TGIF

You may also like...

472 Responses

  1. Reuben says:

    Beautiful

  2. Sarah says:

    I agree with Reuben. Beautiful.

  3. “Shut up, you old bastard!” “He’s got the FLU!”

    Oh boy, laughing hard at that.

    This is great Michael. Thank you.

  4. Bob Sweat says:

    Michael,

    Check your email.

  5. Andrew says:

    Love does cover a multitude of sins. One of my favorite verses. Since there are so many out there “narc for Jesus” types, I really admire your grandma.

    Although I guess there are real situations of “enabling” others in their sins or being involved in a co-dependent relationship, I think there is a bigger problem with purposely trying to hurt someone,embarrass someone, humiliate someone, expose someone and judge someone.

    If we were to take this concept into the church, we really need to cover each others sins. I think this is illustrated all the way through the Bible starting with when God first made animal skin clothing to cover the nakedness that Adam and Eve experienced in the garden. Covering is very Biblical. Exposing is also Biblical but in a different sense.

  6. Babylon's Dread says:

    Sounds like Newnham was quite a cat.

  7. Nonnie says:

    Michael, that was beautiful.

    Alex, your number 8 is vile and uncalled for.

  8. Andrew says:

    Nonnie,

    Kind of agreed it is vile. Wonder if Michael will moderate that.

  9. Papias says:

    This is a good example of “Love covers a multitude of sins” and the Sacrifice that we benefit from. Thanks Michael.

  10. What a delightful story. Love the line “she knew all along” may use that one day…and give you no credit! 🙂 You know what they say: “The secret to originality is how well you hide your sources”

    I hope this thread, which has such potential for a positive message, doesn’t take a sour turn. Unfortunately, too many of these threads get hijacked and end up on the same dismal subject or an argument between a few

    Stay on task people 🙂

  11. Alex says:

    “Stay on task people”

    It had to do with cats and Michael’s carousing days 🙂

    But, yes, agreed. (it was a joke people, lighten up)

  12. Alex says:

    I’m in Fundie hell. Yikes!

    Grace does in fact cover a multitude of sins, which is the point of the story.

  13. Papias says:

    Alex, I think everyone gets your point, as your MO is the same:

    1) Someone posts a thread thats good
    2) You make a asidnine point
    3) You get called out for your point
    4) You cry foul and refer to the original thread

    Yeah, this approach is well known and is getting tiring.

  14. erunner says:

    Alex, There are ladies reading here and for that simple fact alone you should have thought of them before posting that. That’s the talk of immature teenagers not something for a blog comprised of believers.

  15. Michael says:

    I took it down.
    As you were…

  16. Nonnie says:

    Thank you Michael for this beautiful story. And yes, I had a good laugh at your Grandmother calling out your grandfather. That was great. All along she knew. She knew you, yet she saw the possibilities that were in you and through her love, the unseen, became the reality. Bless you!

  17. Nonnie says:

    Alex, I love you and I continue to pray for you. Had my own son posted what you did, I would have said the exact same thing.

  18. Alex says:

    I think Michael’s story is pretty much the dynamic in Calvary Chapel. A lot of denial of reality with regards to its leaders and a chunk of their Affiliated pastors.

    It was the dynamic in our home, but more fear-based than grace-based.

  19. Michael says:

    Nonnie, thanks.

    It’s weird…I’ve been up all night thinking about something it took me over fifty years to understand.
    I’ve been accused (justifiably) of the same kind of blindness with those close to me…and now I know where I got it.

  20. Alex says:

    Nonnie, I don’t blame you for expressing your opinion. I made a back-handed point about Selective Fundamentalism.

  21. Michael says:

    Alex,

    This thread isn’t about you…or Calvary Chapel…or your cockamamie theories about believers.
    It’s about the grace of God.
    He woke me up to write it and I’m going to make sure that whoever was supposed to read it is able to do so without shuffling through a hundred non related posts.
    Period.

  22. Nonnie says:

    Michael, re: you number 20. She left you a wonderful legacy! Like Chuck Smith says, “I’d rather error in favour of grace than go the other way.” (or something like that)

  23. Alex says:

    Yes, Grace Michael. It’s about Grace. OK. I hear those words.

