A Prude By Any Other Name…Still Sounds Like a Pharisee!
Scott on May 24, 2007 at 12:33 pm
(Cue dramatic music…Begin sound effect ticker)
Beep…beep…beep…
Newsflash…
beep, beep, beep…
Dateline: Somewhere in Cyberspace
beep…beep…beep…
Internet Watchbloggie extraordinaire Ingrid Schlueter, founder and leading stone thrower at Slice of Laodicea and contributing pharisee judge jury executioner writer over at Christian Research Network has announced that VCY America has stopped broadcasting Chuck Swindoll’s Insight for Living radio show.
beep…beep…beep…
Schlueter, a heresy hunter of the first order who never fails to find an apostate in every evangelical pew, has declared on behalf of VCY America:
Through the years we have had multiple conversations with IFL regarding objections to content in their broadcasts. It is VCY’s position that certain language and illustrations used have been crude, vulgar, and from the gutter and have no place on Christian radio.
Beep…beep…beep…beep…beep…
(End mock radio transmition)
Anyone who has been reading this blog over the last 18 months knows how we feel about the litter of watchbloggies whose nose-in-the-air attitudes more closely resemble those of the Pharisees who pray, “Lord, thank you that I am not like these other sinners” rather than modeling the mind and heart of Christ. The peeps over at Slice, CRN, TeamPyro, et al tend to be fairly predictable in the people/groups/organizations they target.
But every once in a while they take a giant leap into the absurd…like today. VCY America has decided to take a bold stand against corruption in the Christian church and has refused to carry Chuck Swindoll’s teaching as aired on the Insight for Living radio broadcast. As examples of the sundry vulgarities, crudities and gutteralities expressed by Chuck Swindoll, Ingrid shares the following damning examples:
1) On March 5th of this year, speaking of the sons of Issachar, Swindoll said:
Patton would say they had guts. You’d say at work, they had balls.
Regarding this, Ingrid said: It is VCY’s position that this language is gutter talk, is crude, and vulgar. VCY stated to IFL that such language is uncalled for, is unbecoming a pastor, and is inappropriate for our listeners.
(My thought-If “balls” is crude and vulgar, how much time does Ingrid spend coming down out of her tower of purity and rubbing shoulders with the publicans, sinners, tax-collectors, fisherman, etc?)
-
2) On March 6th, speaking of a recent medical exam, Swindoll said:
I had my physical the other day and Cooper who has a finger that long (pause with laughter), that long (continued laughter). And while he was up in there said, ‘Now that’s your prostate.’ I said (Swindoll yells) ‘I know that’. Was this anatomy class? (Laughter). He’s a very sick man. (Laughter). Got through prostate, checked out great. I bragged about that to Cynthia about three hours. ‘I’ve got a great prostate.’ She said, ‘get a life, honey.’” (Laughter)
Regarding this, Ingrid said: VCY finds it unacceptable to broadcast Chuck Swindoll’s re-counting of the length of the finger of his doctor and describing it in his body while checking his prostate. This is both crude and offensive.
(My thought-Since he was talking at the time to a men’s leadership meeting, and most of these men had endured the “Dr. Jelly Finger treatment,” I would say that this is a time when once again Ingrid has ignored the importance of context.)
-
3) Back in November of 2000, Swindoll seems to have stepped into it by discussing “The Lion King.” Ingrid prefaces VCY American’s objection by saying:
Christian broadcasters all over the country were giving warnings regarding the homosexual promotion such as gay days, gay-friendly issues and other depraved issues being promoted by Disney. While this boycott was going on, Insight For Living took another position. The November 20, 2000 IFL program promoted “The Lion King” (produced by Disney) using it as an illustration. Chuck Swindoll stated on this broadcast.
On this day, Swindoll said:
“Now I could ruin the rest of the story for you, but rather than doing that, I’ll urge you to go down to your local video store and rent for yourself, ‘The Lion King’”.
Regarding this, Ingrid said: At that time VCY addressed concern to IFL pointing out that researchers who reviewed this movie stated that the one who anoints Simba as king, was Rafiki, who happens to be a witch doctor. Rafiki carries his magical pack on the top of his staff. Viewers are taught throughout the movie that you can align yourself with witchcraft to overcome evil. It is also pointed out that the movie promotes talking to the dead (necromancy).
(My thought-It’s a CHILDREN’S MOVIE!!! Ingrid must be LOADS of fun as a mom.)
-
4) On the January 3, 2001 edition of Insight for Living, Swindoll used an illustration of Art Linkletter talking to a boy whose father is a police officer. Art asked if the boy’s mother was bothered by this, the boy responded and Chuck emphasized, “Heck, No!”.
Regarding this, Ingrid said: VCY contacted IFL stating “heck” is slang for “hell” and that listeners were offended by this.
(My thought-Perhaps Ingrid would have preferred it if the boy had said, “Golly, No!” Since words are typically definded by their intent, then wouldn’t “golly” be just as bad as “heck?” In fact, in any situation couldn’t one just substitute a bland/inoffensive word for a “loaded” word and still be accused of “cussing?” For example, wouldn’t “You’re a sonofacow” be just as offensive as “You’re a sonofabitch?” -or- wouldn’t “I hate you. Go wash yourself and die!” be the same as “I hate you. Go f___ yourself and die!”)
-
5) On February 5, 2001, Chuck used an illustration from a regular column he reads from “Sports Illustrated” magazine written by Rick Riley. Chuck quoted this portion of the article:
“Be careful with your money, write your own checks, none of this power of attorney crap. Get an agent and a lawyer and tell each, the other is a crook. (Laughter) That’s perspective.”
Regarding this, Ingrid said: VCY alerted IFL that day that the word, “crap” is crude, uncalled for and offensive and should not to be used in a Christian’s vocabulary, let alone come from a pulpit and broadcast all over the country.
(My thought-”Crap” could also be used to as a reference to garbage/trash/junk. Perhaps it is Ingrid who needs to get her mind out of the crapheap.)
-
6) In September of 2001, VCY contacted IFL out of concern that Chuck Swindoll was calling into question a literal interpretation of Genesis for a six-day, 24-hour day creation when he said:
“On what day did He make the sun? It was the fourth day. So for three full creative days or eras of days, however you might handle that. For three solid periods of time there was light, but there was no sun…But what’s interesting to me is that the light that came upon this earth, for a period of who knows how long, did not come from the sun. Where did it come from?”
Regarding this, Ingrid said: In this message IFL called into question a literal six-day, 24-hour day creation.
(My thought-Unless Ingrid is able to prove for 100% certain that the days in Genesis were literal days, and unless she can explain away every bit of evidence that seems to indicate something different, she should probably just back off on using that as a litmus test of orthodoxy.)
-
7) In February of 2005, Swindoll set off the heresy alarms at VCY America when they decided that he had an incorrect understanding of “grace” and “judging”:
“No person is qualified to judge another. Extending grace means we refuse to play God in anyone else’s life…So, rather than judge others, it’s our duty to give them room to be who they are…But let me go to drinking wine for supper, or you know, or a glass of wine for lunch. Some of you have an absolute abhorrence for the thought. And, that’s your conviction. I’m not talking about drinking too much. I’m not talking about out of moderation. I’m talking about a glass of wine every once and a while. If you do not have a problem with that you’re not free to bring a big bag of booze and set it on the table when you eat at Bob’s Steakhouse. Okay? That’s unwise especially if you’ve got a couple of brand new Christians with you, or if you’ve got them sitting nearby. If you want to drink a little wine, drink it in your house. Keep it to yourself because that’s love. Now, I know I’ll get mail on this, but I don’t care (laughter). I’m trying to make a point and I could have chosen another, but I know that would make you think. So, I thought I’d use this one and let you think whatever you wish. When I come to your house I do not check your refrigerator to see what’s in there…And when I have you in my home and you look in my refrigerator, it’s none of your business (Laughter). It works both ways….I want to say to you who are strong, lighten up, lighten up….I want to say to you who are weak, grow up. Quit judging people who have liberty that you don’t feel you have.”
Regarding this, Ingrid said: It is VCY’s position that God calls believers to lead a life of separation from worldly practices and amusements and that the life of one who is saved should demonstrate that he is a child of God, surrendered to do the will of God. The child of God is not to do those things which will cause a brother to stumble or be made weak, but affirms II Corinthians 5:17, “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.”
(My thoughts-If the drinking of wine is one of her many tests for the spirituality of people, I would suggest she start by dealing with the Apostle Paul who recommends the drinking of wine, and Jesus who created wine for a wedding.)
-
8) In December of 2005, Chuck said, “Get your buns in gear and turn to…(gave passage of Scripture).
Regarding this, Ingrid said: It is VCY’s position that this is not appropriate language from the pulpit nor on this Christian radio ministry.
(My thought-Ingrid, you must be one REALLY REPRESSED individual if the word “buns” gets you all in a tither.)
-
It is such a relief to know that Ingrid and the rest of the gang over at Slice (along with the others in the watchdoggie litter) are there defending the faith from the dark machinations of the Evil One who has perverted one of the longest running Christian teaching programs in America. To be sure that we get the salient points and to be sure that we are all on the right judgmental spiritual page, here’s what we have learned:
1) Commonly used social colloquialisms and slang are to be avoided at all costs, and to fail to do so draws into question the amount of Godliness within one’s soul. To use a phrase like “got balls” as opposed to “got guts” exhibits a taint that is a strong indicator of pervasive spiritual corruption.
