Friday, June 24, 2011
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Atheists are smarter
Lifted wholesale from http://voxday.blogspot.com/:
The 5 or 6 point difference in IQ between believers & non-believers is touted by atheists. But most atheists are leftists, so it raises the question of whether they are open to discussing the more serious gaps in other demographic slices. Frinstance, the standard deviation lag of blacks in IQ in comparison to whites. It would be a positive if atheists who claim intellectual superiority on the basis of a few IQ points would open their minds to not only God, but also the fact of human biodiversity. Moreover, the atheists' IQ advantage is about the same as the average male IQ over that of women. From a public policy PoV, taking IQ seriously would mean a complete abolition of cultural Marxism and multi-cult in our institutions since intellectual and moral performance are closely tied to IQ score.
All this by way of saying that if atheists choose to boast of a small difference in IQ points, they would necessarily also have to accept disparities in mental performance elsewhere in society. Atheists however are not an honest lot in intellectual matters... it's important to remember that a minimal IQ advantage doesn't indicate an attendant level of higher moral development. It's much easier to persuade an intelligent person to support passively a monstrous regime since the abstractions involved appeal to the intellect rather than any basic moral sensibility. It's true that on a personal level, atheists are squeamish about actually pulling the trigger, so their level of incarceration might be average or below average. This is probably not true if the atheist is working for the state or the military, in which case, the moral is the same as state policy.
In the ballot box though, atheists are more likely to support cruel policies and candidates since the resulting evil is carried out by an abstraction (i.e., "the state") acting on behalf of another abstraction, "the common good." When the consequences of these policies are brought to the atheist, he merely shrugs and says, "we need to provide more money and resources to make the abstraction work better." High IQ fall in love with pretty ideas even if they produce a lot of ugly in the real world. This is true of both atheists and believers, but the believer is circumscribed by a moral law that transcends generations and even society itself.
The 5 or 6 point difference in IQ between believers & non-believers is touted by atheists. But most atheists are leftists, so it raises the question of whether they are open to discussing the more serious gaps in other demographic slices. Frinstance, the standard deviation lag of blacks in IQ in comparison to whites. It would be a positive if atheists who claim intellectual superiority on the basis of a few IQ points would open their minds to not only God, but also the fact of human biodiversity. Moreover, the atheists' IQ advantage is about the same as the average male IQ over that of women. From a public policy PoV, taking IQ seriously would mean a complete abolition of cultural Marxism and multi-cult in our institutions since intellectual and moral performance are closely tied to IQ score.
All this by way of saying that if atheists choose to boast of a small difference in IQ points, they would necessarily also have to accept disparities in mental performance elsewhere in society. Atheists however are not an honest lot in intellectual matters... it's important to remember that a minimal IQ advantage doesn't indicate an attendant level of higher moral development. It's much easier to persuade an intelligent person to support passively a monstrous regime since the abstractions involved appeal to the intellect rather than any basic moral sensibility. It's true that on a personal level, atheists are squeamish about actually pulling the trigger, so their level of incarceration might be average or below average. This is probably not true if the atheist is working for the state or the military, in which case, the moral is the same as state policy.
In the ballot box though, atheists are more likely to support cruel policies and candidates since the resulting evil is carried out by an abstraction (i.e., "the state") acting on behalf of another abstraction, "the common good." When the consequences of these policies are brought to the atheist, he merely shrugs and says, "we need to provide more money and resources to make the abstraction work better." High IQ fall in love with pretty ideas even if they produce a lot of ugly in the real world. This is true of both atheists and believers, but the believer is circumscribed by a moral law that transcends generations and even society itself.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Passing on the performance car legacy - budget Camaro build - bonus episode
Episode one, purchase and bodywork.
Episode two, mechanicals and interior.
Episode three, final details and the finished car.
Bonus episode, LS conversion.
Double bonus episode, converting the 4L60e tailshaft housing to a mechanical speedo drive.
Triple bonus episode, the details leading up to the purchase of this car and what it meant.
--------------------
That last project was supposed to be my 1967 Camaro coupe. It had just achieved glittering road-worthiness after a ground-up rebuild when my friend Duncan called. I could tell something was on his mind. His voice shaky, he whispered, “I want a muscle car.”
I knew what was up. Those five words told an entire story, a tale of youthful indiscretions behind the wheel of dad’s car, of gas fumes and perfume, of cruising and girls and grease. Memories of a time past, coming forth in the wake of advancing age and graying hair, the heady brew of nostalgia mixed with adrenaline.