  24. Shaun Sells says:

    The beauty of the gospel:

    We who are sinful are seen as sinless by God (if only Him).

    When God sees us, He sees the righteousness of His son Jesus Christ applied to us.

    God has taken our sin and cast it as far as the east is from the west (Ps. 103:12), completely cleanses us from the stain of our sins (Is. 1:18),
    buried our sin the sea of forgetfulness (Micah 7:19),
    cast our sin behind his back (Is. 38:17),
    trampled our sin under his feet (Micah 7:19),
    canceled out the certificate of debt owned (Col. 2:13-14),

    and most impressively . . .

    . . . the God who is all knowing remembers our sins no more (Jer. 31:34)!

  25. Michael says:

    Sometimes, the rest of the community deserves some grace as well…

  26. Michael says:

    Shaun,

    That’s the application…thank you!

  27. Andrew says:

    Yeah, I really don’t understand Chuck Smith’s comment. If you are going to error on the position of grace, why is Chuck so so against Calvinism? He seems militant against it yet when I look at the alternative or at least Chuck’s alternative it seems more about what I need to do to become or stay saved. It really seems man orientated which is works oriented at times. Just an observation and not accusing Chuck of being unsaved but he talks about grace but is reluctant to give it to Alex and is militantly against Calvinism. Something seems a bit off here.

  28. Rob Murphy says:

    It’s hard to look back on how I’ve despised grace in my own life and not put on a lead vest of shame . . . there’s no condemnation in Christ, but oh my how my past will run me down with incredible swiftness. The only salve for yesterday’s shame is to live and move and have my being in today’s grace. Treat grace as the treasure it is today, and share it rather than horde or despise it.

  29. Rob Murphy says:

    Lavish! The word I was looking for was lavish, be “lavish” with grace. Brain is not great.

  30. Michael says:

    “Treat grace as the treasure it is today, and share it rather than horde or despise it.”
    Amen and amen…

  31. Papias says:

    Thats good Shaun.

    I am mulling over the “Sacrifice for our benefit” angle.

    I was looking at my books the other day and found one by that I had not read yet: http://www.amazon.com/Unfolding-Mystery-Discovering-Christ-Testament/dp/0875521746

    So yea… gonna have to sit down and break that spine… 😉

  32. Andrew says:

    Alex,
    you misquoted. It is love not grace that covers a multitude of sins. Similar concepts but one without the other is no good. It appears Chuck gives grace to his own at times but he is not acting loving towards other people at same time. Yes, good idea to error on side of grace but not at the expense of violating love.

  33. Michael says:

    Andrew,

    This thread is not about Chuck or CC.
    It’s about us and the grace of God.

  34. Only took 19 posts to derail the subject! That must be a new record

  35. Andrew says:

    Michael, ok, just responding to Nonnie comment.

  36. Bob says:

    Michael:

    Interesting contrasts in your post. Here are two people who both see the issue at hand and they both choose to address it differently and the same.

    Both saw the drinking and carousing and basically did little to address that issue, but one , Grandmother, decided to spread love while the other, Grandfather just sat back and did little more than complain, no instruction, nor fatherly guidance, and no love.

    How are they remembered today? Your post says it all.

    But what if the Grandfather had actually done something more than complaining, what if he had acted upon love?

    Of course then there may not be a PP.

  37. Michael says:

    Evidently, we only have one topic now.
    I hope someone profits from this article.

  38. Michael says:

    We’ll try this one more time.
    Stay on topic.
    If you want to talk with or about someone else…visit their blog or email them.

  39. Steve Wright says:

    Great post Michael. Powerful.

  40. Frosted Flake says:

    It is such a great example of grace and unconditional love. Someone who actually lived with such love is inspiring to say the least.

  41. Nonnie says:

    God help us to pass that grace, that we love so much, on to others.

  42. Michael says:

    Thank you, Steve.
    FF, the question before the house is “what would change if you knew you were loved unconditionally…by God?”
    Because the believer is…

  43. Ixtlan says:

    great story Michael !

    The thing about grace is that it is an investment where the dividends are not guarenteed and the yield may be deferred well into the future.