2) Discussing the physical realities of life (such as medical examinations) is off limits, especially if it is done in a light and humorous manner. Discussing a proctologic exam is to acknowledge that men have prostates, which can only be examined through the anus, which is pretty much always a humbling (if not humiliating) experience. It is always better to pretend that nobody in the world has a prostate or an anus, because that would lead to other embarrassing discussions of defecation, flatulence and the like. Pretend that it’s not there and it will go away, or at least nobody will notice it.
3) Never, never, EVER expose yourself or your children to any sort of stories or fairytale involving magic, magical lands, magical/talking animals, etc. Magic is always evil, no matter what, so anything that tries to portray it in any other light is anathema and must be shunned and/or stoned and/or burned at the stake of heresy. This includes Disney’s “Aladdin” (the genie uses magic) and “The Little Mermaid” (King Triton uses magic), “The Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe” (both the book and movie portray magic being used on both sides of the battle, which is obviously a misdirection/shell game since all magic is evil and thus Aslan the lion and the White Witch were really fighting on the same side), children’s stories like Cinderella, The White Swan, The Princess and the Frog, The Princess and the Pea, The Swan Princess, Rapunzzle, Rumplstiltzkin, etc, etc, etc. And just to be safe, you should probably put the story of Balam and his donkey on the list from the Old Testament.
4) Words like “heck,” “darn,” “shoot,” “crap,” “dang it,” “darn it,” “dang nabbit,” and the like are all suger-coated cuss words to be avoided at all costs. Since a word like “crap” could mean either “shit” or “garbage/trash,” it is doubly important to avoid it in order to avoid any confusion, since we all know that a double-minded person is unstable in everything they do.
5) A literal belief in six 24 hour days of creation is ESSENTIAL for a proper understanding of the Christian faith and thus for salvation. Any other belief/interpretation is heresy and should be treated as such.
6) The consumption of any food or drink that the world seems to approve of is to be avoided. In the case of alcohol, anyone who drinks it has allied themselves with the world and the prince of this world (the Devil). The consumption of alcohol is grounds for immediate condemnation to the bowels of hell. In fact, doing anything for fun and/or pleasure that is also done by the world must be avoided. Besides drinking alcohol, the list would include: eating chocolate (or any sort of food with a pleasant flavor), listening to music (even hymns), dressing in anything but sack cloth (longs skirts for women and suites and ties for men stimulate feelings of pleasure at one’s appearance, which is sinful, besides the fact that such articles of clothing have been conceived by and created by nonbelievers in the world), reading (even the Bible, since reading anything but Leviticus can lend itself to an enjoyable passing of time while one reads about the movement of God in the history of the world), watching movies (even G rated movies, since again they have been developed by nonbelievers and are thus tainted by the impurity of their thoughts and actions), etc.
7) Any reference to any male or female anatomy located below the shoulders and above the knees is to be avoided, lest it stimulate carnal and/or otherwise inappropriate thoughts. Besides the obvious ones, the following words should also be avoided: chest, bosom, breast, crotch, groin, thigh, derriere, bottom, rump, butt, buns, bum, and arse.
I’m sure that we all want to thank Ingrid for all her hard work and diligence in keeping an eye on our lives and our purity, and for identifying those who seek to sully the Church with their reckless and impure speech and heretical ideas.
Thanks, Ingrid, and keep up the good work!
Category: Religion & Faith |
Your description of Ingrid, Slice, CRN, VCY and Pyromaniacs is very wide of the mark and sad indeed.
They are not Pharisee’s as you choose to classify them. I would suggest you do some research on what the faults of the Pharisee’s truly were.
What Ingrid, Slice, CRN and others are carrying out the role of what the Elders and congregations of Churches used to do but no longer have the backbone to carry out. The boards of the vast majority of Churches now are nothing more than Business Boards, that have virtually no knowledge of the word. And the Pastors have become CEO’s who lord it over their congregations, dumbing them down. Feeding them a diet of perpetual Psychobabble Watery Milk! Satisfied to leave them in perpetual bondage to their sins, just so long as they can remain the “Priest” and be perceived as the only one who carries the “secret knowledge” and the only one able to live a “Christian” life.
The level of Biblical Knowledge among the congregations and even more sadly the Church “Leadership” is horrendous, and the carnality of their lives much worse. The mainline Evangelical and Pentecostal Churches have become nothing more than marketing extensions of our fallen Pop Culture world.
I have listened to Chuck Swindoll for years and even before VCY took the step of ending his broadcasts I turned him off as his “sermons” had become nothing more than Crude Theatrics pandering to our current cultures predilection towards vulgar and base language and attitudes.
Be careful which side you place yourself on, it might very well turn out that you will find you are one of those with the rock in your hand ready to fling it at those who shine the light into an ever darkening apostate Christian landscape
May 24, 2007 @ 1:24 pmAnother home run!
That last list is right on the money. What’s funny is that if it weren’t satire, and it came from someone in the watchdog group, they’d all probably link to it and pat the person on the back for such a wonderful list :-)
Funny.
May 24, 2007 @ 1:49 pmVery amusing indeed
May 24, 2007 @ 1:58 pmYikes, and how sad must you be Scott to have spent so much time “refuting”…well, whatever it is you are refuting.
So, I guess we all owe you a great debt of gratitude for being the exact inverse of what so-called “watchdawggies” are doing. An odd irony…
O and by the way, there is no “gang over at Slice.”
May 24, 2007 @ 2:15 pmJohn,
The pharisees were guilty of self-righteous judgmentalism, pride and the arrogance of those who believe they have been placed in the seat of God to judge all those around them.
Did I miss a memo from God that said that people are allowed to appoint themselves as elders and guardians of churches where they do not attend? As a sometime visitor to this blog Henry (of Following Judah’s Lion) has pointed out on occasison, how is it that Ingrid has appointed herself as the peer/judge of pastors of large and small churches around the country, when according to a strict interpretation of Scripture, she does not have that luxury? According to a conservative standpoint of Biblical interpretation, as a woman Ingrid has no standing to attack the leader of any church. That is to be left to other male leaders/elders of the church.
How can Ingrid and Ken and Chris and others appoint themselves as judges over churches across America (and around the world) when they have no actual working knowledge of the various church bodies, the members, the pastors, etc?
You say, “The boards of the vast majority of Churches now are nothing more than Business Boards, that have virtually no knowledge of the word. And the Pastors have become CEO’s who lord it over their congregations, dumbing them down. Feeding them a diet of perpetual Psychobabble Watery Milk!”
Can you see what you just said, John? You said, “the vast majority of churches.” HOW IN THE WORLD could you know that? How many churches are there in your state, let alone in the United States? How can you (or the people you are defending) presume to judge “the vast majority” of something like churches. You are taking the word of some people (who also don’t have a clue about the “vast majority”) and are extrapolating what they are saying into an all-ness statement, a nearly absolute fact of which you have no knowledge or direct experience.
Again, you say, “The level of Biblical Knowledge among the congregations and even more sadly the Church “Leadership” is horrendous, and the carnality of their lives much worse.”
And again I say…John, can you read what you just wrote? How could you POSSIBLY know about the Biblical knowledge among congregations, let alone church leadership? How could you POSSIBLY know about the level of carnality that exists in their lives.
You don’t think that sounds pharisaical? You don’t think that you have set yourself up in the seat of the judgment in which you presume to evaluate those you don’t know and have never met? You don’t think that your sweeping, broad-stroked assessment of “the vast majority of churches” indicates a level of self-righteousness that is frightening?
You said that you stopped listening to Insight for Living after Swindoll’s sermons “had become nothing more than Crude Theatrics pandering to our current cultures predilection towards vulgar and base language and attitudes.” If you think that the examples Ingrid provides are truly relevant, hard-hitting evidence of corruption within Swindoll’s teaching, then perhaps you need to head out into the “real world” and get some exposure to how the “real world” talks.
Words like balls, crap, heck, and butt are simply language. If YOU choose to find offense, then you have successfully begun to live a 1st Corinthian life of professional stumbling and offense where you are just looking for something to be offended by. Out in the “real world” they use words like shit, hell and ass (and others that I won’t delve into right now).
Just out of curiousity, how DO you think that the fisherman disciples/apostles spoke in those early years of the church? Do you contend that they spoke with the articulate flair of the King James Bible? Not that I am condoning the use of the “F bomb” or anything like that, but most of these early church guys were fisherman and craftsman. Have you ever hung around professional fisherman?
As far as the “ever darkening apostate Christian landscape,” I am the first to admit that there are problems within the church and some big problems at that. But at the same time, I’m not convinced that many of the problems that Ingrid claims to see are actually the ones that need attention. In fact, at times Ingrid and Ken and the rest of the gang have decided to make their own monsters without any guidance from the Lord. They have substituted personal preference for spiritual discernment and have swapped “God wants and/or believes” with “I want/believe.”
May 24, 2007 @ 4:23 pm[...] Ingrid S, Queen of the Internet Watchbloggers, has gone to war against….Church Swindoll. Read this AMAZING recounting of the specifics of Ingrid’s issues with Chuck at this detailed story at Verum Serum. Then go take a shower, because you’ll want to wash the slime off of you. [...]
May 24, 2007 @ 4:28 pmOk – I was drinking [water] when I read “Dr. Jelly Finger treatment” and I almost spewed [water] across my computer screen and keyboard….I’m still laughing….
Would Ingrid have issue with my use of the word “spewed”?
Ingrid is simply worrying about the externals so you don’t have to.