Yes, Duncan was afflicted. His disease, long dormant, had flared up like an itched that had to be scratched. And I owned the scratch.
But now I had a predicament. I worked very hard on this car. Do I really want to sell it, this last project?
That evening I told my wife. But she already knew before I opened my mouth. 30 years of marriage leaves few secrets uncovered. And to my amazement she became an enabler. She said she knew how much I loved lying under cars busting knuckles. Why should I give up something I love?
So Duncan and I quickly reached an accord. He got the keys and I got funding for my next project.
That car turned out to be another 1967 Camaro, a convertible. My plan was to simply do some mechanical upgrades and drive it. But I underestimated the sickness, a particularly virulent strain known as “while-I’m-at-it.” I’m doing the brakes, so why not replace the bushings while-I’m-at-it? The motor is out, so I’ll paint the engine compartment while-I’m-at-it. That’s the way it works.
With parts now scattered all over my garage floor and a stack of parts catalogs with dog-eared pages, I eventually realized I was off plan. I decided that I would finish the mechanicals, give it a temporary paint job, and get it on the road. I could restore the body later, but enjoy the car now. It was summer after all, made to order for a convertible.
After a trip to a “jobs-killing” big box store and a quick spray job, the car was now resplendent in a surprisingly glossy Rust Oleum fire truck red. The rest of the car was only partially assembled with no windshield and no door handles. An empty five gallon bucket served as the seat. It was enough.
Ah, there is nothing like the maiden cruise. Duncan and his son Nate were on hand to witness the momentous event. The engine roared to life, mellifluous melodies of fossil fuel detonation dancing through my brain, outgassing through a pair of Purple Hornies, which are, well, “mufflers.”
The car sounded strong.
Nate rode with me, wide eyed, and Duncan followed behind in my previous Camaro. I smiled. Nate was infected. Indeed, he would go on to purchase a big block Nova several years later.
A quick shakedown trip around the block confirmed that this Camaro passed muster. Duncan noted that there were no unfortunate emissions of liquid or smoke, but what appeared to be a mouse nest was discharged from the folds of the convertible top.
This is the stuff of personal legends, memory-making at its finest. As a bonus, a new generation has taken up the flickering torch of American performance automobiling and thrust it forward with rekindled flame, lighting the way for a continued appreciation of a time when Detroit muscle ruled the world.
Monday, June 13, 2011
A facebook friend creates doctrinal controversy
The next 3 out of 10 indicators that you might be in an emergent church. 4.They come up with "new" extra biblical revelations and visions that are supposedly from God. 5. They avoid mentioning let alone studying end-times bible prophecy(eschatology). 6. They try to teach "biblical truths" out of movies rather than opening up the Holy Bible and preaching the Word!
Me: The emergent church is a troubling trend. Being culturally relevant has translated into compromising the truth of Scripture.
That being said, I've never been thrilled with pre-trib dispensational theology.
M.L.: in my opinion, very troubling. Rick Warren was quoted as saying that fundamental/biblical Christianity is the biggest threat to the emergent church. Other ultra emergent leaders and their followers make comments like "we should... take them(fundamental/biblical Christians) out back and shoot them". Sounds like fuel for persecution of true Christians. I am just finishing a book, which I recommend, that reinforces the bible and doesn't try to redefine it like most pop-culture literature in Christendom today. It's called "Faith Undone" by Roger Oakland.
As far as the eschatology comment that I included, I am talking about eschatology as a whole. I myself am pre-trib, but I believe that in the end it doesn't really matter. What matters is that people be truly born-again, truly saved.
R.L.: Here's the link for that forum so you can watch it for yourself. I'd suggest to go into it without your mind made up, but that's probably not going to happen. :-) http://www.facebook.com/l/d7966/www.saddlebackcivilforum.com/peaceinaglobalizedsociety/"
R.L.: The basis of their "talk" is to love your neighbor as you love yourself. It's not about a one-world government. If you keep looking for that in every preacher you don't like, or read that others don't like, you'll find that speck in their eye every single time. Who quoted Rick Warren as saying what you quoted above? I'm not about defending him, by the way, but goodness, somewhere, sometime, all this criticism has a way of boomeranging. Mario, you should go to Bible school and become a pastor so you can be criticized like the rest of us. :-) You seem to have it all figured out and know exactly what a "true Christian" looks like, when apparently no one else but those you find on the internet know what that means. I know we'll disagree. I don't want a long, long cut and paste answer, even though that's your right to do. We're still going to be at an impasse.