  44. Michael says:

    Ixtlan,

    That is a really important point…and it’s why if you practice grace you never have to give up on anyone…

  45. Shaun Sells says:

    I like to share with people that God is pleased with them because He is pleased with His Son whose life has been credited as yours.

    It removes the need to please God by living righteous and makes our righteous living more of a gift to the God who first loved us.

    Both result in righteous living, but one is by compulsion and fear and the other is an expression of worship, love and respect.

  46. Michael says:

    Shaun,

    Well said…

  47. Michael says:

    Real grace doesn’t deny reality…it transforms it.

  48. London says:

    Thank you, Steve.
    FF, the question before the house is “what would change if you knew you were loved unconditionally…by God?”
    Because the believer is…

    Not quite accurate. The thing about Gods grace and love is that it’s not limited to “the believer”.
    While we were yet sinners…..

  49. Nonnie says:

    Amen, Shaun. We are to live our lives as a response to His love, rather than living our lives trying to earn His love.

  50. Michael says:

    London,

    Well done! 🙂

  51. Nonnie says:

    “While we were yet sinners…..” Yes, that is truly amazing!

  52. Andrew says:

    “Not quite accurate. The thing about Gods grace and love is that it’s not limited to “the believer”.
    While we were yet sinners…..”.

    Not quite accurate as well. Believers are sinners too….At least I am.

  53. Alex says:

    Hmmm. Much to consider. Lots of pushback from the Legalist in me, but I sure like the extreme Grace narrative, and I count on it and hope for it.

  54. Nonnie says:

    Amen, Alex. I believe many of us here today are resting on and rejoicing in that grace of God, as we place our faith in the finished work of Christ.

  55. Andrew says:

    Alex, it is more than extreme. Its radical.

  56. Alex says:

    Somewhere, John McArthur just felt a disturbance in the Force 🙂

  57. Alex says:

    Well, extreme Grace makes me want to be more gracious and more loving, whereas legalistic strict fundamentalism makes me want to be an ODM and a total a-hole.

  58. Shaun Sells says:

    Nonnie –

    I just clicked the link in your name and found JOY place! FANTASTIC!

    We recently started a class for people with learning disabilities on Sundays led by two gals in our fellowship who work with disabled kids full time. It is such a joy. Many of the kids stay with their parents for worship, but then go to their class. I am glad they stay for worship because we have one little girl who is so beautifully expressive in worship that it makes me a better worshiper to watch her.

    I would love to hear what an average service at JOY place looks like.

  59. Paigemom says:

    Beautiful and beautifully written Michael….. no wonder you are the kind of dad you are for Trey…. and no wonder you are the proponent of GRACE that you are….
    Yes, God knows …… it’s an ongoing battle to not cower in shame and to believe He loves.

    Blessings to all.

  60. Nonnie says:

    Shaun, thank you for your encouragement! I know just what you mean, when you speak of that little girl in your church. Pure, uninhibited worship. I don’t want to take away from the post here on Grace. I’ll FB message you. Again, thank you for your encouraging words!

  61. Solomon Rodriguez says:

    I was also my grandmas favorite and my grandpa tough texan that he was tried to get my grandma to be hard on me. She couldn’t tho, she would talk to me about my wrong doings but in a very loving way. She was from Mexcio so she was not really good at the english language but we always understood each other. She passed away in September last year. Unfortunatley she didn’t spend a lot of $$ on me because to the extent that she was very loving she was also very cheap lol!

  62. Andrew says:

    “Well, extreme Grace makes me want to be more gracious and more loving, whereas legalistic strict fundamentalism makes me want to be an ODM and a total a-hole.”

    True fundamentalism speaks of extreme and radical grace. I support ODMs that protect that truth. Legalistic and strict are terms I despise.

  63. Michael says:

    Paigemom,

    It’s really hard to wrap our broken hearts and battered minds around the grace of God…which is why we must preach the Gospel to ourselves every day.

  64. London says:

    Andrew, read it again…i said “not limited to”…i didn’t say that it excluded the believer nor that believers weren’t sinners.

  65. Alex says:

    “True fundamentalism speaks of extreme and radical grace.”

    Not the Version I’m familiar with…unless you’re Affiliated, then yes.