Notice Mr. Silva is dis-associating himself with Slice 2.0 now that CR?N is his.
May 24, 2007 @ 4:32 pmKen,
Thanks for stopping by and contributing…well, nothing.
I take that back. You contributed another example of your inability to defend an indefensible position while making snide and/or snarky comments at people. If nothing else, Ken, you are consistent.
And next time, rather than using your ineffectual and logically flaccid come back of, “Well, you’re doing what you say we’re doing, so you shouldn’t be doing it if you don’t like us doing it, since you’re a hypocrite if you pass judgment on us for passing judgment,” perhaps Ken you could try this…”I’m rubber and you’re glue. Anything you say bounces off me and sticks on you.”
That might be more effective.
And by the way…No Returns!
May 24, 2007 @ 4:32 pmWoW! Remind me to stay away from these folk! I mentioned “passing gas” once, I wonder if that will send me to the “Lake Of Fire”? Are Christians even allowed to associate with Athiests? Because I am kinda friendly with a few on 2 weblogs, and I would hate to have these folks “stone me” while their leader holds their coats for them.
May 24, 2007 @ 7:29 pmScott,
Nothing is effective with you because I’ve seen no evidence you are willing to listen to anyone other than yourself. And slough it off if you want to but you are doing the exact same thing you accuse us of doing, just from another point of view.
So if you condemn us for appointing ourselves blah, blah, blah, I can turn right around and point out your hypocrisy because just who is it who appointed you to watch us? O yeah, that’s right…you did.
May 24, 2007 @ 7:43 pmKen,
As for evidence that I listen to others than myself, though I don’t think it would do any good, I would be happy to provide you with the names of the men and women I am accountable to and who I submit to spiritually. These include young men in their mid-20′s all the way up to some godly “old timers” who are in their late 60′s to early 70′s. Many of them are ordained pastors who have many more years in the pulpit preaching and teaching and ministering the name of Christ than you and I put together. When they offer correction, I listen because they have proved themselves approved of/by God in their actions and attitudes and in the wise and Godly council which they provide.
And though I know this will sound snarky, I will say it anyway – These Godly people who I have been blessed to know and fellowship with have proven themselves through years of hard fast dedication and public service to the Lord while not dismantling/decimating a church’s membership (“weeding out”) and without creating for themselves their own ministry/fiefdom where they can name themselves “president” and from which they can bluster and boast about being the head/president of a ministry aimed at building up the very small remnant of actual/true/righteous faithful. Rather than claim that they needed to get out of the “cesspool” of dealing with the non-Christians out in the world (I believe that is how you described your time and/or dealings while coaching and/or working with a local high school), these Godly men have remained true to the words of Christ and have worked to remain as lights within the darkness, not pulling back because the darkness is too icky.
As far as who appointed me to watch you…that’s easy: YOU DID!
When you went public with your poorly researched, shoddily supported, sloppily exegetted claims about people who make a REAL impact for Christ in the world (as opposed to the imagined impact that you claim to be having)…and as soon as you proclaimed that it was YOUR JOB to watch out for everyone else…and as soon as you decided that you were qualified to pass judgment on other ministers and other churches that you have never known or visited…and as soon as you decided that you could pass judgment on John and I (and others) and declare that we are “walking in darkness,” “partners with the devil,” “tools of Satan,” because we voiced disagreement with you and expected ACTUAL support for your claims rather than circular hyperbole…as soon as you did all of this IN VIEW OF THE CYBERWORLD, you invited everyone and anyone to watch you and evaluate your words/claims/actions.
So far, you seem to be wanting in the grand scale of things.
May 24, 2007 @ 8:15 pmWrong.
Wrong.
Which has been your foregone conclusion anyway, so – whew – big surprise here. :-)
May 24, 2007 @ 8:21 pmJohn,
What was it the Pharisees did? Well, they added to the Law, and so by the time Jesus came around they accused him of breaking the Law when he was only breaking their law.
What is it Ingrid and the folks at CRN do? They take the scriptures and add to them, and then accuse followers of Jesus Christ of violating the scriptures.
Seems to me to be a pretty apt comparison.
Tim
May 24, 2007 @ 8:22 pmKen,
So I’m wrong about your use of the “cesspool” analogy? Try this from one of your fundraising “misifs:”
I am not anxious to return to my secular work in the local high school. Christ is no longer having me evangelize there, one can see in the Spirit He is through with it. Jesus has had me there for four years now, even coaching the football team and this Nineveh just wouldn’t repent. It is rapidly becoming a human cesspool now. It is so sad to watch. And the burden that He has now placed in my heart is to be available to devote myself completely to CRBC and AM.
Yes, Ken. I can see how it would be a relief not to have to deal with all the icky, unrepentant people in the sphere of influence you were blessed with by the Lord.
(What is it that Jesus said about a doctor needing to treat the sick and not the healthy?)
By the way, when you say, “Christ is no longer having me evangelize there (at the school), one can see in the Spirit He is through with it,” how exactly does that happen? How is it that you are seeing/discerning “in the Spirit” that Christ “IS THROUGH” with a school (or a community)? That’s it? “In the Spirit,” Christ showed you that He just wrote off a segment of the population? Wow, I sure would like to see your Biblical support for that flimsy/flaccid excuse for cutting and running away from a challenging situation. Though I have typically assumed that you see yourself like Stephen, standing bold in front of the Sanhedrin or like Paul on Mars Hill, perhaps I have been wrong. Maybe you are more like Jonah, running away from Nineveh.
I would almost bet that you are one of those guys who broke up with a girl using the excuse, “I just don’t feel the Lord wants us together anymore. The Spirit is telling me that we should break up.” It is certainly easier to use “the Spirit” as an excuse for one’s own short-comings than to cop to them honestly.
And I’m wrong about you inviting me and others to become your watchers after you took your “ministry” public? How so… Because you say I’m wrong? YOU are the one that began your “ministry” and went public with your “wisdom” and “insights” into the hearts and minds and souls of those with whom you disagree. YOU invited evaluation of your words by pronouncing them in the public arena.
Remember the exhortation from 1st Thessalonians…”Test all things and hold onto that which is good.” Testing all things includes testing YOUR words which you boldly proclaim to be the words/thoughts/ideas/desires of the Lord.
So far, though some of what you say has merit, much of what you say doesn’t deserve to be “held onto” in light of the Thessalonians passage. Your accusations and overly dramatic pronunciations can easily be proven to be based on frequent isogetics, out-of-context quotes, misrepresented ideas, and poorly researched/reasoned argumentation.
That is why you appear to be “wanting” in the grand scale of things.
And by the way, this wasn’t my forgone conclusion from the beginning. It is the conclusion that I arrived at after spending time reading and evaluating your “work” in light of sound Biblical reasoning and rationale thought…two things you might want to try and exercise a little more of.
May 24, 2007 @ 9:22 pmIt’s an amazing thing how Ken uses words and puts sentences together and says absolutely nothing.
May 24, 2007 @ 10:38 pmI want to form a Ken Silva fan club! Ken, sorry, but if you only do unto others as you would have them do unto you then you DID invite others to publicly comment on your web ministry, point out inconsistencies and demand justification for unfounded remarks or acting in a way that could be seen as not in accord with scripture.
Or did I misunderstand that verse?
May 25, 2007 @ 1:06 amGood thing the Apostle Paul came before Ingrid. His language could have been interpreted to be somewhat “colorful” too!
May 25, 2007 @ 7:32 amThat Swindoll, he’s a regular Mark Driscoll with that potty mouth of his.
Chuck the cussin’ pastor.
So, VCY won’t carry IFL anymore. That means Swindoll loses, what, fifty of sixty listeners? Feh.
May 25, 2007 @ 9:14 amYou can still (for now) purchase Swindoll’s books through the VCY bookstore:
http://www.vcy.com/search_results.cfm?author=swindoll&title=&isbn=&catid=49&subid=&sortby=b.title
May 25, 2007 @ 10:10 amIngrid, you must be one REALLY REPRESSED individual if the word “buns” gets you all in a tither.
Yes, but the word “fanny” (as in “fanny-shakin’) is quite alright:
http://cleave.blogs.com/Music/SLICE.mp3
May 25, 2007 @ 10:37 amI will make this my second and last post. Most likely to the relief of all here.
In regards to this comment:
Scott said:
By the way, when you say, “Christ is no longer having me evangelize there (at the school), one can see in the Spirit He is through with it,” how exactly does that happen? How is it that you are seeing/discerning “in the Spirit” that Christ “IS THROUGH” with a school (or a community)? That’s it? “In the Spirit,” Christ showed you that He just wrote off a segment of the population? Wow, I sure would like to see your Biblical support for that flimsy/flaccid excuse for cutting and running away from a challenging situation.
The Biblical Reference is here:
Luke 10:1-23
“Whatever city you enter, and they receive you, eat such things as are set before you. And heal the sick there, and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’ But whatever city you enter, and they do not receive you, go out into its streets and say, ‘The very dust of your city which clings to us we wipe off against you. Nevertheless know this, that the kingdom of God has come near you.’ But I say to you that it will be more tolerable in that Day for Sodom than for that city.”
And here:
Acts 13:46:
Then Paul and Barnabas grew bold and said, “It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; but since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles.
And in regards to Chuck Swindoll’s “coarse jesting”:
Ephesians 5: 1-7:
Therefore be imitators of God as dear children. And walk in love, as Christ also has loved us and given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma.