R.L.: "Have you heard of Matt Chandler? Pastor at The Village Church in Tx. He's one of the most straight forward preachers I've ever heard. He's not easy on the Christian or the hypocrite. I podcast his stuff."
Me: Wow, that is harsh, Robin. It is perfectly acceptable to evaluate churches and pastors based on biblical truth. Leaders must be held to account (Heb 13:17).
Mario, keep standing for the truth. You have nothing to apologize for.
R.L.: Rich, not trying to be harsh. It seems that just internet preachers seem to know what the "true church" is. I don't buy that. I think THAT is harsh, as is the way the Church is portrayed by them. I know that verse too. Everyone is held accountable and that verse has been used as an excuse for wrong behavior and treatment of pastors for way too long, hence the comment about going to Bible college. If you were a pastor, you'd know what I'm saying. It's the hardest job on the planet. Bozeman has some great churches with amazing Christians in them. No one can convince me that Bozeman is void of this "true Church." Not gonna buy that either. And no, I'm not deceived."
Me: All of your comments are about things no one in this thread has commented upon.
No one has lumped pastors into the "evil" category. No one has dishonored the leaders of any particular church. No one has suggested there is no true church in Bozeman or anywhere else. And no one has accused you of being deceived.
I don't buy the "you wouldn't know unless you are one" rhetoric. That argument then seems to extend to the "you aren't one, so you can't have an opinon about it" argument. I reject that as well. And I think I have the Spirit of God too.
Robin, you seem to have a chip on your shoulder. Apparently someone has wounded you as a result of being a pastor's wife. Just a guess, I really don't know, except by the evidence of your odd comments. However, those injuries, if they did happen, can take the form of curses, and you can make them null by prayer and deliverance.
R.L.: It stems from a previous conversation with Mario.
D.L.: As I read the full thread, I have disagree with you on a couple of things and I'll clarify one thing. First, Robin is not walking with wound from being a pastor's wife. I rarely use the term "reject" because it closes the conversation rather than keep it open for more dialogue."
D.L.: Sorry about that. I do deplore the new feature on Facbook that ends you comment when you hit return. Arg! Robin's comments stem from several previous and the current conversation so you had to have been a part of those."
M.L.: thanks for the encouragement. I don't take it personal. I believe that we are living in times where we have to be direct, clear and uncompromising with the Word of God and as watchmen 'expose the unfruitful works of darkness...' 'We wrestle not against flesh and blood' Our battle is for truth. That has always been the battle. There are many people headed toward the slaughter b/c of this ('beautiful' 'peaceful' Dan.8:24-25), emergent agenda and we were there too but God in His mercy took us out and opened our eyes.
The emergent church expects you to check your brain at the door and not question anything or if you stand on decisive truth you are intolerant,legalistic, hateful & archaic. Such is the reproach & offense of the true christian. Sounds like a cult to me.
D.L.: I did it again! (hate the return thing! The issue seems to be that the comments made are combative from the beginning, so the comments back are combative and there you have it, Christians taking shots at one another instead of focusing on the mission of Christ, that is reach the lost and making disciples. The thing about "you wouldn't know unless you were one" does have truth in it, whether you reject it or not. I don't pretend to know what a business owner goes through, or a US Senator or or a doctor the President of the United States because I've served in those roles. No one said you didn't have the Spirit of God because you're not a pastor (it seems that's what you're perhaps making an accusation of) and you can have an opinion. But I've never walked your in life shoes in what you do, you've never walked in mine as a pastor. A little bit like "you wouldn't know what a woman goes through unless you are one". Not that far, but we don't know what it's like for someone unless we walked in their shoes is what she was trying to say. That's the main point. The dishonoring happens when someone consistently makes judgements and comments about the Church (big C) and doesn't take into account they are judging the body of Christ, yes even the Bride of Christ. The "chip on the shoulder" stems more from frustrations from rarely, if ever seeing encouraging words that the Church is doing something the Bible teaches, which I think they are. So yes, in my opinion there has been dishonoring of churches and their pastors who are doing their very best to serve God as best they can. We should hold each other to account, but we must do so in the spirit of love and not condemnation. Jesus said that the world would know us but our love, not our judgement. " 34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” John 13:34-35. I love the Church, the body of Christ. We aren't perfect, we can always improve, we strive to know God better and serve him better. However I believe with all my heart that pastors in Bozeman, the Gallatin Valley, across Montana and the United States are diligently doing the best they can, searching the Scriptures with pure hearts and teaching what they feel the Holy Spirit is leading them to teach week in and week out to win the lost and build up the body of Christ. We aren't perfect and I do believe absolutely there are those who use the Church for they own gain, who aren't preaching truth and who are false teachers. That, however is not the majority pastors and leaders I see, and meet hundreds a year from all over the world. For the most part, the vast majority are seeking God with their whole heart. The term "emergent church" is very confusing because the truth is NO ONE has the corner on the market for what it is. I just know what my calling and mission is and I do all I can to fulfill my part for the Cause of Christ because his return is imminent and coming soon, praise God! Ed Stetzer has done exhaustive research on this and he would be a good one to check out as well.
