Tuesday, May 29, 2007

If Rick Warren should boycott Zondervan...

then so should John MacArthur.

In recent posts (here and here) over at Christian Research Network, Rev. Ken Silva calls on Rick Warren to boycott Zondervan, the publishing house that prints his book The Purpose Driven Life. His reasoning behind this is that Zondervan is owned by News Corp, which is in turn owned by Rupert Murdoch. News Corp owns several pornography channels in Europe, and Rick Warren has apparently claimed to be Murdoch's pastor (this is still hotly contested, and is not an issue I'm going to get into here). Among its other holdings, News Corp also owns HarperCollins, which publishes The Satanic Bible. So what?

I'm glad you asked.

Zondervan, owned by News Corp/Rupert Murdoch, who also owns the company that publishes The Satanic Bible, publishes two of John MacArthur's books: The Gospel According to Jesus, and Charismatic Chaos. If Rick Warren should boycott Zondervan because of it's connection to The Satanic Bible, then Ken (and other discernment ministries that have picked up this story) should call on John MacArthur to do the same. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Labels: , ,

13 Comments:

Blogger Ken Silva said...

*sigh* Like shooting fish in a barrel...

Let me see if I can wipe the postmodern fog from your eyes there Dan.

1) "Rev. Ken Silva calls on Rick Warren to boycott Zondervan." You might notice I don't use the title "Reverend."

2) I am not the one calling for the "boycott." That is another contributor at CRN so in neither post do "I" call on Rick Warren to boycott anyone.

3) "If Rick Warren should boycott Zondervan because of it's connection to The Satanic Bible, then Ken (and other discernment ministries that have picked up this story) should call on John MacArthur to do the same. What's good for the goose is good for the gander."

Now since I did not call for the boycott this actually has zero to do with me personally. However Dan, your logic here is flawed. Rick Warren is clearly on record saying "I am Rupert's Pastor!" There is absolutely no contention there, that is a fact.

What could be contested is what Warren may have meant by saying this. But your conclusion is to commit the fallacy of the false analogy. Warren - your "goose" (apples) - said, "I am Rupert's pastor!" Dr. John MacArthur - your "gander" (oranges) - did not make such a foolish claim.

Therefore your logic doesn't hold. Those wanting the boycott are calling for it within the context of Warren allegedly pastoring an unrepentant "Christian" still openly practicing very public sin.

I'm glad I could clear that up for you Dan. You see, it really helps to have the facts straight when you level criticism. peace.

12:25 PM  
Blogger Coop said...

Postmodern fog? Nice try Ken...

Let's go over this point by point:

1) You are a pastor, are you not? I mean, come on Ken, I use the title Reverend out of respect, and you slam me for it?

2) While I will grant you that the second post was made by the "editor" (which is who, exactly?), the first post I linked to references Apprising Ministries by name, and states that it was AM that revealed the connection between Zondervan and HarperCollins.

Also, did I not clearly state in my post I was not going to get into the issue of whether or not Warren is Murdoch's pastor? That has gotten plenty of ink elsewhere, and I was not then (nor am I now) interested in rehashing the arguements. From the text of your comment here, it seems that you yourself are not too confident in that position.

Answer me this, Ken: Why does Warren being Murdoch's pastor require that he pull his book from Zondervan's rolls? If it is wrong for Warren's books to be published by the same company that puts out The Satanic Bible, then why isn't it wrong for the same company to print MacArthur's books? What about not being unequally yoked?

12:46 PM  
Blogger Watcher's Lamp said...

Hello Coop

I wrote the Saddleback post asking the questions regarding the boycott action. If you notice, the post consisted of questions. You reference John MacArthur, a point well taken. Please permit me to ask a few more questions...

If a boycott action were to be initiated who has the personal relationship with Rupert Murdock?

Who has the best selling non fiction book of all time?

Who has 30,000+ congreagation and influence over a network of 30,000+
churches across the global?

Who has the best chance of pursuading a media mogul through a demostration of economic clout?

John MacArthur or Rick Warren?

Would Murdock notice if MacArthur
pulled his titles or if Rick Warren?

