Buy Black Experiment

Blowing the dust off this place to link to an article on MSNBC, and hopefully spark some discussion. I got the link from a blogger in my home state of Wisconsin, about a couple in Chicago who made a commitment at the beginning of the year to buy only from black-owned businesses. Now, as a white person, if I made the commitment to buy from only white-owned businesses, I'd be called a racist and a bigot, and probably rightfully so. But what I'm wondering is, how is this any different than the commitment so many in the church make to buy only from Christian-owned businesses? We have Christian business directories in many cities around the country (including Milwaukee, where I live), and I know from firsthand experience that some Christian owned businesses will only spend radio advertising dollars on the local Christian station. To some extent, I can understand that; Christian radio stations don't take ads from just anyone, and Christian businesses see it as a win-win for them, but the question still exists; how is this different than believers buying only from believers?

Your thoughts are welcome and appreciated.

Ray Boltz "Comes Out"

I was saddened to see in my feed reader this morning a post from Slice with a link to this article from The Washington Blade, a gay newspaper. Yep, Ray Boltz, famous for such songs as "Watch the Lamb," "Thank You," and others, came out to his family almost four years ago, the same day of the deadly tsunami in the Indian ocean. While I'm not a fan of Ray's music, I am saddened by this, but I must take issue with a few things.

First and foremost, Ingrid turns this into an indictment against the CCM industry as a whole, especially the incidences of Christian and gospel singers coming out as either gay or having committed other infidelities. I don't think that's fair. Yes, there is a lot of emotion in CCM, but there is a lot of emotion in all music. If there wasn't emotion, it wouldn't be music; it would just be noise. Even the great hymns of the past and present appeal to our emotions, to the very nature of who we are (for lack of a better term), and speak to us on a deeper level.

Next, I have to take issue with the Blade's conclusions about CCM. They publish a quote from Joe Hogue, a former CCM producer who found himself with no job offers after he came out, who says that there are "a lot of closeted people in Christian music," and yet nothing is offered to back this up. Forgive me, but with no evidence, I find that hard to believe. They also hit on the allegations against some prominent figures in the Christian world, who have been questioned about being gay because they are still single, such as Mark Lowry, although they did admit it's not fair to assume such people are gay just because they're still single. Not all of us get married, and not all of us intend to or have the desire to. That doesn't make it a sin. Jesus Himself addressed this in Matthew 19:12.

In the end, I do think it's sad that Ray Boltz chose this path. And yes, I do think it is a choice. He could have gotten help, and he chose to simply push this under the rug and let it fester for years. That's never a good choice to make. And, now, we've seen where it's led him. Pray for Ray, pray for his family (he and his wife split amicably, and are still on good terms), and pray for those who will be affected by this announcement.

Much ado about...

well, nothing, really.

After all the hubbub, the wailing, the posts railing against Richard Abanes and his handling of an article by Ken Silva, after all the virtual screaming and hollering about Apprising Ministries being taken offline (which could have been easily avoided if Ken had simply taken the high road and deleted the post, even temporarily), Apprising.org is back online, with a new layout which, in my opinion, is much more attractive than the old one.

Ah, well, the beat goes on, as they say.

Like bits of data on the Internet...

...these are the posts of our blogs.

I hesitated to post on the dispute between Richard Abanes and Ken Silva, but as Pastor Silva's site, Apprising.org, appears to be offline at this hour, I decided now is as good a time as any. I was going to post a brief rundown of what has brought us to this point, but I decided that if you're reading this post, you probably know what's going on by now, and if not, do a little poking around, I'm sure you'll get caught up pretty quickly.

OK, here goes...

I have a lot of issues with Ken Silva and the things he posts at Apprising Ministries. To be brutally honest, it's hard for me to get through even one of his articles/missives, what for his liberal use of name calling (heretical this, neo-liberal that, ecumenical church of deceit, Roshi, Yogi, Guru, etc. etc. etc...). However, I read the original article in question (link is to Google cache copy), and I can certainly see where Richard Abanes would see that he was being libeled by Ken Silva. Why he has chosen to wait this long to bring up the issue, I do not know, and I do not pretend to know the motives of Pastor Silva or Rev. Abanes. Just wanted to make that clear.