But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints; neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. For this you know, that no fornicator, unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not be partakers with them.
You see the things that the word asks us to do are not some unattainable goal. they are considered our normal service, they tell how we are supposed to conduct ourselves on a daily basis. Because this is what marks us out as Children of God.
If we cannot expect a nationally known “Christian” leader to conduct himself in how the word asks all of us, the least and the greatest to act in reasonable service, then he should be admonished, and I think Ingrid has shown that VCY did this repeatedly, but after a time if that leader does not change, then we are to depart from him, as he is willfully sinning and refuses to repent. Also becasue he is a leader, his conduct has a greater impact upon others, and other Christians will consider it ok to participate in “coarse jesting” In other words as long as Chuck Swindoll is allowed to have a national voice and he continues using coarse and vulgar references he is causing others to sin.
I would also like to add is that as Christians our conduct towards other Christians in a debate should always be respectful. The internet has provided a medium where Christians if they are not careful can stumble and fall. As it allows them the freddom to say what they wish and how they wish. However as Jesus said:
Matthew 12:35-37
A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things. But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day
of judgment. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”
And Jesus says here:
Matthew 5: 22
“But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire.”
And he says here:
Matthew 15:10-20
When He had called the multitude to Himself, He said to them, “Hear and understand: Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.”Then His disciples came and said to Him, “Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?” But He answered and said, “Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. Let them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch.” Then Peter answered and said to Him, “Explain this parable to us.” So Jesus said, “Are you also still without understanding? Do you not yet understand that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and is eliminated? But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. These are the things which defile a man, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man.”
We bear witness of who’s we are: God’s or the Devils by what comes out of our mouth and how we speak to others. And this is not directed to one specific group here. None of us should allow ourselves to destroy our witness by what comes out of our mouth. the Bible is sufficent for convicting others and bearing witness of the Truth.
Luke 17:7-10:
And which of you, having a servant plowing or tending sheep, will say to him when he has come in from the field, ‘Come at once and sit down to eat’? But will he not rather say to him, ‘Prepare something for my supper, and gird yourself and serve me till I have eaten and drunk, and afterward you will eat and drink’? Does he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I think not. So likewise you, when you have done all those things which you are commanded, say, ‘We are unprofitable servants. We have done what was our duty to do.’”
Gods Blessings to all of you
May 25, 2007 @ 11:53 amJohn,
Some of your criticism of watchblogs is valid sometimes, but now this is turning into a watchblog of the watchblogs, which will sooner or later necessitate a watchblog of the watchblogs of the watchblogs. I don’t know how you can lump PyroManiacs in there also.
Your speech should be ‘seasoned with salt’ as a Christian. Though I’m sure Ingrid’s tone could have needed some charity, talking about male genetalia and proctological exams from the pulpit is hardly necessary (I’ve never actually heard a pastor do it). Jesus did rub shoulders with tax collectors and sinners, but he didn’t imitate them.
May 25, 2007 @ 12:07 pmPRCalDude said:
John,
Some of your criticism of watchblogs is valid sometimes,
I say:
Umm I’m not sure where you derived from my statements that I was criticising watchblogs? After all I have a watchblog, So was I criticising myself?
What I was saying which was for all parties here, and which I would like to add that you have as well issued caution on this same subject on other blogs, is that there is nothing wrong with a watchblog and there is nothing wrong with having Biblical debates, but at all times the debate should not sink to the level of blatant sarcasm and the insulting of others. Because it does destroy a person’s witness.
So I am scratching my head on where you are coming from as I was on this thread defendng Ingrid, Slice, VCY, & CRN who has posted some of my articles.
Gods Blessings
John
May 25, 2007 @ 12:46 pmumm, confusion between John of Verum Serum and John of the extremely long post? If not anywhere else, then in my tiny little mind I’m getting confused.
This original post was by Scott, so was PRCalDude meaning to address Scott? In which case I have some sympathy with your point, but Apprising Ministries (from where I found here, strange as it may seem) and other watchblogs should allow more reader comment in order to remove the need for VS to do what they are doing here. FWIW I think this post is a bit harsh, but not half as harsh as Slice et al.
If you were meaning John of the extremely long post, then ignore me, I’m just a feckless Brit getting everybody confused over nothing. I’ll go and misunderstand something else now’
keith
May 25, 2007 @ 1:40 pmjohn,
I am familiar with the passages you noted. I would point out a few points…
In Luke we see the initial/first spread of the Gospel as the disciples are sent out by the Word himself (Christ). But CONTEXT is important here. They are commissioned to move/act/speak as ambassadors of Christ within every town they visit. The customs of the time and culture dictated that the towns they visited receive these men and that they be offered food and shelter. While in the town they were to share the blessings of Christ with the people by working in the power of God, spreading the news of the Gospel, etc. If these Jews, who had been raised with the expectation of the coming of the Messiah and who knew what to look for from the words of the prophets, chose to see and hear the evidence of His coming but chose to reject the news and the Messiah, then they deserved to be denounced. They rejected the Messiah, thus the condemnation.
But trying to apply that same train of thought to today doesn’t quite track. The school and community where Ken was serving is NOT rooted in 1st century Israel. The people there wouldn’t know the prophecies of the prophets, let alone recognize the words of the Messiah.
If we are called to be salt and light to an unbelieving world living in darkness, how can Ken be salt and light when he is busy worrying about staying away from the “human cesspool?” As I mentioned earlier, the whole “being led of the Spirit” is too often used as an easy excuse for pulling back when things become uncomfortable and there is a desire to do something easier or at least more enjoyable and more in line with what we want/prefer to do. The Bible is FILLED with examples of men and women who would have preferred to do one thing, but instead did what God called them to do.
Just out of curiosity, is the excuse that Ken uses always valid? When friends of mine who are serving as “undercover missionaries” in a Communist country covertly share the gospel and are rebuffed/rejected, does that mean that they are to “shake the dust off their feet” and condemn those people in that town/village to eternal condemnation?
If I am active in the school where I teach in trying to promote Christ, but am restricted from witnessing and am not allowed to form any sort of faith-based clubs to bring the Gospel to students at the school, then doesn’t that mean that I could make a statement similar to Ken’s, along the lines of, “The doors to spreading the Gospel on campus have been closed, so obviously Christ is no longer having me evangelize here. I can see in the Lord that He is no longer interested in extending his Grace to these people.”
Isn’t that quite a leap, to move from “I can’t witness here” to “The Lord is done with this place?”
Maybe it is Ken’s Calvinism shining through that makes it easy for him to figure that if God has designated someone in the school as part of the “elect,” then it isn’t his problem.
But that sure doesn’t solve the whole “city on a hill” / “candle in the darkness” dichotomy that is created by him deciding to pull his influence out the lives of the young men he was coaching.
May 25, 2007 @ 1:43 pmKeith said:
“John of the extremely long post”
I say: I think the narrow margins make me look a little more long winded.
Hmmm “John of the etremely long post” sounds kind of Monastic, doesnt it? :- )
Have a nice Memorial Day weekend everyone, and for the Brits have a great Bank Holiday Weekend.
May 25, 2007 @ 1:47 pmScott,
I think you are missing the point and spirit of what I said, In regards to Pastor Ken and his words, you may not like how he put it but his intent was in keeping with the spirit of thepassages I cited. your appeal to context is incorrect and flawed,.
We may not always do in the exact terms as Christ said in Luke 10:1-23. But the spirit and the intent of the word is what we should concentrate on. When a group of people will not accept your witness but instead ridicule it and treat you roughly for being a Christian. Jesus is saying we are not abliged to remain and be humiliated for our faith, but the ones who do the humiliating will have judgment fall upon them much worse than Sodom because unlike Sodom the people who ridiculed you had the witness of the gospel to them and they not only rejected it they ridiculed it.
Anyways this has nothng to do with what Chuck Swindoll is doing. Chuck Swindoll uses “Coarse Jesting” in the preaching of the word, which is much worse than just standing around and engaging in “coarse jesting” as he is making it part of a Christian message and witness. He is in other words saying in effect. Coarse Jesting and Base Crudeness is allright in utilizing to spread the word. If then it is alright in using to spread the word then it must follow it is alright to use in any circumstance. As preaching the word and wintessing is one of the most important things we can do as a Christian.
May 25, 2007 @ 2:20 pmAll,
My bad. I thought John Sexton posted this. My aforementioned comment was directed to Scott.
Scott,
Ken isn’t even a calvinist.
May 25, 2007 @ 3:07 pmJohn (O.T.E.L.P.),
Though this is obviously a side-bar issue, I’ll make one more statement anyway. You say that my discussion of context is “incorrect and flawed.” I would disagree. A basic study of the passage and basic knowledge of the Middle Eastern cultures explains a lot. Does context explain and explore ALL possible meanings? Absolutely not. But if one explanation and interpretation of a passage seems to contradict the basic context, I think there is a problem.
You have extrapolated WAY beyond what is expressed in Luke.
Jesus said, “Whatever city you enter, and they receive you, eat such things as are set before you. And heal the sick there, and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’ But whatever city you enter, and they do not receive you, go out into its streets and say, ‘The very dust of your city which clings to us we wipe off against you. Nevertheless know this, that the kingdom of God has come near you.’
- But -
You said, “When a group of people will not accept your witness but instead ridicule it and treat you roughly for being a Christian. Jesus is saying we are not abliged to remain and be humiliated for our faith,…”
Jesus never mentions being ridiculed and treated roughly for being a Christian. He also never mentions being humiliated. I would imagine that by the standard you have just given, most the Book of Acts would not have taken place because every time the people and/or the city officials moved to arrest Paul and/or Barnabas – or – threatened to stone Stephen or some other apostle, they would have just gotten out of town.