R.L.: There has been multiple dishonoring comments about pastor's from particular churches, such as Rick Warren. Yes, it has been said there is no "true church" in Bozeman. Again, from previous conversations. I didn't say you couldn't have an opinion. It's FB, you can have all the opinions you want. You don't know what it's like to be a pastor and have people slashing at pastors on a consistent basis. Please don't be offended by that - it's just a reality that's my side of the conversation. I'm just about to start my 39th year in ministry. I was born, raised and married into it. You'd better believe there are hurts in ministry! Way too many! The chip on my shoulder isn't from hurt - it's from deep frustration from the consistent bashing of preachers that are made out to sound like the anti-Christ, but aren't, calling them false prophets. This isn't about wounding. It's about continual criticism. Again, as Matthew 7 says (MSG), that kind of criticism WILL boomerang. It's a very serious thing to criticize who God considers "the Lord's anointed," whomever that might be. God selects them, we don't. What if pastors of churches get on FB and criticize particular people in their churches, BY NAME? Wouldn't we all love that? Of course not. If it's okay to bash pastors, then let's bash everyone? There's a reason Jesus didn't let the disciples behave that way. He hates that kind of behavior because it's contrary to His Spirit. Everyone is going to be judged, BY GOD. If we take it upon ourselves to do the judging, that will boomerang. As I've said in previous conversations, the Great Commission is very, very clear. It doesn't include what's happening here. You can't pick and choose who you love and how you treat them. Jesus taught the disciples how to love Pharisees and Samaritans, even Romans and Greeks!! That's a big deal for us to grasp, and even harder to play out in our lives. I don't have it all figured out yet. None of us do. Our job it to love. Love is not a watered down Gospel - it IS the Gospel!! That's why Jesus was killed - He brought a message of love and the religious crowds who loved judging their neighbor didn't want to hear His message of "love your neighbor" any longer. It's not love to call someone out, whom you don't personally know or have relationship with, on FB. It would be love to call them out in private and have that conversation without criticizing them in this type of forum. That's dishonoring, foolish and not our job. THAT is my point.
Me: [shift] [enter] allows you to make paragraphs.
Me: Well, that clarifies some things.
Dan and Robin, you both have covered a lot of ground in your posts. It's not that I don't agree with much of what you said, it's just that if there's a history with you and Mario, you can't say that it automatically falls to Mario to do what you think is the "right thing." The phone works fine on each end of the line, you know.
As far as the public calling out of doctrinal error, I don't see anywhere in Scripture where it is forbidden. Matthew 18 is not a universal catch-all passage regarding the treatment of these matters. Jesus himself was quite harsh with the pharisees, for example, calling them out publicly. Are we not also destined to judge the world? The angels? Are we not called to judge disputes between believers?
Yes, we make judgments every day. It is right and proper that we do. Like the Westbrough Baptists. Harold Camping. Scientology. I could go on. The thing that is clear is that there is a distinction between the man and the issue at hand. The man is not being judged, the issue is, and rightly so.
Me: I'm sorry that I still have to disagree with you regarding the "walk in someone's shoes issue." That line of thinking is employed every day by abortion rights advocates, for example, who claim that men cannot have an opinion about abortion because men can't get pregnant. The technique is a conversation stopper, it pre-emptively dismisses the debate.
I'm sure that being a pastor is tough. What makes you think that it is uniquely so? What makes you think that people cannot know what it's like without being one? On what basis do you make this dismissive judgment? It is one thing to assert this, it is another thing entirely to make a blanket statement about everyone who isn't a pastor. Yes, it can be true, but it isn't even close to axiomatic.
As far as Robin being wounded, I did not say she was, I wonder if this was the case. It sure sounded that way. Both you and her sound defensive about the issue of pastors being beaten up, so it is quite natural to wonder such a thing. People do not get defensive unless something needs defending as it were.