My take? Both of them went too far. In spite of the fact that Richard Abanes felt that talking to Ken Silva directly would have been fruitless (and based on exchanges I've seen online between Ken and others, I'd say Richard is probably right about that), he should have at least tried to resolve the issue with Ken directly. He has also, I feel, added some unnecessary fuel to the fire over the last few days.

Now, lest you think I am letting Ken off the hook... Ken Silva has, in my assessment, blown this whole thing completely out of proportion. This is one article among THOUSANDS on his site. Ken had the chance to be the bigger person and simply pull the article from his site, no harm no foul. Instead, he posted the message from iPower (his hosting company) for all to see, and stoked the fires that soon spread across the blogosphere. Not to mention, he violated copyright laws by posting an email from Richard Abanes that had a clear copyright notice at the bottom. Furthermore, I find it hard to believe that Ken had no form of recourse with iPower. He could have called them, explained his side of the story, and discussed possible solutions to this problem. He could have gotten in touch with Abanes directly and resolved this, at which point Abanes could have redacted his complaint to iPower. It's possible Ken could have sought some sort of arbitration with iPower to prevent the deletion of his site.

Long story short, this whole thing has gone too far. While I disagree with almost everything Ken Silva has posted at apprising.org, it didn't need to come to this.

That's my opinion. That and $1.50 will get you a copy of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel tomorrow morning.

Paul was a Platonist? Well...

As often happens here at While Rome Burns, I am going to respectfully disagree with Ingrid's assessment over at Slice of Laodicea. In this case, we're looking at a video posted on YouTube (embedded below for your convenience) of an interview between Tony Jones and Jerry Johnson, president of Criswell College.




The folks who put this video together seem to think that Jones is elevating the writings of Augustine to the level of Scripture, and stating that Paul was a Platonist. I really don't think that's an accurate assessment, and here's why. First of all, he doesn't say Paul was a Platonist; he *does*, however, say that Paul was versed in Platonism, which would imply he was extremely familiar with it. This would make sense, as Paul talked about being "all things to all men," and his various writings show that he adjusted his message based on who he was speaking to in order to convey the message in a way his audience could understand. Second, Tony doesn't say that Augustine's writings are the same as Scripture; he simply states that a strong knowledge of Platonism came through in many of his theological writings, and uses that to draw a parallel. Finally, Tony doesn't deny the inspiration of the Scriptures, which Johnson implies at the end of this video. I think I would really like to get my hands on the audio of the entire interview, because it seems to me that in the video above, Tony got cut off. I've got a busy week ahead (I really shouldn't even be on now!), but I'll see what I can do. Stay tuned.

Feed Me, Seymour, Feed Me!

Great post over at CRN.Info today in response to an article by Jim Bublitz at OldTruth.com. First, I want to post the comment I left at CRN.info, and then I want to expand on this a little more, so here goes:

It was not so long ago, in our College and Career age Sunday school class, that one of the ministry leaders (ministry is led by a husband and wife team who are not paid by the church, but do receive financial assistance from the church for things related to the ministry) made the point that the Sunday (and possibly midweek) services should not be the only times you get fed. They should be, as she said, “the icing on the cake.” Yes, we are referred to as sheep, and sheep need to be taken to a place where they can eat, but the shepherd can’t eat for them. As the old saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink. Same principle applies here. The pastor is called to act as a shepherd and feed his sheep, but at the same time, the sheep need to do the actual eating. Not only that, we are told to “grow up in our salvation” and move from milk to meat.

I’ll say it once more; the pastor can put the spiritual food in front of his congregation, and show them where to find more, but they have to make the choice to actually eat it.

I also wanted to expand on this, because the point that seems to have been made by Jim and others at Old Truth is that sequential exposition is the *only* way to properly preach the Word. However, as Rick Frueh (one of the commenters at CRN.info) pointed out, even expository preaching is topical on some level, because there is a topic to the sermon, and honestly, there has to be, or the sermon won't make sense. Go read the original article at Old Truth, and then read the response at CRN.info and the comments. There are some great points made on both sides.

Miley Cyrus: Two Responses

I invite you to compare and contrast these responses to the dustup over Miley Cyrus' photo shoot for Vanity Fair.

1st Response

2nd Response

Which of these responses is seasoned with grace?

What do Gays and Lesbians Hear?

This is the question asked by Michael Spencer (aka the Internet Monk), who has also earned a place on my blogroll. Go read the whole thing; you'll be glad you did.