Sorry, John, but it seems that you are giving a lot of latitude for “getting out of Dodge” where very little is actually given.
Now as for the Swindoll thing, I agree that at times things are said from the pulpit that maybe could have been phrased differently. But is that enough (even multiple examples of it) to condemn an entire ministry?
As I said earlier, Jesus chose a bunch of tradesmen and fishermen as the first ambassadors of the Good News. I’m not thinking that he was using a strict standard/code of acceptable speech when he sent these guys out to represent Him.
May 25, 2007 @ 3:42 pm.
PRCaldude,
Sorry.
Now that you have said that, I think I remember that coming to light at some point in the past.
Oops! Sorry, Ken. I’ll send you some TULIPs as an apology gift.
Scott
May 25, 2007 @ 3:44 pmYes, but they had heard the Sermon on the Mount at that point. Our cult is imitating the culture way too much in this country, to the point we’ve forgotten holiness. I’ll be the first to place myself in that category. The Scribes, Pharisees, tax collectors, and sinners were able to see in Jesus the very holiness of the Father. Jesus kept the Law perfectly. Granted, he sent out sinners to proclaim his message, but we’re supposed to imitate Jesus. I think you’re reacting to the tone over at Slice more than anything, and I’m noticing a little of the same tone in this post.
May 25, 2007 @ 4:26 pmI’m speculating here, based on what I’ve read of Ken Silva’s writings, that he was in large part responsible for his treatment by people in that school. If you antagonise people (which, intentional or not, seems to be Ken’s style) they are going to react in a less than friendly way.
Look at John 4 (the woman at the well). Jesus knew this woman’s history before he ever set eyes on her, but he didn’t start by telling her to sin no more, he started by asking her to do something simple for him, then showed her compassion and kindness.
With the woman caught in adultery we see the same. I just somehow feel it unlikely that Ken displayed much grace and compassion to these people before pointing out their faults, and in return becoming rejected by them.
We will be rejected by people because of our faith, but we should go out of our way to ensure that the Christian message is put across in a positive, affrming way, rather that leaping in all guns blazing telling everyone what they’re doing wrong. I know I do that sometimes, but most of the time I try to use Jesus as my model for evangelism.
May 26, 2007 @ 1:37 amWith the discussion predictably diminishing to Ken verses someone/everyone let me try and give another perspective. First let me disassociate myself from Ms. Schlueter.
I have been edified over the years by Chuch Swindoll’s ministry.
I think we should watch our language from the pulpit or we run the risk of projecting a subliminal image that it is just a little “waiting for the bus” talk and not what it should be, the ministry of the Holy Spirit teaching through an imperfect vessel. I realize that in the strict sense Swindoll did not curse, but I have known preachers who use that type of common terminology on the pulpit and they go even further around friends. We must attempt to be above reproach.
About the wine drinking – you can but in our culture shouldn’t. It is not a sin but probably a weight and not a good example considering the overwhelming abuse in our culture. In point of fact, if you cannot sacrifice wine in your walk what do you sacrifice? And if it is only sin you avoid then you sacrifice nothing. Paul said he would not eat meat, a good example to consider.
An examine from the proctologist is appropriate to expound upon in a different setting but is perhaps best left unexplained in a gathering designed to seek the Lord’s presence.
As far as the 24 hour creation day, that has been one of the most significant red herrings in Christian circles. Who knows and who cares?
This post I believe was meant to generate a thoughtful and sincere discussion on Christian speech and behavior especially as it refers to the pulpit. It is a reasonable and serious topic that we should all give prayerful meditation to, without allowing the tone and motives of others to obscure the essence of what the Lord Jesus desires us to examine in our own lives as well as others. It is that “in our own lives” that usually is the stumbling block for many.
May 26, 2007 @ 4:30 amOn a bit of a sidenote, this is really rather a simple answer, and so, as light dispels darkness, may we dispel such biblical ignorance as displayed in the following quote.
Swindoll quote:
“On what day did He make the sun? It was the fourth day. So for three full creative days or eras of days, however you might handle that. For three solid periods of time there was light, but there was no sun…But what’s interesting to me is that the light that came upon this earth, for a period of who knows how long, did not come from the sun. Where did it come from?”
Is not the presence of Almighty God sufficient….?
“This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.” [1 John 1:5]
May 26, 2007 @ 12:15 pmMany of these things that get Ingrid’s panties in a wad are fairly predictable. But, the most offensive (and yet, very summarizing of her entire worldview) is her reaction to the “literal 6 day” thing.
Even if Swindoll was teaching directly on creation, rather than making a passing reference, all he did was allow that maybe, just maybe, there’s a 0.0001% chance that those who believe in a literal 6 days are wrong.
If you want to get all riled up about euphemisms for stronger words, go for it. If you want to get upset about anyone endorsing a movie that wasn’t produced by BJU, more power to ya.
But please, for the love of all that’s holy (and I mean that quite literally), don’t get all rankled over someone treating something that you hold dear (for whatever weird reason) as being less than a primary theological doctrine.
Whether the 6 days were literal 24-hour periods is NOT primary. It’s not even secondary or tertiary. It’s not even theology.
In short, it doesn’t bleeping matter.
May 26, 2007 @ 2:04 pmKen said:
So tell us, from the voice of experience, how much sadder is it to make an entire career of it?
May 26, 2007 @ 2:07 pm[...] course you know out in the blogosphere there are great responses to the announcement from VCY. From Verum Serum: It is such a relief to know that Ingrid and the rest of the gang over at Slice (along with the [...]
May 29, 2007 @ 6:34 amTo parphrase Hank Hanegraaf: While there should be no argument over essential Christian doctrine, let’s just agree to disagree over the fringe issues. There’s much work to be done to reach the millions of folks who don’t know Jesus Christ and our time — mine included, I must confess — could be much better spent elsewhere.
May 29, 2007 @ 8:52 amCan you imagine the literal, physical condition of Ingrid’s heart? Honestly…for someone who spends so much time spazzing out over CRAP…
…looks like she’s lashed out at Todd over at MMI now.
You would think she’d have learned her lesson after her last meltdown.
May 29, 2007 @ 1:12 pmMatthew 12:34-37 – “For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks”…”For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned”.
I would rather err on the side of caution when it comes to critiquing my own words/language, with the bible as my subjective standard, and not the culture of the day. Culture’s and popular trends come and go, but the word of god is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow.
May 29, 2007 @ 5:57 pmSandra,
I understand the sentiment you are expressing, though I would say that your Matthew passages don’t support Ingrid’s or VCY’s position of a wholesale condemnation of Swindoll and his ministry of 25+ years.
I wholeheartedlly agree with your statement about critiquing your own words/language. Notice that you speak about yourself and are not assuming that you can speak against and/or judge/condemn others.
Ingrid (once again) has appointed herself as the judge, jury and executioner of someone. She gives no thought to THEIR OWN relationship with God as the primary filter through which they are operating. If she disagrees with someone, she automatically makes the assumption that HER opinion is God’s opinion and that Swindoll’s walk with God must be out of sorts.
May 29, 2007 @ 7:22 pmScott, 1 Thess 5:21-22 says “Test all things, hold fast what is good. ABSTAIN from EVERY FORM of evil”. If you look up every scrripture verse regarding what comes out of our lips/tongues/mouths, and apply the above verse, then I have to agree with how Ingrid has removed this program.
You’re right, I/we can’t judge Swindoll’s relationship with the Lord (that’s between him and God). BUT I CAN rebuke his actions of using filthy language in such a public arena. Scripture exhorts us to… 2 Timothy 4:2-5 – “preach the Word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, REBUKE, exhort, with all long-suffering and teaching…”
2 Timothy 3:16 – “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for REPROOF, for CORRECTION, for instruction in righteousness”.
May 29, 2007 @ 8:53 pmSandra,
Let me be clear. It is possible that Chuck Swindoll went too far in broadcasting his men’s retreat talk in which he mentions his proctologist/proctologic exam. Though I wouldn’t have a problem with that reference in a talk made to a gathering of men, I would probably have a problem with it being broadcast for general public consumption, especially to women who wouldn’t have a context to understand and/or appreciate the situation…just as I wouldn’t have an understanding and/or appreciation for a discussion of a visit to an gyno.
But your application of 1st Thessalonians encourages Christians to abstain from every form of evil. You have made quite a leap from things that might be questionable in your (and Ingrid’s) view -and- things that are evil.
You are classifying as evil:
-Using a common euphemism for guts/bravery/spunk
-Referencing a proctologic exam
-Mentioning a children’s movie that may or may not have alternate subtexts to be concerned about
-Quoting a child who uses the world “heck.”
-Quoting a man who uses the word “crap.”
-Inferring that there could be an alternate interpretation to Genesis rather than 6 literal days of creation.
-Mentioning that there is more than one way to view the discussion over the drinking of alcohol.
You don’t think that is, at the least, something that might be a questionable leap of logic and spiritual judgment? You think his language is “filthy?” I could see how you might be offended by it, but “filthy?” Pardon my bluntness, but you mean to say that in your mind there is no difference between heck, crap and butt -vs- hell, shit and ass?
Is Swindoll above reproach? Absolutely not. Is he beyond correction? Absolutely not. Is he human and fallible? Absolutely. Does VCY America have the right to pull his programing because of sensitivity over instances such as these? Absolutely.