Me: Some people do slash at pastors. Most do not. Some pastors derserve it, unfortunately. Most do not. It is not appropriate to slash at pastors, but I wonder if that is the right word. Again, there is a difference between the man and the issue. If a pastor is a consistently bad preacher, for example, he should not be allowed to continue in the pulpit.
Frankly, the role of pastor is very misunderstood and rarely manifests in a biblical way. The pastor at the top of the church pyramid is a disfunctional model, so it does not surprise me that pastors feel mistreated. Ephesians 4:11 paints a very different picture of church leadership.
Well, I guess I inserted myself into an ongoing and if I may say, unholy dispute. Maybe God brought me in to break it up, Who knows?
You guys best get on with fixing the situation before God is dishonored further.
D.L.: So this is why I rarely comment on Facebook because we are so misunderstood. First and foremost, I love Mario (I love you Mario!) and I apologize if I've injured you from my comments. I love to have these conversations face to face because then we can see each others emotions and heart. The simple principle of walking in someone else's shoes simple means I won't make judgements about you and what you do without considering the fact that I don't do what you do and visa versa. Again, You CAN have and opinion and I value it. I'm only making the point that.
D.L.: So this is why I rarely comment on Facebook because we are so misunderstood. First and foremost, I love Mario (I love you Mario!) and I apologize if I've injured you from my comments. I love to have these conversations face to face because then we can see each others emotions and heart. The simple principle of walking in someone else's shoes simple means I won't make judgements about you and what you do without considering the fact that I don't do what you do and visa versa. That's all, just the old saying "Don't judeg a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes", regardless of the occupation. Again, You CAN have and opinion and I value it. We all have things to learn from each other and should be open to conversations with each other to make each other better. The issue, not the man should be judged is good! We must, like the Bereans take things to Scripture. No argument there. I do agree that our models of church are imperfect, and believe I continue to hear many ideas of the models are. Church should be done as a team rather than focused only on one leader. Yet, there is the role of a leader and how that all shakes out, we get to work out together. That's my goal, anyway. How you view is how you view it, and that's okay, too. I don't believe any one person has had a sudden revelation of what that role is. If they did, a hundred more would come out with an hundred more revelations. We do the best we can as we work it out together, keeping Jesus the focus and loving each other the basis for our interaction. I love doctrinal discussion, bur rarely on Facebook because so many times are words are misunderstood. I have no quarrel with Mario, period. If we can't have disagreements and continue to be friends, what do we have? I still love he and Julie regardless of how we view doctrinal issues. Fact is, I do believe it is an "in house debate" and should be in house. The problem is, once in on Facebook, it's out there for the world to see and in fact Facebook invites public comment. I don't want it to judgemental, and in the end some times we have to agree to disagree. That doesn't change my love for them! Finally, I don't believe God is dishonored by these conversations but he is dishonored when we take pot shots at each other with a heart of bitterness and intention to hurt. I don't think that was the intention of Mario or Robin. Can we say things better? Sure! Can we learn from these things? I hope so. Be blessed, my friends and I hope we can continue friendships through conversations (even lively ones!), prayer for each other and love for God.
D.L.: I deleted the comments I made because I didn't want thing to go any further on Facebook. I did direct message Mario. I'm not in a dispute with anyone. That's why I rarely and now never make public comments on Facebook regarding things like this. It's almost always misunderstood and people start to get the wrong idea. I'm sorry thing looked that way. I can strongly disagree with Mario doctrinally, but that doesn't mean I don't love him or have a personal dispute with him. What I believe dishonors God is when we take disagreements and air them for the whole world to see. I'm not going there and neither is Robin anymore. Be blessed my friend and keep sharing Jesus in the Gallatin Valley. I miss that place!!!
Me: The emergent church is a troubling trend. Being culturally relevant has translated into compromising the truth of Scripture.
That being said, I've never been thrilled with pre-trib dispensational theology.
M.L.: in my opinion, very troubling. Rick Warren was quoted as saying that fundamental/biblical Christianity is the biggest threat to the emergent church. Other ultra emergent leaders and their followers make comments like "we should... take them(fundamental/biblical Christians) out back and shoot them". Sounds like fuel for persecution of true Christians. I am just finishing a book, which I recommend, that reinforces the bible and doesn't try to redefine it like most pop-culture literature in Christendom today. It's called "Faith Undone" by Roger Oakland.
As far as the eschatology comment that I included, I am talking about eschatology as a whole. I myself am pre-trib, but I believe that in the end it doesn't really matter. What matters is that people be truly born-again, truly saved.