Trees, Tyson, and Tony Jones: SoL Strikes Again

Ingrid must have been bored today, or something. Her latest post rails against Tony Jones' new book The New Christians: Dispatches from the Emergent Frontier. The first thing that strikes me about her post, however, is that she's taking someone else's word for it (namely, that of Lighthouse Trails Research on their From the Lighthouse blog). But wait, it gets better.

First, how does she know that the trees pictured at the top of her post were used for Tony's book? Then, she drags Brian McLaren into the fray, simply because he is credited with giving Jones the idea for this book. Then, she somehow twists what he has to say into a message about the rights of chickens, and how we need to be defending them. Uh, what?

I can't write any more about this. I just can't. Go read it for yourself, but I warn you; Ingrid has really dialed up the rhetoric on this one.

On Cars and CRN

Apparently, what a pastor chooses to drive is fair game for blog fodder over at CRN, especially if they can use it to get a jab in at Erwin McManus. Seriously, how is Erwin stating that pastors should drive whatever they want a point of contention worthy of a post? Apparently pastors (and the rest of us) should run our car choices past the ever elusive "Editor" at CRN before purchasing.

So Erwin likes fast and fun cars. Most guys do. Heck, a lot of women enjoy sports cars. What business is it of theirs (or anyone else) what Erwin McManus (or any other pastor, or anyone for that matter) what kind of car is in his driveway? How is this related to salvation, grace, theology, God's call, etc.? The simple answer is: it isn't. And I think it means that CRN is getting desperate for anything they can use against those they disagree with.

Of course, someone from CRN will say that it's about the deeper issue of Erwin using the phrase "whatever we want," and that that somehow indicates a heart condition out of line with Scripture. To which I respond, if you look for what you want to find, you'll find it sooner or later, even if it's not there.

So, "Editor," I'm thinking about buying a 1995 Ford Taurus wagon. Does that meet with your approval? I'll send you pictures of the cars I'm considering if it helps.

Punk'd By The Devil

No comment needed here; just head over to Reverend Scottie's blog to see how he proved the point so many of us have been trying to make about Slice of Laodicea; they're not interested in the truth, they're interested in their version of Christianity. A form of Godliness, denying its power...

HT: Monday Morning Insight via CRN.Info

Ken Silva's El Niño

Over at CRN.Info Chris has published a response to Pastor Ken Silva's latest missive. I've decided to link to his response rather than write one of my own, because Chris expresses the point I would like to make much better than I ever could. In his missive, Pastor Silva takes an Episcopal priestess who has embraced Islam without leaving the church (no, I don't know how that works either), links her to the Emergent/emerging church, and decries the entire movement as "not of God" and responsible for all of the ills in the Church today. I encourage you to read what Chris has written on this topic.

Ingrid on Porn Addiction

In her latest post at Slice of Laodicea, Ingrid takes on pornography addiction, which is, without doubt, one of the biggest issues facing society today. It is an addiction that knows no bounds; it is not selective, it has no respect for boundaries of race, sex, class, religion, or any other category. And it is devastating.

Ingrid's answer? People who are addicted to porn can't *possibly* be Christians. Apparently she missed the parts of the Bible that deal with the fact that even the righteous stumble, but what sets them apart is that they get back up. Apparently she missed the apostle Paul talking about the thorn in his side that the Lord refused to take from him.

It's late, I'm tired, and there's so much more I could say about this, but I can't put it into words just now. I will say this; Ingrid and others in the discernment crowd have taken ministries like XXXChurch.com to task for what they do. These people are facing the porn problem head on, offering support, encouragement, and hope to those who are addicted to porn and even helping former porn stars leave the industry and start new lives. These men recognize that we cannot simply ignore the problem and hope it will go away. We cannot simply shun those who struggle with these issues.

If you struggle with an addiction to pornography, know that there is help for you. XXXChurch.com is a great place to start. Go to the Wall of Prayer and start there; you will find people who are at the same place you are, and those who have been there before. They will help you. They also offer a program that will track the Internet sites you visit and email a list of questionable sites to an accountability partner you designate. If you want to go as far as a content filter, BSafe Online offers a great one, which can also be purchased as part of a total security suite.

Let me leave you with this; we serve a God who is faithful and just to forgive us if we ask Him. If you need help, start with the One who created you, and knows you from your inmost being.