  66. Michael says:

    Eleazar,

    I’m not going to post your comment…I’ve had enough strife this week.
    The answer is that if I’m going to preach it, I have to live it.
    By it’s very definition, all grace is undeserved…including the grace that you and I have received.

  67. Kathy says:

    Wow. I woke up too this morning and had to read what Michael wrote (but that’s not unusual).

    It’s a great story, one that makes Michael so loved and liked by many.

    Grandma sounds awesome. She sounds a lot like my Brian.

    Well… can’t say anything wrong about Grandma, so I’ll tell a little story about Brian. When Brian got cancer, all his “friends” abandoned him and he was left with me, broke, unemployed, homeless me.

    After my mother’s horrific death and abandoning my dog when he was about to die, I had a horrible guilt trip, so I poured my energies into helping Brian in his chemotherapy. And he got well! For now…

    Well, this created a bond that few can break. And all I can say is that Brian is very lucky he met me in my old cranky beaten-down age. If it was a younger, dumber Kathy, I would’ve taken advantage of his love and kindness and taken him for everything he had. Then left….

    But as fear of the Lord is the beginning of understanding, I knew that this was my chance at redemption and I honored it, and I have done the best I can to be “Jesus” to Brian.

    I guess my point is, there has to be a balance… one cannot trust everyone, especially a drunk, unruly teenager. One hand there is grace, unconditional, always forgiving grace. The other hand is accountability and discipline, letting that person know they cannot take advantage of the unconditional love. I’m not saying Grandma was wrong, because Grandmas are never wrong, they are the lollipops of the world. But a steady diet of lollipops can be unhealthy.

    Anyways, sorry to be a joy-kill to such a nice story. 😀

  68. PP Vet says:

    Grandmas are wonderful. I just adored mine.

    Our church was going through the “Two Question Test Deserves Answer” evangelism campaign. God put it on my heart that my dear Christian grandmother, churchgoer for 90+ years, was not saved. I fasted for a day or so and went through that wonderful little pamphlet with her, and she accepted Christ.

    I know – the glory of God came and she was touched and changed.

    About the only book of the Bible she had ever understood was Proverbs.

    A quiet woman, more than happy just to live in the shadow of her husband. Loved her so much.

  69. Alex says:

    Loved my Grandma Ruth (my mom’s mom). I (and my daughter) were kept from seeing her by CC pastor when she was dying. I had to strongly negotiate with a CC elder to get a supervised brief visitation before she died. I have it on video to this day along with our handlers/monitors. It was pretty disgusting, but i’m sure no one cares. Thank you Jesus that I got one last supervised visitation. She was a good grandma in a bad situation.

  70. Alex says:

    I want to be Michael’s grandma to my kids. I’ll never betray them or leave them or hurt them.

  71. Crowned1 says:

    Alex @ 66

    Christendom will never be a source of grace. Only God is.

    Take it from a man who repented of the idolization of men (pastors) & churches. A spiritual transition, as it were, from churchianity to Christianity.

    If you say that you do not see grace in the churches & staff, you speak truth, because you are looking for grace in the wrong place. What grace Christians have is ‘from God’ so keep your eyes on Him. God bless.

  72. Lutheran says:

    Bee-youtiful story, Michael.

    On grace:

    “God’s one-way love is the heart of Christianity. It is what makes Christianity Christian.”

    “What is grace? Grace is love that seeks you out. Grace is love coming at you Grace is being loved when you are unlovable.

    “Grace is irrational in the sense that it has nothing to do with weights and measures.”

    “Grace is one-way love.”

    — Paul Zahl, Episcopal priest and one-time bishop
    From “Grace in Practice: A Theology of Everyday Life”

  73. Andrew says:

    “The other hand is accountability and discipline, letting that person know they cannot take advantage of the unconditional love. I’m not saying Grandma was wrong, because Grandmas are never wrong, they are the lollipops of the world. But a steady diet of lollipops can be unhealthy.
    Anyways, sorry to be a joy-kill to such a nice story. 😀 ”

    Yep, you really are a kill joy Kathy. You call me mentally ill yesterday and then make up some wacky story that I never said on Alex’s blog and now you call talking about the balance. I don’t believe you. Maybe you can throw a lollipop my way one of these days. Sorry if I am a kill joy to you Kathy but if you really want the balance that you seem to be asking for here, than start showing it.