R.L.: Here's the link for that forum so you can watch it for yourself. I'd suggest to go into it without your mind made up, but that's probably not going to happen. :-) http://www.facebook.com/l/d7966/www.saddlebackcivilforum.com/peaceinaglobalizedsociety/"
R.L.: The basis of their "talk" is to love your neighbor as you love yourself. It's not about a one-world government. If you keep looking for that in every preacher you don't like, or read that others don't like, you'll find that speck in their eye every single time. Who quoted Rick Warren as saying what you quoted above? I'm not about defending him, by the way, but goodness, somewhere, sometime, all this criticism has a way of boomeranging. Mario, you should go to Bible school and become a pastor so you can be criticized like the rest of us. :-) You seem to have it all figured out and know exactly what a "true Christian" looks like, when apparently no one else but those you find on the internet know what that means. I know we'll disagree. I don't want a long, long cut and paste answer, even though that's your right to do. We're still going to be at an impasse.
R.L.: "Have you heard of Matt Chandler? Pastor at The Village Church in Tx. He's one of the most straight forward preachers I've ever heard. He's not easy on the Christian or the hypocrite. I podcast his stuff."
Me: Wow, that is harsh, Robin. It is perfectly acceptable to evaluate churches and pastors based on biblical truth. Leaders must be held to account (Heb 13:17).
Mario, keep standing for the truth. You have nothing to apologize for.
R.L.: Rich, not trying to be harsh. It seems that just internet preachers seem to know what the "true church" is. I don't buy that. I think THAT is harsh, as is the way the Church is portrayed by them. I know that verse too. Everyone is held accountable and that verse has been used as an excuse for wrong behavior and treatment of pastors for way too long, hence the comment about going to Bible college. If you were a pastor, you'd know what I'm saying. It's the hardest job on the planet. Bozeman has some great churches with amazing Christians in them. No one can convince me that Bozeman is void of this "true Church." Not gonna buy that either. And no, I'm not deceived."
Me: All of your comments are about things no one in this thread has commented upon.
No one has lumped pastors into the "evil" category. No one has dishonored the leaders of any particular church. No one has suggested there is no true church in Bozeman or anywhere else. And no one has accused you of being deceived.
I don't buy the "you wouldn't know unless you are one" rhetoric. That argument then seems to extend to the "you aren't one, so you can't have an opinon about it" argument. I reject that as well. And I think I have the Spirit of God too.
Robin, you seem to have a chip on your shoulder. Apparently someone has wounded you as a result of being a pastor's wife. Just a guess, I really don't know, except by the evidence of your odd comments. However, those injuries, if they did happen, can take the form of curses, and you can make them null by prayer and deliverance.
R.L.: It stems from a previous conversation with Mario.
D.L.: As I read the full thread, I have disagree with you on a couple of things and I'll clarify one thing. First, Robin is not walking with wound from being a pastor's wife. I rarely use the term "reject" because it closes the conversation rather than keep it open for more dialogue."
D.L.: Sorry about that. I do deplore the new feature on Facbook that ends you comment when you hit return. Arg! Robin's comments stem from several previous and the current conversation so you had to have been a part of those."
M.L.: thanks for the encouragement. I don't take it personal. I believe that we are living in times where we have to be direct, clear and uncompromising with the Word of God and as watchmen 'expose the unfruitful works of darkness...' 'We wrestle not against flesh and blood' Our battle is for truth. That has always been the battle. There are many people headed toward the slaughter b/c of this ('beautiful' 'peaceful' Dan.8:24-25), emergent agenda and we were there too but God in His mercy took us out and opened our eyes.
The emergent church expects you to check your brain at the door and not question anything or if you stand on decisive truth you are intolerant,legalistic, hateful & archaic. Such is the reproach & offense of the true christian. Sounds like a cult to me.
