. The sociopaths are on their own in their million dollar mansions.

As mentioned above, if Ken feels a ministry need for the pulpit sociopaths, he’s more than welcome to figure out how to reach them.

We have found that the best way to reach them is in the crosshairs. Hit them where it hurts, in the pocket book and in the number of warm bodies in their pews. They wrongly believe that the money and people belong to them. They are wrong. They both belong to God.

Evie wrote:

How hard is it to go somewhere for a visit and announce to others that they must go where he is (not that he intends to stay) and risk their lives sharing the gospel in a place he says will be destroyed if they don’t?
That kind of thing pisses me off. I’m tired of the way these guys use the gospel so disingenuously.

Exactly. In his latest article about how his teachings played a role in the decision of this young man to move his family to Libya http://www.desiringgod.org/blog/posts/when-we-send-a-person-to-his-death , he finishes it off with “Finally, I call thousands of you to take Ronnie’s place. They will not kill us fast enough. Let the replacements flood the world.” To Piper I say, “YOU go first and set the example.”

When I read the story of Ronnie Smith and his family, my stomach was in knots. I don’t want to go into it in a blog response, but I have lived through a horrible tragedy and loss that will affect me the rest of my life. When I think of Anita Smith suddenly being a widow and single mom, I am grieved for her.

As a resident and one who is working for the Name of Christ in this city (where we are given great freedom and protection under the authorities here)…I would beg whoever posted this to please take it down immediately! I know that John Piper surely had no idea the damage he was doing in making this statement, but for the sake of the Gospel in this area of the world, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE REMOVE THIS IMMEDIATELY! This could result in great damage to the work here. Unfortunately, the problem with wonderful Christians coming to briefly minister in areas like ours is that they don’t have enough perspective on the work here and can make some disastrous mistakes…like this one! Thanks so much!

I have had personal experience with John Piper, wherein he tried his usual schtick of shaming everyone in the room who wasn’t willing to “radically” “give up their lives” “in obedience to Christ” (thus, literally losing family, jobs, and one’s current church family in the process).

The two links that M. Joy posted above are what I wish those of us in the room had been able to say that day. Not so much for Piper’s sake (though, until a person breathes their last there is still hope — old dogs CAN learn new tricks), as to help protect the insecure Christians who were being swayed by the “passion.”

But when his schtick is broadcast to the world it does indeed become dangerous, and I am thankful you have taken the time to directly plead with the businessmen to come to their senses and remove the video. It is highly, highly inappropriate; deeply, deeply offensive; and NOT Christianity.

@ Nicholas:

This is a good antidote as well. “God of the Mundane” by Matt Redmond

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1937063968

dee wrote:

Heading to bed
I am sorry for the way this thread developed.

I’m not sorry! I have a Word Doc called “Brilliant Comments from TWW.” I have copied and pasted about 20 comments from this “hijacked thread” including yours, Wade’s, Patrices’s, Nick’s, Victorious’s, and others. It has been extremely helpful to me to understand a lot of what I still struggle with. I even copied one of Ken’s posts…I think that’s the beauty of this blog…we’re all in process and we know it. I hope you slept well.

BTW, Eagle, have you shared your testimony online? I would love to read it. Thanks!

Dee,

This is a post in which John Piper explicitly encourages Christians (who sense a calling to do so) to look into moving to Dubai for the sake of sharing the Gospel. He even writes about the freedom with which preachers can talk about the Gospel in Dubai. http://www.desiringgod.org/blog/posts/dubai-amazing-and-strategic-city

Meanwhile, David Platt is at least hinting that sharing the Gospel in Dubai can put one in physical danger! Maybe Piper and Platt could benefit from having a conversation on this subject, if they haven’t already done so…? I don’t know; the mixed messages are confusing to me. Don’t get me wrong– I know full well that there are Christian churches in Dubai and that conversations about various faiths happen there freely. I’m just confused as to why even *similarly Calvinistic leaders* seem to have such varying views of what life is like for Christians in Dubai!