  74. Lutheran says:

    ‘Christendom will never be a source of grace. Only God is.’

    Covered1,

    YMMV.

    I’ve experienced Christendom as a source of grace many, many, many times over the years.
    Especially the last 10!

  75. everstudy says:

    @ #73… And the sword of grace comes out… /sigh/

  76. Xenia says:

    Every one of my five children think they are my favorite.

  77. Great story and realizations, Michael!

    My mom’s mom was a Portuguese immigrant who gave birth to my mom when they lived in Brockton MA, so the events of Boston mean much to me. This Gran was a force to be reckoned with, the matriarch Catholic from the Azores.

    My dad’s mom was a genteel lady of fine Southern upbringing, classy, a woman of strong but gracious protestant faith. I inherited my white hair from her, and my artistic DNA which passed to my dad then to me.

  78. Nonnie says:

    Xenia, I love that! At my dad’s memorial service, one by one, his 10 grandchildren each took a turn to tell stories about him, and until that day, they each thought they were his favourite. We all loved it.

    Of course I always knew that I was his favourite. 😉

  79. Lutheran says:

    YMMV:Your mileage may vary.

  80. Lutheran says:

    Reminds me of the “Everybody Loves Raymond” where an older lady from the neighborhood died. At the funeral parlor, both Ray and Robert told others they were her favorite kid.
    🙂

  81. Crowned1 says:

    Lutheran @ 74

    I have seen Christendom ‘display’ grace toward others…but the ‘source’ was always God’s Spirit. So that if any praise was due…it was always due the Father. And likewise, if one needed an example of grace, looking to man you would never find it.

    I can no longer uplift men for their good deeds (including myself). Every breath we take is a gift from God, so any positive impact we make in life is because of Him. All praise to Our Father.

    Our trust cannot be in men, because we are untrustworthy. Hopefully that clarifies my position.

  82. Lutheran says:

    Crowned1:

    There really isn’t any such thing as “Christendom.” That’s an abstraction. Actions are done by individuals.

    Of course, everything is by grace. No one would be crude or crass enough to want to take credit for their good deeds. Can you imagine standing before the Lord at the End and saying, “well, Lord, I did pretty good here…and here…and here.” Yecch.

    Yet, it’s a paradox that I believe one can’t explain…that there is plenty of grace in the Church.
    Along with God’s grace in Christ, we can choose how we respond to that grace — with gratitude or bitterness, acceptance or fury…you catch the drift.

    With that in mind, I submit that there’s plenty of grace among God’s people.

  83. Kathy says:

    Andrew: this is the last time I’m addressing you. I’m choosing to ignore you because I think you’re a troll. Until I think otherwise, I will continue to ignore you.

    PxP could avoid so many fights and derailments if people simply let others be.

    Other people might think you’re a voice of wisdom and light. I am not one of those people. But since it’s not my blog, I can’t do anything about it but ignore.

    Peace.

  84. Andrew says:

    Kathy,

    You out right lied on that previous post. I never made any these alleged comments that you said I did.

  85. Andrew – in the spirit of the thread, perhaps she had you mistaken with someone else?

  86. Andrew says:

    Kathy,

    And now you want to call me a troll. You completely made up your bogus story and not even a single apology. Some grace this is you talk about.

  87. Crowned1 says:

    Lutheran @ 83

    “Actions are done by individuals”. So very true…which is why I often find more grace shown to me by the world than those who profess to follow Christ. I suppose one could argue that I ‘caught them on a bad day’…but I am more apt to think that Christ chooses whom He wants to work through.

    It is the sum of my own life experiences. And, truth be told, I look forward to the day when I get to meet all my brethren in heaven and finally discover just how wrong I have been about so many things.

  88. Andrew says:

    Josh,
    She either completely made up this story or she does have me mistaken for someone else. I have already given the name of my pastor and church that was in question. That is enough for now.

  89. Paigemom says:

    Michael wrote:

    “It’s really hard to wrap our broken hearts and battered minds around the grace of God…which is why we must preach the Gospel to ourselves every day.”

    WHEW….. such a truth and true statement.