D.L.: I did it again! (hate the return thing! The issue seems to be that the comments made are combative from the beginning, so the comments back are combative and there you have it, Christians taking shots at one another instead of focusing on the mission of Christ, that is reach the lost and making disciples. The thing about "you wouldn't know unless you were one" does have truth in it, whether you reject it or not. I don't pretend to know what a business owner goes through, or a US Senator or or a doctor the President of the United States because I've served in those roles. No one said you didn't have the Spirit of God because you're not a pastor (it seems that's what you're perhaps making an accusation of) and you can have an opinion. But I've never walked your in life shoes in what you do, you've never walked in mine as a pastor. A little bit like "you wouldn't know what a woman goes through unless you are one". Not that far, but we don't know what it's like for someone unless we walked in their shoes is what she was trying to say. That's the main point. The dishonoring happens when someone consistently makes judgements and comments about the Church (big C) and doesn't take into account they are judging the body of Christ, yes even the Bride of Christ. The "chip on the shoulder" stems more from frustrations from rarely, if ever seeing encouraging words that the Church is doing something the Bible teaches, which I think they are. So yes, in my opinion there has been dishonoring of churches and their pastors who are doing their very best to serve God as best they can. We should hold each other to account, but we must do so in the spirit of love and not condemnation. Jesus said that the world would know us but our love, not our judgement. " 34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” John 13:34-35. I love the Church, the body of Christ. We aren't perfect, we can always improve, we strive to know God better and serve him better. However I believe with all my heart that pastors in Bozeman, the Gallatin Valley, across Montana and the United States are diligently doing the best they can, searching the Scriptures with pure hearts and teaching what they feel the Holy Spirit is leading them to teach week in and week out to win the lost and build up the body of Christ. We aren't perfect and I do believe absolutely there are those who use the Church for they own gain, who aren't preaching truth and who are false teachers. That, however is not the majority pastors and leaders I see, and meet hundreds a year from all over the world. For the most part, the vast majority are seeking God with their whole heart. The term "emergent church" is very confusing because the truth is NO ONE has the corner on the market for what it is. I just know what my calling and mission is and I do all I can to fulfill my part for the Cause of Christ because his return is imminent and coming soon, praise God! Ed Stetzer has done exhaustive research on this and he would be a good one to check out as well.
R.L.: There has been multiple dishonoring comments about pastor's from particular churches, such as Rick Warren. Yes, it has been said there is no "true church" in Bozeman. Again, from previous conversations. I didn't say you couldn't have an opinion. It's FB, you can have all the opinions you want. You don't know what it's like to be a pastor and have people slashing at pastors on a consistent basis. Please don't be offended by that - it's just a reality that's my side of the conversation. I'm just about to start my 39th year in ministry. I was born, raised and married into it. You'd better believe there are hurts in ministry! Way too many! The chip on my shoulder isn't from hurt - it's from deep frustration from the consistent bashing of preachers that are made out to sound like the anti-Christ, but aren't, calling them false prophets. This isn't about wounding. It's about continual criticism. Again, as Matthew 7 says (MSG), that kind of criticism WILL boomerang. It's a very serious thing to criticize who God considers "the Lord's anointed," whomever that might be. God selects them, we don't. What if pastors of churches get on FB and criticize particular people in their churches, BY NAME? Wouldn't we all love that? Of course not. If it's okay to bash pastors, then let's bash everyone? There's a reason Jesus didn't let the disciples behave that way. He hates that kind of behavior because it's contrary to His Spirit. Everyone is going to be judged, BY GOD. If we take it upon ourselves to do the judging, that will boomerang. As I've said in previous conversations, the Great Commission is very, very clear. It doesn't include what's happening here. You can't pick and choose who you love and how you treat them. Jesus taught the disciples how to love Pharisees and Samaritans, even Romans and Greeks!! That's a big deal for us to grasp, and even harder to play out in our lives. I don't have it all figured out yet. None of us do. Our job it to love. Love is not a watered down Gospel - it IS the Gospel!! That's why Jesus was killed - He brought a message of love and the religious crowds who loved judging their neighbor didn't want to hear His message of "love your neighbor" any longer. It's not love to call someone out, whom you don't personally know or have relationship with, on FB. It would be love to call them out in private and have that conversation without criticizing them in this type of forum. That's dishonoring, foolish and not our job. THAT is my point.
Me: [shift] [enter] allows you to make paragraphs.
Me: Well, that clarifies some things.
Dan and Robin, you both have covered a lot of ground in your posts. It's not that I don't agree with much of what you said, it's just that if there's a history with you and Mario, you can't say that it automatically falls to Mario to do what you think is the "right thing." The phone works fine on each end of the line, you know.
As far as the public calling out of doctrinal error, I don't see anywhere in Scripture where it is forbidden. Matthew 18 is not a universal catch-all passage regarding the treatment of these matters. Jesus himself was quite harsh with the pharisees, for example, calling them out publicly. Are we not also destined to judge the world? The angels? Are we not called to judge disputes between believers?
Yes, we make judgments every day. It is right and proper that we do. Like the Westbrough Baptists. Harold Camping. Scientology. I could go on. The thing that is clear is that there is a distinction between the man and the issue at hand. The man is not being judged, the issue is, and rightly so.