I really wish that *both* Piper and Platt could see the daily life of my girlfriend there, living with and working for a Muslim family, stuck in a contract with them as an “overseas foreign worker” from the Philippines. Her daily reality is actually somewhere *between* what Piper and Platt describe… but sadly, given that she is a Catholic, both of them would view her as being just as lost and in need of Christ as the Muslim family for whom she works! 🙁

@ Bridget:
Exactly! Like, who’s team is the guy on? It just infuriates me that he would say something that completely dismisses any other sacrificial Christian missionary work that has happened and is currently happening over there. Not a word! All he suggests is that some new, unprecedented work take place. And where is he, at the forefront of that, calling in the troops? And why? Because he happens to be there standing in a wide open space shooting a video? That gives him the authority to say what he did?

Hold me back because my coffee is buzzing and it’s looking to put it’s stingers into Piper’s delicate, unshodden feet.

“God’s work done in God’s way will never lack God’s supply.” Hudson Taylor

Nick Bulbeck wrote:

There is an important theme here, I think. A big reason why so many people buy this kind of thing is that they want rules, documents, constitutions, church buildings etc etc that they can see, not relationship with a God they can’t see.

The unrelenting “certainty” that is the hallmark of modern evangelicalism has deadened any sense of mystery and the attendant sense of wonder, awe, and gratitude that naturally flows from our faith in the Living (and unseen) God.

“10 E-Z Steps to Gospel Success!” “Attend or Read THIS [insert conference/book of your choice] and be Immediately Sanctified!” “Rigidly Defend the Faith From the Godless ‘Other’ to the Nth Degree of Certainty Via Pastor Bob’s A-1 Apologetics Academy-n-Debate Club!” “Only Members (TM) of Our Church (TM) Have All the Answers (TM) and Everyone Else is Apostate – Boo!”

Nick Bulbeck wrote:

the “weightier matters of the Law” Jesus spoke about, like justice and the love of God, are obviously too vague and difficult to define. It’s much easier to measure out a tenth of our mint, dill and cumin (figuratively speaking) and declare ourselves gospel™ on the strength of that.

I’m done with soulless evangelical certainty, personally. I am unsuccessfully falling on my face every minute of my life grappling with the “weightier matters of the Law” and coming up short every single time.

And guess what? IT’S GOOD ENOUGH. Nothing, but nothing, will ever separate me from the love of God. He loves me anyway. No matter how cranky, foul-mouthed, judgmental, beat up by life, beat up by others, mean, sad, angry, “perfect” or piously gospelly I am, He simply does not care one bit. He still loves us!

I can’t explain it for my life, and at this point I don’t want an explanation. I figure He’ll reveal it all in His own time – it’s not my responsibility to parse, slice, and dice His inscrutable ways. In the meanwhile, I’m going to bask in His love and thank Him for it. Imperfectly as always. That’s also enough for now.

Whew! Thanks Nick for your comment.

ken wrote:

So, I think I understand at least the part of the time it takes to heal and the different ways.

Perhaps you do.
Perhaps you don’t.
Perhaps you should remember that “One size fits all” is generally a bad idea. And expecting it to fit all or nearly all will only frustrate everyone involved.

I say this as a person who has walked with those so broken by life, family, and church that they have alienated nearly everyone else. I’ve walked through the valley of the shadow of death with them. It is a dark and terrifying place. Much room needs to be made for cleaning up the mess. Sometimes if spiritually feels like cleaning up infants or the bedridden elderly after an explosive diarrhea episode.

I’m trying to help you understand how messy it can really get. If you can’t stand the smell, stay away from it.
But just as God doesn’t exist nurseries or nursing homes because of the mess, neither does He exit places where the worst of the worst spiritual abused are being exposed and the mess that goes along with it.

M. Joy wrote:

Exactly. In his latest article about how his teachings played a role in the decision of this young man to move his family to Libya he finishes it off with “Finally, I call thousands of you to take Ronnie’s place. They will not kill us fast enough. Let the replacements flood the world.” To Piper I say, “YOU go first and set the example.”

Amen, M. Joy. If Piper wants to call young men to martyrdom, let Piper do it first.

ken wrote:

anon 1 wrote:

I am curious if it is keeping Christ preeminent by teaching wife to take abuse for a season. Or by teaching women that they should view their husband as their leader even though he asked her to be a part of a threesome? There are plenty more where that came from but I would not call that keeping Christ preeminently

Imo, the answer would be no.