But Ingrid’s tone goes beyond that. She isn’t just pulling his program. She is calling into question his entire ministry and, by extension, his years of service to the Lord.
David was a man after God’s own heart and Solomon chose wisdom above all else. And yet both of these mighty men of God also made poor decisions that gave evidence of their fallibility as men. God never got rid of them in their humanness. God never disinherited them for their wrong words and/or deeds.
It seems as though this may have been overlooked.
May 29, 2007 @ 10:29 pmI’ve never heard of VCY America as we don’t have a lot of Christian radio in Canada (for which, perhaps, we should be thanking God!) nor have I ever heard of this Ingrid person.
I’m just wondering – if you wanted to make a name for yourself, wouldn’t it be a “smart” idea to “take on” on a prominent and well-known figure?
I mean, hey, it worked for Michael Moore. It worked for John Hinckley, Jr, it worked for Lee Harvey Oswald, didn’t it?
Perhaps this whole thing is more logically explained in psychological and sociological terms rather than anything spiritual or theological. Unknown needs attention, self-righteously attack well-known. Presto, I’m famous.
That’ll do it for you in a blog-crazy world, won’t it?
May 29, 2007 @ 11:40 pmScott, I agree with you in that Swindoll’s entire ministry and service to the Lord should not be put into doubt. But I find only one way to interpret Ephesians 5: 1-7…”Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor coarse jesting, which are not fitting…”therefore do not be partakers with them”.
Sin is sin. God’s word says not to do it (abstain from every form of evil). Every day, every minute, each one battles with different forms of sin. Unfortunately for Chuck, his was in a very public arena. Again, I can’t personally judge the man, but scripture exhorts us to to reproach/rebuke/warn others when someone is in error – as Ingrid has done. She is not the judge and jury as many are suggesting. I suggest she is merely following what scripture says we should do when someone is in error. Maybe there would have been a better way to have handled this – I don’t know – only Ingrid knows that.
Sin is sin, and God’s word is God’s word to us – the final authority on every subject. And regarding those “lovely” words you mentioned above, yes,I am being more convicted and challenged every day that they are not appropriate. No, I’m not an old woman or a prude. I am an Australian woman who has just turned 40, who believes that the church world wide needs a wake up call on their colour blindness. Black is black and white is white. No grey areas – no luke warmness. Sin IS SIN.
May 30, 2007 @ 4:19 amI’m not trying to stoke any conspiracy theories here, but could it be possible that the “lordship salvation” camp has never really forgiven Swindoll for presiding over his alma mater, that hotbed of “cheap grace” and “easy believism”, Dallas Theological Seminary?
Just sayin’.
May 30, 2007 @ 5:49 amSandra
I think we get a lot of confusion over the boundaries between ‘rebuking’ and ‘judging’. One we are urged to do in scripture, the other warned very sternly not to do.
My feeling is that Ingrid and Ken et al err on the judging side, simply by saying what they say in the public forum. I guess that same applies to me for that previous sentence, but it is difficult to illustrate the point without an example.
My main issue with Ingrid and Ken is what I perceive as the double standards illustrated by willingness they display to criticise others vs the strict control they place on what comments on their writings are displayed on their websites. I can come on here and disagree with John and Scott, my comments are published and if they disagree with what I’ve said, they respond. It’s usually a reasoned discussion. You can’t do that with Ingrid or Ken.
Yes, Sin IS SIN, and it comes between us and God. But you can’t live a sinless life, all sin is abhorrent to God, and yet, as mentioned above, look at Solomon and David. The bridge between a sinner and God isn’t made by being sinless, it’s made by God’s grace.
May 30, 2007 @ 7:24 amI don’t know who set the VCY up as an “authority” to submit to. Chuck Swindoll has been around for decades and done more for the Kingdom of God than any of you can imagine. Have you forgotten that Jesus himself hung out with prostitutes, with fishermen, with tax collectors and every other kind of sinner? How can you possibly think that Jesus never heard coarse language during the span of his life?
Jesus didn’t care about the people who had all their spirituality together. Those who were more fascinated with what a book said than affecting change in men and women’s hearts. He called them pharisees, snakes, and the people that carried God’s Word in front of their eyes at all times, these are the people that Jesus disdained. Because they were high and mighty and had it all figured out. Jesus himself, the Son of God, could do nothing with a proud heart. And now, history has repeated itself, and there are those, like the VCY, who have taken it upon themselves to be the Big Brother of Christianity.
Yet, none of you can see this. You will respond with your Bible verses and your Christianese and you sit proud in your own self-righteousness. Who among you has hung out with a prostitute lately and told them about a better way to live? Who among you has invited a gay couple into your home? Who among you live in the real world, and are a cause for affecting real change? You’re nothing more than hot air. Swindoll is out there everyday, doing what God has called him to do.
And on the other hand, the VCY, who 99.5% of the world has never heard of, is doing nothing more but sitting on their high horse, making sure that every Christian within hearing distance is conforming to their brand of Christianity. What is the VCY and others going to say when God comes to judge us all? “Lord, um…I was doing your will.” Which God will retort, “No one likes a tattle-tale. I knew the hearts of everyone. Your life was wasted.”
Good job, VCY. Good job VCY fans. Way to go in doing God’s job for him.
May 30, 2007 @ 7:33 amSandra,
I understand the heart of your comments. You are right, sin is sin. And I believe that if I am in the presence of someone who is sinning, I should encourage and guide them to turn away from it, rebuking them face-to-face. But the moment I take what they did and tell it to others, making their sin public by way of my words, then to me that seems like gossip, self-righteousness, and judgement.
I can not condone someone calling another’s service and salvation into question (which seems to be the true issue here). That is 100% God’s business.
I am very thankful that I do not get what I deserve.
May 30, 2007 @ 10:12 amJust a thought here…and I have no way of validating it…
Since the airtime on VCY is brokered (I’m assuming), and there’s only so many good viable air hours to insert a show, maybe Ingrid and her Daddy just decided that they could make that time available to another ministry at a higher fee. If Swindoll’s been on the station for awhile he might be on a lower fee structure. Dumping his show for reasons real or imagined would free up that time for someone who’s willing to pay more.
That’s how brokered radio works. Time is money.
You’ve got the money? I’ve got the time.
Not to say that’s happening at the train wreck we all know and love as VCY.
May 30, 2007 @ 1:18 pmIs this a Christian site? (Christian meaning Christ-like) Neither the words nor the attitudes expressed, on both sides of the issue, reveal that anyone here is a Christ-follower. We do not use curse or slang words in our home. Neither do we allow the words “shut up” or “stupid”. I have told my children many times that just because they hear inappropriate language, does not mean they have to repeat it in order to tell me about it. Would Jesus talk the way Chuck Swindoll and the people of this site think it is okay to talk? On the other hand, would Jesus repeat the inappropriate talk of above said people? I don’t think so on either question. Let’s get busy about doing our Father’s business–lifting up Jesus in every area of our lives so that all men (women, boys, & girls) will be drawn to him. The cause of Christ is to reconcile wayward children to the Father.
May 30, 2007 @ 2:13 pmTim, tsk tsk. Comparing Hinckley and Oswald to Michael Moore. What they’d ever do to you? ;-)
May 30, 2007 @ 8:03 pmBLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
I’m sorry was there a coherent discussion here?
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
Pomposity, pretentiousness, thirty-dollar church words and phrases we shoot back like Pavlov’s dog….
They sound like the witch-hunters of the KJV-only movement. “We don’t allow slang words in our house…” congratu-frickin-lations. Ooops…. sorry, my bad. Substitute curse word there.
By the way, pride is a sin. Are you PROUD of being a Christian? I’m not. I’m FRICKIN GRATEFUL and thank God every day for his MERCY!!!
Scott… honesty and clarity is always the best policy. Keep telling it like it is.
May 31, 2007 @ 9:46 amBy the way Tim…
“I’ve never heard of VCY America as we don’t have a lot of Christian radio in Canada (for which, perhaps, we should be thanking God!)”
Truer words were probably never spoken.
May 31, 2007 @ 9:47 am[...] on Ingrid’s radio station’s decision to dump Chuck Swindoll from their lineup. Give A Prude By Any Other Name…Still Sounds Like a Pharisee! a [...]
June 1, 2007 @ 7:55 amChuck Swindoll’s sermons are the closest to Jesus’ teachings in the modern world. There’s a sincere, uncompromising grace evident throughout that man’s messages.
June 1, 2007 @ 8:10 am[...] Verum Serum responded to the VCY’s ridiculous smearing of Chuck Swindoll. It is a must-read this week. It’s so interesting how different things look when you view them in context. Thanks VS! [...]
June 1, 2007 @ 8:31 amHi Zachary,
First of all I am not a VCY, Ken Silva or Ingrid fan. I too think that in many instances they go overboard. However, let’s not overact….
“Have you forgotten that Jesus himself hung out with prostitutes, with fishermen, with tax collectors and every other kind of sinner? How can you possibly think that Jesus never heard coarse language during the span of his life?”
Probably what you fail to recognize is that VCY are ‘judging’ fellow christians, not the lost.
I agree, Jesus probably heard coarse language on a daily basis. I guess the question is did he use it? Don’t get me wrong, I am not for instituting a culturally, church sanctioned legal list of ‘banned’ words or topics, but I’d rather err on the side of caution.