Me: I'm sorry that I still have to disagree with you regarding the "walk in someone's shoes issue." That line of thinking is employed every day by abortion rights advocates, for example, who claim that men cannot have an opinion about abortion because men can't get pregnant. The technique is a conversation stopper, it pre-emptively dismisses the debate.
I'm sure that being a pastor is tough. What makes you think that it is uniquely so? What makes you think that people cannot know what it's like without being one? On what basis do you make this dismissive judgment? It is one thing to assert this, it is another thing entirely to make a blanket statement about everyone who isn't a pastor. Yes, it can be true, but it isn't even close to axiomatic.
As far as Robin being wounded, I did not say she was, I wonder if this was the case. It sure sounded that way. Both you and her sound defensive about the issue of pastors being beaten up, so it is quite natural to wonder such a thing. People do not get defensive unless something needs defending as it were.
Me: Some people do slash at pastors. Most do not. Some pastors derserve it, unfortunately. Most do not. It is not appropriate to slash at pastors, but I wonder if that is the right word. Again, there is a difference between the man and the issue. If a pastor is a consistently bad preacher, for example, he should not be allowed to continue in the pulpit.
Frankly, the role of pastor is very misunderstood and rarely manifests in a biblical way. The pastor at the top of the church pyramid is a disfunctional model, so it does not surprise me that pastors feel mistreated. Ephesians 4:11 paints a very different picture of church leadership.
Well, I guess I inserted myself into an ongoing and if I may say, unholy dispute. Maybe God brought me in to break it up, Who knows?
You guys best get on with fixing the situation before God is dishonored further.
D.L.: So this is why I rarely comment on Facebook because we are so misunderstood. First and foremost, I love Mario (I love you Mario!) and I apologize if I've injured you from my comments. I love to have these conversations face to face because then we can see each others emotions and heart. The simple principle of walking in someone else's shoes simple means I won't make judgements about you and what you do without considering the fact that I don't do what you do and visa versa. Again, You CAN have and opinion and I value it. I'm only making the point that.
D.L.: So this is why I rarely comment on Facebook because we are so misunderstood. First and foremost, I love Mario (I love you Mario!) and I apologize if I've injured you from my comments. I love to have these conversations face to face because then we can see each others emotions and heart. The simple principle of walking in someone else's shoes simple means I won't make judgements about you and what you do without considering the fact that I don't do what you do and visa versa. That's all, just the old saying "Don't judeg a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes", regardless of the occupation. Again, You CAN have and opinion and I value it. We all have things to learn from each other and should be open to conversations with each other to make each other better. The issue, not the man should be judged is good! We must, like the Bereans take things to Scripture. No argument there. I do agree that our models of church are imperfect, and believe I continue to hear many ideas of the models are. Church should be done as a team rather than focused only on one leader. Yet, there is the role of a leader and how that all shakes out, we get to work out together. That's my goal, anyway. How you view is how you view it, and that's okay, too. I don't believe any one person has had a sudden revelation of what that role is. If they did, a hundred more would come out with an hundred more revelations. We do the best we can as we work it out together, keeping Jesus the focus and loving each other the basis for our interaction. I love doctrinal discussion, bur rarely on Facebook because so many times are words are misunderstood. I have no quarrel with Mario, period. If we can't have disagreements and continue to be friends, what do we have? I still love he and Julie regardless of how we view doctrinal issues. Fact is, I do believe it is an "in house debate" and should be in house. The problem is, once in on Facebook, it's out there for the world to see and in fact Facebook invites public comment. I don't want it to judgemental, and in the end some times we have to agree to disagree. That doesn't change my love for them! Finally, I don't believe God is dishonored by these conversations but he is dishonored when we take pot shots at each other with a heart of bitterness and intention to hurt. I don't think that was the intention of Mario or Robin. Can we say things better? Sure! Can we learn from these things? I hope so. Be blessed, my friends and I hope we can continue friendships through conversations (even lively ones!), prayer for each other and love for God.
D.L.: I deleted the comments I made because I didn't want thing to go any further on Facebook. I did direct message Mario. I'm not in a dispute with anyone. That's why I rarely and now never make public comments on Facebook regarding things like this. It's almost always misunderstood and people start to get the wrong idea. I'm sorry thing looked that way. I can strongly disagree with Mario doctrinally, but that doesn't mean I don't love him or have a personal dispute with him. What I believe dishonors God is when we take disagreements and air them for the whole world to see. I'm not going there and neither is Robin anymore. Be blessed my friend and keep sharing Jesus in the Gallatin Valley. I miss that place!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)