Then we have a problem. The man you have credited with teaching you about the preeminance of Christ focuses on the above (and more like it) quite a bit. He teaches it to young pastors and tells women it is God’s truth. In effect, all he is doing is making man preeminant.

Deebs –

I think I’ve lost a post to moderation. It had one link to Desiring God.

@ Patrice: That’s exactly what he’s doing, and it really does not help *anyone,* in any way at all.

Not to mention that it tells others in the world (not just Arab Muslims) about our real intentions – empire-building.

@ Patrice:

I find the entire Joni Erickson Tada sham to really be that…a sham. If there is one situation that puts to shame the hypocrisy of those pushing extreme gender roles, what women can and cannot do..it’s Tada that shows why complimentarims (sp?) is a total shame and nothing but patriarchy.

Yes she is handiciapped…so how can Joni serve and sumbit to her husband? The roles are abscially reversed in her husband taking here of her. As a paraplegic someone has to do the laundry, bath, change, etc… and in the role of the woman as held up by Piper and all…Joni Erickson Tada fails it.

PLUS I find it damning that she taught at the Strange Fire conference. All this ^%&$ about why women can’t teahc, preach, etc… and that’s exactly what she does everytime she tells her story…Joni is preaching. Not only that she is quoting scripture when she tells her story. I’d love to hear what happens if she is ever in Tim Challies chruch 😛

M. Joy wrote:

he finishes it off with “Finally, I call thousands of you to take Ronnie’s place. They will not kill us fast enough. Let the replacements flood the world.”
To Piper I say, “YOU go first and set the example.”

It does bother me he encourages other people to do something he is likely unwilling to do himself.

I just caught one of the X-Men movies in repeat on cable over the weekend.

There was a similar situation where the mutant villain, Magneto, put an innocent, kidnapped mutant girl, Rogue, in a contraption that would kill her, but it served his larger goal of messing with the humans, so he was okay with her dying in the process.

A good guy mutant, Wolverine, told the baddie something like,
“You are so self righteous. If you really believed in your cause, you would let the girl go, put yourself in that thing, and die yourself.”

Kind of reminds me of Piper on this,
“Hey everyone, I’ll just stay safe in the States or in nations hospitable to Christians, but y’all need to risk your lives in nations where Christianity is not welcomed. It’s for the greater good, so do risk your life!”
🙄
Piper-Magneto. 😆

@ Bridget:

I’m glad you enjoyed that. A coffee-loving friend of mine shared that photo with me months ago.

I’m more of a tea drinker but do enjoy the occasional cup of coffee (with lots of sugar).

I used to work with a guy who would literally shake if he didn’t drink several cups of coffee at work during the day.

@ Daisy: Funny pic, and shows why I don’t drink coffee – talk about wired!

Daisy wrote:

Piper-Magneto.

In the movies, Magneto’s background was surviving a Nazi Concentration Camp as a child. Watching the Krema ovens do their thing to others like him because they were of the “Different” races in the Third Reich. And that colored his entire career as a supervillain when he came out as a high-powered Mutant.

Magneto was one of the “Never Again!” types whose “Never Again!” became “Because We’ll do it to Them first!” He became a Mutant Supremacist who by the second movie was willing to exterminate the non-Mutants to make the world safe for Mutantkind. He had become a reflection of the opposing non-Mutant Supremacists like that Senator. Communism begets Objectivism.

@ Nick Bulbeck: Marvelous quote./comment, Nick! And very funny as well.

@ dee:

It appears to me that Wade was doing the same thing as ken, and all of it diverted from the topic and wrongness (maybe not a work, but it works) of what Piper said in his video clip.

It doesn’t matter what his motives are, what he said disses all the ministries already working in foreign Muslim countries and possibly puts many people in harms way. And for what? To pump his conference up because he feels he has something to say about missions, that nobody else does? Isn’t that why the video was made?

Again, I view this as bad, or worse, than what Driscoll did at Strange Fire. I doubt as many people will call out Piper, though. He seems to be more in favor with the crowds at the moment than Driscoll.