Jesus’ life was marked by perfection. In fact he was only ever accused of blasphemy (falsely). Aren’t we supposed to become more like Christ? Sure we need to watch out for legalism, but we also need to watch out for self indulgence. You know the saying “authenticity without integrity (biblically based) is nothing more than self-indulgence”.
“Jesus didn’t care about the people who had all their spirituality together. Those who were more fascinated with what a book said than affecting change in men and women’s hearts. He called them pharisees, snakes, and the people that carried God’s Word in front of their eyes at all times, these are the people that Jesus disdained.”
They were Pharisees (it wasn’t a derogatory term in those days, that’s what they called themselves). What’s interesting is that the Pharisees started out with really good intentions and a desire to live a life of faith as God intended. Unfortunately over time they morphed into a legalist branch of Judaism adding a list of over 600 rules. Hmmm much like most Christian movements. Pick any one and dig a little and you’ll will find ‘additions’.
Actually Jesus hung out with everyone including Pharisees. One became a personal friend and was instrumental in securing his body for burial after his crucifiction.
In a conversation with that Pharisee (John3:5) Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Interestingly enough many commentators believe that water may have a double meaning: amniotic fluid as well as the Word of God. Nicodemus knew the Word but he needed to be born again by the Spirit. Jesus did disdain those who were more fascinated with the Word, not because Jesus had an issue with the Word, but because they failed to see that the Word pointed to him as the Savior. In no way did he ever disdain the Word.
Yet, none of you can see this. You will respond with your Bible verses and your Christianese and you sit proud in your own self-righteousness. Who among you has hung out with a prostitute lately and told them about a better way to live? Who among you has invited a gay couple into your home? Who among you live in the real world, and are a cause for affecting real change? You’re nothing more than hot air. Swindoll is out there everyday, doing what God has called him to do.
Are you saying that one cannot do this without using coarse language or by living in obedience to God’s word. BTW what is your track record for reaching the lost? It seems that Ingrid et al is not holding the lost accountable but Christians (however misguided that is). Let’s face it you have just assumed her and VCY’s interaction with the lost. In reality you have no idea. And you have no way of knowing how many people have come to Christ through the ministry of VCY so how can you outrightly condemn them?
you sit proud in your own self-righteousness.
And your response does not have an air of self-righteousness itself?
Which God will retort, “No one likes a tattle-tale. I knew the hearts of everyone. Your life was wasted.”
Are you sure? The fact is that you don’t know their hearts.
Since we are saved through faith, by the grace of God, I’m interested in what the phrase “Well done, good and faithful servant” means to you? This is what it means to me…
(it) means more than just a category-switch on the books somewhere Out There. It is that, to be sure (Colossians 1:13), but it is also…
…well, it’s what Paul says it is in Titus 2:11-14—
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, 12 training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, 13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.
There it is, you see. Grace brings salvation, and it then trains us in holiness.
Funny thing is you can do that and still hang out with the lost.
June 1, 2007 @ 2:58 pm“By the way, pride is a sin. Are you PROUD of being a Christian? I’m not. I’m FRICKIN GRATEFUL and thank God every day for his MERCY!!!”
Indiana Jim,
June 1, 2007 @ 5:39 pmIt is not a matter of pride. It is a matter of loving God with all of my heart, soul, mind and strength. I’m living to please him. That makes me very careful how I represent him. Living in grace doesn’t give us a license to walk and talk as we choose. Doing things are own way is what gets us in to trouble in the first place. It is also a matter of loving our neighbor as ourselves. You can only love your neighbor as yourself if you love God supremely. Life based on this premise causes us to think before we speak or act. In other words, how is what I am about to say or do going to affect someone else? Especially, if we call ourself a Christian. I, too, am grateful and thank God for his mercy.
By the way, mocking doesn’t become a child of God.
Puddleglum,
I wish I had typed that!
It made reading all the of the tripe worthwhile.
June 1, 2007 @ 11:45 pmWarren, I should know better than to post comments after reading Slice and Apprising all day. I find myself wondering how these people lack so much common sense.
It just makes me angry and frustrated. If you knew me, you would understand where my passion stems from, but avenues of discussion like this one leave much to be desired.
Forgive me if you felt that I came across with arrogance, or pride. And while I could debate endlessly with you concerning language and any other point of doctrine we could get hung up on, I’ll leave it alone.
It’s good to meet you.
June 2, 2007 @ 7:30 am“In other words, how is what I am about to say or do going to affect someone else?”
Plenty of people get put off christianity by what they see as a ‘stiff’ otherness of people in the church – they almost perceive people wearing their Christianity as a straitjacket. I choose to be different, so that the people I work with can see that it is possible to be like them (watch soccer in the pub etc) and also be a Christian. I am/try to be like them, but different, so that they see that it is possible to be a ‘normal’ person but also to be a Christian.
It might not be for everybody, but it certainly isn’t the ‘easy’ option.
BTW Zachary, since some guy murdered five of them just before Christmas, prostitutes have been a little thin on the ground round here, but those there are get ministered to plenty without my help, and yes we have invited gay couples into our house for a meal. Aren’t you tarred with your own ‘judgmental’ brush there?
Can anyone explain what thirty dollar church words are? Thanks.
June 2, 2007 @ 7:33 amHi Zachary,
Good to meet you too.
I understand exactly what you are saying. I have actually stopped reading Slice and Apprising Ministries because I often feel that they are too quick to judge and to slow to display patience with others who are probably at a different stage in their journey or who may not approach ministry in the same way. Sometimes they rip things way out of context.
One thing I have learnt lately is that “you don’t know what you don’t know”, so it’s usually best to start from there.
And for the record I also got a little agitated when I read what VCY were saying. I often listen to Chuck on the radio and have always been blessed by him. As I said, personally I don’t have a problem with coarse language. Being part of the non full time leadership in a church and a parent I typically try watch what I say (words and content) in my private life as well as my church life. But that’s my personal choice.
Lastly I wasn’t looking for a fight (or a debate). I just got the impression that your comment was a gut reaction and so I responded to that.
Anyway keep that passion burning and God bless.
June 2, 2007 @ 5:50 pmKeith. In my experience, religion is like politics. It is a subject rarely talked about with grace and patience. A fault of mine that I’m working on getting better at.
June 2, 2007 @ 8:56 pmThat’s very true, Zachary, it’s a fault of most of ours, but you seem to be doing great. Like Warren said, keep that passion burning. You are a part of the body of Christ.
Keith
June 3, 2007 @ 1:42 pmBrendt says:
May 30th, 2007 at 8:03 pm |
Tim, tsk tsk. Comparing Hinckley and Oswald to Michael Moore. What they’d ever do to you? :)
With apologies to the sniper on the grassy knoll, of course!
Speaking of which…Chuck Swindoll lives in metro Dallas. JFK WAS shot in Dallas and they DO think there may have been another shooter besides Lee Harvey Oswald involved…somebody call Ingrid, quick!
You don’t think Chuck…no, there’s no way; but then again, he DID speak positively of The Lion King and…. he DID say “heck” so…it’s a slippery slope to the grassy knoll, is it not?….no, can’t be, but, hey, that’d be a catchy lead for the 6 a.m. Monday morning news on Christian radio, wouldn’t it? WARREN REPORT MYSTERY SOLVED! LEADING CHRISTIAN RADIO PREACHER SUSPECTED OF LINKS TO LHO AND JFK
June 3, 2007 @ 10:10 pmDoesn’t anyone look at the whole man, and his true motives, and heart? Chuck Swindoll is a good man and a man of God. Behind the scenes I wonder how much of this same language is used by his critics. This sounds too much like legalism whereby other believers are “spying out his liberty.” Which of us can say God is using us because we are flawless. So, I’m not for casting stones. I’ll continue to respect Swindoll and take the good that God’s using him to bring to his listeners. Let’s press on to the greater issue, of having a heart like Christ and winning people to Jesus.
June 4, 2007 @ 8:05 am[...] retelling of his visit to the doctor about his prostate. Then there came the public commentary (which I commented on multiple times, letting my anger and frustration get the better of me). And [...]
June 4, 2007 @ 8:08 amSandra
Hey, I’m hip to you on the whole sin is sin deal, that’s why I want to take this moment to open up a caller line on the topic of ousting all fat preachers.
Excess is sin and overweight clergy are thereby dishonoring God’s word and His creation (their bodies); not to mention publicly endorsing obesity (a huge USA problem – no pun intended) and causing frail christians to stumble.
And while I’m on the topic, all you SOB’s (Sinners or Backsliders) who own cars valued at more than $15,000 or live in houses more that $300,000 or (pick your poison)…
yep, all excessive and wasteful.
Wait a sec, I’d like to hold off on the house value comment until I get my home appraised. I just want to make sure the log in my eye is smaller (or at least a different species of timber) than the log in my brother’s eye.
As a side note, I’m burning all of my C.S. Lewis books. The revelations that I’ve received from some inspired contributors to this blog have made me aware that Lewis was a reprobate worthy of censorship due to his excessive lifestyle (e.g. overweight, smoking and drinking), as well as his tendency to think for himself rather than to tow the line of traditional orthodoxy. I also think he might have talked about sex way too much.
Thanks for the enlightenment!
June 4, 2007 @ 11:11 amIt’s been said that the truth is seldom pure and never simple. Well, God’s Word is indeed pure but how it is delivered and how it is received can certainly be controversial. If some take offense at Mr. Swindall’s broadcasts that is grevious. As for me, his messages have always brought me closer to God and I am thankful for his ministry over the years. My prayer is that where there is offense there will be forgiveness and that in some way God will use this controversy for good for those who love Him and are called according to His purposes.