Again, these are just questions posed to the individual and the group that are politically and economically in a position to even bring attention to the matter.

Jim

7:37 PM  
Blogger Coop said...

It's late, and I should already be asleep, but I'll take these quickly:

1) It is apparent that you know the answer to this question already. Rick Warren has a relationship with Rupert Murdoch; however, none of us knows precisely how deep this relationship goes.

2) I really don't know; I don't keep track of such things. Again, you apparently already know the answer.

3) I really don't think economic clout has anything to do with tha matter at hand. It doesn't matter whose book sells better, if it's being published by a company with a connection to the Satanic Bible, it would seem to be the position of yourself and Rev. Silva (oops, sorry, he doesn't like being called Reverend) that the book should be pulled from Zondervan's rolls.

4) Would Murdoch notice? I doubt it, unless someone sent him a memo or told him about it. The man oversees a huge corporate empire; I highly doubt he is intimately familiar with all of its interworkings. I used to work for a national corporation; this would be like asking the president what the sales figures were for one particular rep in our office on a specific day.

And let me close by saying this shouldn't be motivated by "bringing attention to the matter." If I'm in a position where I can do something clearly contrary to what is right, or I can do the right thing, why do I need to draw attention to it?

10:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who has the best selling non fiction book of all time?

Hrm. If I'm not mistaken, the Bible is the best-selling non fiction book of all time. Is that what you were getting at? A boycott of Zondervan Bibles?

A professor in college called the NIV a "travesty", but I don't think he took it that seriously.

6:41 PM  
Blogger Coop said...

One of the pastors at my church once said that he sometimes wonders if, when he was in college, he would have gotten away with some of the translations used in the NIV. It wasn't enough for him to condemn the entire translation, however. Just something I thought I'd add.

7:01 PM  
Anonymous Brendt said...

Silly me. I thought that Watcher's Lamp was calling for Warren to do the "right thing" (at least in WL's eyes).

But from WL's comments, i now see that the issue is actually who has more clout. The issue isn't trying to correct a wrong -- the issue is who would screw Murdoch the hardest. So Dr MacArthur has no responsibility/culpability where Warren does.

How utterly convenient. Thanks for the clarification, WL!!

8:58 PM  
Anonymous Brendt said...

Oh, and Ken, you need new material. This whole "wipe the postmodern fog" stuff is getting really old. Can't you find a new way to slam your brothers and sisters?

9:00 PM  
Anonymous PTDW said...

Here's just one example where Ken accidentally speaks in the first person when posting as "editor".

http://christianresearchnetwork.com/?p=1597

Don't bother fixing it Ken, there are more.

Oh, and I could fill a page full of links where Ken refers to himself as Rev. Silva...like every post on the old Slice. Have a look back at the wayback machine:

http://web.archive.org/web/20060101095343/http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/

Ken, if it talks like a serpent, lies like a serpent, misdirects like a serpent...

Every time you open your mouth, so lie or half truth comes out. You need to repent of all these half truths and lay weeping at the Savior's feet for how many times you play verbal slight of hand with the truth. Your critics offer you proof and you try to perform some weak, laughable Jedi mind trick.

"You might notice I don't use the title Reverend."

Oh sorry, we just have a hard time forgetting the 1,000 posts over the last two years where you did.

8:36 AM  
Anonymous PTDW said...

The link to the old Slice got cut off...here it is in two parts; paste the entire slice address including http after the long number and slash:

http://web.archive.org/web/20060101095343/
http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/

8:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me."

John 17:20-23

How it must grieve our Savior to hear such endless bickering and disunity over something so completely stupid. But I suppose that could be said for most things said by the people over at Slice, and then the corresponding critiques that are handed down elsewhere. It's really rather sad.

10:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Amen Anonymous, to the words of Jesus! But then you spoil it by your own comment. Where is the love for our brothers and sisters in Christ? Jesus loves us higher so surely we should follow His example? Thank You Lord that You will bring to the light whatever is in the dark and You will deal with it!

8:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The company is publishing "The Satanic Bible". You can try to reason your way around it but ultimately, one Bible sold goes to the profits of Satan in some way, shape, or form. They should both boycott.

2:33 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home