@ Nick Bulbeck:

It reminds me of the Children’s Crusades in the Dark Ages.

Was the video removed? 🙂

I hope people will realize that people like John Piper, Mark Driscoll, and John MacArthur are just Fred Phelps in nicer clothes with better English. Their hateful methodology is insidious because it is covered with theological terms and many people don’t see the true nature of their beliefs and preaching. At least with Fred Phelps, what you see is what you get. While I do not worship your God, I do appreciate the good work you all are doing.

Bruce Gerencser wrote:

I hope people will realize that people like John Piper, Mark Driscoll, and John MacArthur are just Fred Phelps in nicer clothes with better English.

You’ll get no argument from me on that point, Bruce.

@ trust4himonly- Faith:
A recent article for you (I’m being cheeky)
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/09/if-nelson-mandela-really-had-won

@ Rafiki:
Been thinking about what to say for a couple of days and can’t come up with anything profound except a joke from the 80s as illustration of the grip the Dutch Reformed Church had on SA society.

Van der Merwe went parachuting one day in the Orange Free State, jumped out the aeroplane but when he pulled the cord to open the ‘chute nothing happened. Then he realised – nothing opens in Bloemfontein on a Sunday.

Groan, but I think you get the picture. Also, my high school history teacher made a point of telling us that Oswald Pirow, a cabinet minister in the 1930s was a Nazi supporter and admirer of Hitler. And following the progression of apartheid laws from the Land Act of 1913 which dispossessed black South Africans from most of the land gave one a rough idea of the inhumanity of it all.

@ Christopher Lake:
Thanks for your considered reply. I came to the conclusion, ‘why pray for more suffering, I have enough already!’ PS the Catholic Church and I part ways over contraception. I find it deeply disrespectful of me as a woman that a group of (mostly) unmarried men (the Vatican) interpret books (the bible) that have also been written and translated by men. They purport to remove my intelligent decision making power in choosing effective, reliable means of preventing pregnancy, and it’s done globally. Rhythm method – makes good Catholic babies. I have seen too much of the hardship (suffering) of women under this doctrine. I’ve always said – it’s about time that men can get pregnant and have to assume most of the childrearing duties. I predict a swift policy shift when that happens.

Christopher Lake wrote:

As for the personal suffering which *can* be avoided in our lives, we should avoid it!–

Don’t they teach that one can/should offer up their suffering for the poor souls in purgatory? They taught that when I was catholic.

Please, please, please, if you need a Vimeo reproduced, email us. Nobody has a copy of this? Ouch.

Haitch wrote:

Thanks for your considered reply. I came to the conclusion, ‘why pray for more suffering, I have enough already!’ PS the Catholic Church and I part ways over contraception. I find it deeply disrespectful of me as a woman that a group of (mostly) unmarried men (the Vatican) interpret books (the bible) that have also been written and translated by men. They purport to remove my intelligent decision making power in choosing effective, reliable means of preventing pregnancy, and it’s done globally. Rhythm method – makes good Catholic babies. I have seen too much of the hardship (suffering) of women under this doctrine. I’ve always said – it’s about time that men can get pregnant and have to assume most of the childrearing duties. I predict a swift policy shift when that happens.

Haitch,

I completely hear you about not praying for more suffering. I have enough trouble offering up the suffering that I already have as it is! 🙂

On the Catholic Church and artificial contraception, I won’t seek to have a discussion about it, because your convictions on the issue are your own and are very strong. I am going to leave a link to an article on the subject written by a Catholic woman, a convert, who accepts the Church’s teaching. Please feel free to read it or not read it– no pressure from me at all. I leave it for you only to provide a Catholic female perspective on the teaching. Peace and blessings to you. http://www.ncregister.com/blog/jennifer-fulwiler/those-catholic-women-who-use-contraception

@ Haitch: Yep!

Estelle wrote:

Groan, but I think you get the picture. Also, my high school history teacher made a point of telling us that Oswald Pirow, a cabinet minister in the 1930s was a Nazi supporter and admirer of Hitler.

Did this Pirow guy found the AWB? Sure sounds like it.