June 4, 2007 @ 1:32 pmI take it back. Slice of Laodicea is a complete disaster. There is little charity or doctrinal truth to be found there, despite its opposite claims. Some of what Ingrid writes is good. Most of it is a nitpicking waste of time.
June 5, 2007 @ 2:14 pmPRCalDude
it is heartening to see someone on one of these blog discussions change their mind (and not simply to an opinion that more closely matches mine). On all of your posts you have struck me as someone with well thought out ideas and opinions, and I have to say I respect you for rethinking this one.
All the best
keith
June 5, 2007 @ 3:39 pmKeith,
I just read an Ingrid vindictive where she launched into Christians for being addicted to porn. The title was “Can Christians be addicted to Porn?” I dunno, can they be addicted to drugs, alcohol? Yes, they can. They need church discipline, Word, and sacrament. Christians can sin grievously.
One commenter proceeded to confess his struggle with this addiction, then another proceeded to tell him he wasn’t truly a Christian, and that Romans 7 was Paul describing himself as an unbeliever. I’ve never heard of Romans 7 described that way by any credible doctrinal statement, confession, or pastor.
There is an underlying ethic of works-based righteousness at the site. Some of the commenters are even arguing that you can lose your salvation if you don’t walk closely with God, yet these commenters are allowed and others are denied.
Ingrid has fibromyalgia, a painful, mood altering illness. I had something like it for a while, so I understand the mood-swings and impatience it can bring. It’s not easy to control, but nevertheless, charity is needed badly over there.
June 5, 2007 @ 4:41 pmWesleyans describe it that way and Wesley was pretty credible.
Personally, I think they have the better argument on Romans 7, but I agree with your general point. There are passages that describe the struggle with sin post-conversion. Sanctification isn’t instant but ongoing.
One can go beyond Wesleyan perfectability to the heresy of Novation. It sounds like some of the Slicers are headed that way.
June 6, 2007 @ 12:56 amMy opinion would be Christians can be addicted to anything. I have a suspicion, based on absolutely zero research but a good few years of observation of the human character, tha Christians are quite open about failings they had before conversion but quite guarded about any new ones. I also believe that the devil attacks Christians where they are weak – so if you are susceptible to lying, alcoholism, porn, greed, looking at young girls in an inappropriate way, racism, a gadget habit… whatever, that’s what the devil is going to tempt you with.
When you are a Christian, falling prey to these temptations seems like a bigger failure – letting down everyone else, so it’s a bigger deal to own up to it. But being a Christian isn’t about ticking off a holy to-do list every day, it’s a relationship with your creator. Like any relationship it can have tricky times and you can do stuff that’s hurtful to God. the miracle is, as someone else put it, that we don’t get what we deserve.
I suspect that if we all knew all the stuff our friends keep hidden everyone would be amazed that they aren’t the only one coping with this, that or the other problem. So, yes, I think Christians can be addicts and I know that if you are partly enslaved to an addiction you can’t fully be Christ’s. But He doesn’t give up on us as quickly as we give up on ourselves. I know from personal experience of temptation that turning to prayer at the key moment, although not easy to do, is powerfully effective.
I’m starting to ramble, so I’m going to stop there.
June 6, 2007 @ 6:10 amI think Scott may be missing the point a little bit. Ingrid and the others are not exercising church discipline. Chuck’s church will have to deal with whether or not they want him to use those particular words in his teaching. What Ingrid is saying is that they do not want it on Christian radio, and that is their call. Christian radio is not the Church.
I will admit that some of the examples of “crude” language are very mild. I think there is an overreaction here! However, I am a pastor and I know that language evokes feelings and makes impressions. The words that we choose do matter. I have used words that I wish I could take back, not because they are wrong, but because they left the wrong impression about who I am. I am not called to try to match the language used by people who talk crudely down at the factory. I can mix with and love them without downgrading my vocabulary.
When you step onto that platform you are treading on the fragile layer of people’s souls. The words that we choose matter! Chuck knows this. He could have made different choices. I think that I have learned something from all of this that will help me in my ministry.
June 6, 2007 @ 7:43 amKeith,
I’m not sure what you mean. Apart from lust, anger, sloth, lying, and the occasional fit of rage, I think I’ve got sin pretty much mastered.
June 6, 2007 @ 8:07 am“My opinion would be Christians can be addicted to anything. ”
I agree, Keith. One major addiction that goes unnoticed is the addiction to self righteous negativity. I am being earnest. It is a stronghold that becomes an obsession and it goes unnoticed because it is mislabeled sometimes with other terms.
Watchman, discernment, prophet, and others can sometimes be covers for this addiction. This addiction relishes in the sin and shortcomings of others. It doesn’t seek correction with restoration as the desired end, no, it seeks more and more information that will feed its hunger for negativity.
When writing negativly about others this addiction is clever, metaphorical, and has literary prowess. But when called to speak of Jesus and His love, mercy, or grace it must cut and paste from other’s pens, many of which are deceased. Why? Because this addiction finds very little effervescence in that doctrinal arena, it must have negativity. It feeds on the sins of others.
This addiction never weeps for its targets, never calls for prayer, and rarely if ever writes about the good that its targets do. I am serious, many Christians are addicted to it. On my blog if I write about things I disagree with Rick Warren about, I might receive many applause laden comments. But if I write about “Man of Sorrows”, many are not energized. It is somewhat symptomatic of this addiction.
This addiction never openly confesses its own sin or shortcomings apart from posting some Puritan’s prayer of confession. It is a stronghold of pride that envisions itself as a protector of the faith and a doctrinal sentry but with little humility or accountability concerning its own tone and approach.
So can a Christian have this kind of addiction? Some better hope so.
June 6, 2007 @ 8:51 amTim,
I agree with you that it is their right to take exception to what they perceive to be Chuck’s “offensive language” and to pull Insight for Living off VCY America if they feel lead to do so. I believe I made that point in the post and earlier comments.
My point is that they aren’t just talking about pulling him off their airwaves. Ingrid and others have taken it to the next level by passing judgment on Swindoll the man and the minister AND on the entire Insight for Living ministry.
You mention Chuck’s church, which is a good point that I actually considered bringing up in the post but decided not to. Besides his role at Insight for Living, Chuck serves as the senior pastor of a church (Stonebriar Community Church) and is the chancellor of Dallas Theological Seminary. In all three of these positions, he is accountable to boards of elders and/or deacons, boards of directors, administrative councils and the like. If any of these bodies feel that Swindoll is out of bounds and/or is in need of rebuke and correction, then it is certainly his duty to submit to the authorities that God has placed over him.
But based on her words and pronouncements, I have the sense that Ingrid wouldn’t/doesn’t trust any of these supervisory bodies to be Godly enough to do the job the way she thinks it should be done.
June 6, 2007 @ 8:59 amBingo. When you read something from 9 Marks, it contains a lot more charity than is contained at Slice. There seems to be a confidence in one’s own righteousness there that is pretty alarming. Having read the article she was referencing in one of her latest posts, she should have gone in quite a different direction with it.
John,
I’m going to stick with what Calvin, Ursinus, Olvianus, and the Westminster divines say about Romans 7 vs. Finney and Wesley.
Keith,
Salvation is because of the objective work of Christ, not our obedience. Let us never forget that. Christians are capable of great sins, but Christ has instituted elders over us to restore us. Let us all hope that we are repentant when confronted by them with one of our sins.
Is anybody here denying that addiction is an actual physical problem, not just a spiritual one?
June 6, 2007 @ 9:23 amJust a quick note that if you read the Bible in its original languages, you’ll find a number of examples of wording that might make the average Sunday morning Christian feel a little uncomfortable.
For example, when a man made a vow to another man in the early Old Testament days, it wasn’t the other man’s “thigh” that he grabbed, though it’s translated that way for our benefit.
Another example, when scripture compares our righteousness to “filthy rags,” it doesn’t just mean dirty old rags. It would be something like saying our good works are like old used up tampons.
June 7, 2007 @ 1:45 pmNot that I’m a huge fan of Chuck Swindoll. I think he has gotten too political, and aligned himself way too closely with the current administration, but that’s another subject for discussion elsewhere. My point is that I don’t have any hidden agenda that would cause me to leap in and defend him.
June 7, 2007 @ 1:56 pmSorry. It’s late in the day and my brain is starting to melt. I was referring to Dobson in the last comment. I don’t have any particular feelings one way or the other about Swindoll because, to be honst, I don’t listen to him.
June 7, 2007 @ 2:06 pmFair enough. Look at the doctrinal statements of some the commenters of Slice, this one from Kevin O. Pulver
Notice anything wrong about their statement on justification:
So much for Sola Fide!
June 7, 2007 @ 4:17 pmAs a disciple of Jesus who has lived in the Milwaukee area, the VCY home, I understand that it is an honor to be on the VCY target hit list. Congratualtions Chuck Swindoll. The list of Christian leaders and ministries, both local and national, attacked by VCY is legion and reads like a modern Hebrews 11 Christian hero list. VCY sees as a primary role for itself to be the “accuser of the brethren.” We know who the leader of that pack is. If a Christian broadcaster has a daily program – 200 messages a year – and can’t annoy VCY for a few seconds once a year, that broadcaster must be more boring to the ears than watching corn grow is to the eyes.
June 25, 2007 @ 1:39 pm