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.

Ken Said WHAT???

I couldn't let this article at CRN pass without comment. Aside from Ken's usual slander and name calling (posers to the faith, neo-liberal cult, etc.), this is the part that made my jaw drop:

This Memorial Day weekend, how about we ask God to help us remember the Biblical doctrines of grace that we as Christians are supposed to be preaching and then use these useless books of the so-called emerging church to light our bonfires. Let’s use them to fuel our cookouts, at least then they might just produce something useful after all…

I cannot believe that Ken is actually advocating that we burn books! People, this is what the Nazis did! And lest Ken try to pull the article and say it never happened, I have taken a screenshot.

Is Ken really advocating this kind of suppression of ideas? Burning books?

I still can't believe it.

That's it, I'm done.

I am officially finished commenting at the new Slice of Laodicea. I have had two comments on one post today result in Ingrid acting as if I was attacking her personally, and the second comment was to try and shed some light on what I was getting at in the first comment. I didn't call Ingrid crazy, I didn't say she was standing on a street corner screaming about fire and brimstone, nor did I say that all fundamentalist churches do so, or that they are all crazy or have bad hygiene. I am pleased to inform Ingrid (and anyone else who reads this) that I am dealing from a full deck of cards, thank you very much, and that I don't get my theology from late night comedy sketches. I have, however, come to a realization; there is no benefit to contributing to the comment section at Slice of Laodicea. To be honest, after the response I received to one of my early comments at Slice 2.0, I don't know why I continued commenting there at all. My comments were taken in entirely the wrong way and words were put into my mouth. But, then again, coming from the "discernment/remnant" crowd, should I expect any different?

A Slice of Hypocrisy at CRN

In a recent post (by the ambiguous "editor") over at CRN, Doug Pagitt was criticized for removing a post from his blog. I would like to note, and make clear, that while I didn't see the original post (and therefore will have to take the "editor's" word for it), Doug did post on *why* the original is now gone, and why he has replaced it. This is far more than we have seen from CRN in it's former incarnation, Slice of Laodicea (which has been reborn, but that's another topic). In it's days as SoL, multiple posts simply disappeared off the site, with no explanation. It was as if they had never existed, and many would likely not know they had ever been there if not for the work of bloggers who did see the posts, and pointed readers to the Internet Archive at wayback.org. This is hypocrisy of the highest order. Pagitt at least gave us an explanation for what he did and why; Slice/CRN would prefer to act as though the post in question simply never happened, as long as it's on *THEIR* site.

Boy Scouts 1, ACLU 0

It seems that some time ago, the ACLU got all hot and bothered because the Boy Scouts hold their Jamboree every four years at Fort A.P. Hill in Virginia. As usual, they thought this was a violation of the separation of church and state. Nice try, guys. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the ACLU had no standing to bring the lawsuit. World Net Daily has the full story.

[H/T: Air1 Radio]

"Hate Crimes" Bill Expected This Week

We've discussed this here before, and now it's definately time to act. Representative John Conyers of Michigan is planning to introduce the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act in Congress this week. And the President is the only one who can stop it. The full story is at The Christian Post.

Ninth Circuit Court Strikes Again

They're at it again. In a recent ruling, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California, in a suit filed by employees of the city of Oakland, decided that "municipal employers can completely censor the terms 'natural family,' 'marriage' and 'family values' as hate speech." But, apparently, memvers of the city's Gay-Straight Employee's Alliance (not to mention high-level city officials) are allowed to slam the Bible and Christiantity openly across the city-wide email network, and call the employee's "hateful." When the affected employees compained, they were threatened with the loss of their jobs, and the court decided that had no effect on free speech. Huh?

In their decision, the court wrote "the district court correctly held that [the City of Oakland] had a more substantial interest in maintaining the efficient operation of their office than appellants had in their speech, appellants cannot establish a viable free speech claim." Again I say, huh?

Thankfully, the Pro-Family Law Center is willing to fight this in the Supreme Court. Makes you glad John Edwards made it onto the bench, doesn't it?

This is an absolutely critical issue. Our rights as Christians are being taken away bit by bit, and we can't simply stand by and let it happen. I encourage you to get the word out about this, and keep following the story. I also recommend reading the full article at ChristiansUnite.com for more.