    I am utterly convinced that God’s love is unconditional for others, but not so much for myself… and the grace thing, well, I know it is for others…..but such a hard time living as if I believed it for myself….. I’m NOT fishing for kind words or compliments….. I’m just admitting my own constant battle…. thus I do so very much appreciate this story of an unconditionally loving Gramma who ‘knows’ the real story… I attempt to be that sort of Gramma to my little treasures…. There HAS to be love somewhere in this crazy life.

  90. Andrew,
    I answered you on the Lord’s Supper thread.

  91. Andrew says:

    Michael,

    Kathy comes across as so condescending and judgmental to see if I fit this profile she talks about, etc.. etc.. etc.. Then she calls me mentally ill. Then she calls me a troll. I am sorry Michael but if this is the grace of God is not being manifest at all. Kathy completely made up her bogus story and she will not admit it. Can you please moderate the comment she attributes to me out of your blog?

  92. Andrew says:

    MLD,

    Thanks for responding to my question.

  93. Alex says:

    Crowned1, amen (probably).

  94. Steve Wright says:

    What do you have that you did not receive? – So asked Paul.

    My parents did their part, but my life is a gift. As is the continuance of that life. I’m not in charge of breathing or pumping my heart, of my immune system or blood clotting, of digesting food, converting it to energy and eliminating the waste products.

    Humanity brings the food and water for survival to me, but God is the ultimate source of both. Rain, harvest..all of God.

    All the elements on this earth that are then crafted with the intelligence God gives others to means that better serve us and improve our lives.

    (It’s easy to see why God as creator is emphasized over and over and why the biggest attack starts by denying such a Giver)

    Common gifts available to all here on earth.

    But then, specifically God has given me (us) His Son to die. His Spirit to indwell, His Scriptures to guide, His presence to enjoy (and one day enjoy to the fullest). Even His discipline is an act of grace since it is for my good and shows I am His child.

    I did a quick word search, not on grace, but on “given” and how awesome it is to be reminded of how much God has given. And we didn’t earn a bit of it. Nor do we deserve or are owed a thing.

  95. Kathy says:

    Holy Toledo, I’m getting roped in. Why is it so hard to ignore people?

    Andrew: I’m sorry that you got kicked out of your CC. I’m sorry people mistreated you. I’m sorry your CC pastor (can I have a name? I didn’t see one in the link you provided) did not provide outstanding customer service.

    But I’m not sorry that I don’t believe your story. True repentance starts with a change of heart. And although I can change my tone of voice with you, I still think your story has a lot of holes.

    If Michael wants to remove my comments in the other post, by all means he has my blessings. I reread the comment myself and thought it was inappropriate.

    Peace.

  96. Kathy says:

    “Kathy comes across as so condescending and judgmental ”

    That I agree. And that I apologize. And that I will change.

    Peace.

  97. Kathy @ 97 – Well done.

  98. Andrew says:

    Kathy,
    I am not asking you to believe my story. I am asking you to retract what you said what I posted. You made up your bogus story about me being in CCCM behind closed doors planning a DDS on Alex’s blog. All that crap you made up.. I still don’t see an apology for those remarks.

  99. Andrew says:

    Kathy,
    Follow the link and look at the sermon review Vision20/20. That was my pastor and church.
    http://www.fightingforthefaith.com/2012/02/about-any-word-from-god.html

  100. Andrew says:

    And regarding your 98
    Apology accepted. 🙂

  101. Andrew, your former pastor’s “vision casting” is typical CC faire. They all do it to put the congregation in bondage.

    You cannot oppose the pastor’s vision, because he got it from God – and if you oppose pastor, you oppose God.

  102. Lutheran says:

    Hey, check out my web site

    rentavision.org

    If you’re a fundagelical pastor and need a vision — you’re too tired or preoccupied or not quite spiritual enough to get your own from God — I’m here to help. And I take Visa and MC!

    🙂

  103. Andrew says:

    MLD,
    You are right. I didn’t understand that at the time though when I attended. But I did take notice of this pastors Christology which seemed to deny Jesus as God and creator which was more disturbing to say the least.

  104. Lutheran says:

    My family attended a charismatic church about 20 years ago. We had some good experiences and then things got weird. At the end he got into the “vision casting” thing. That was the final straw. I met with him and told him that we were leaving, and why. He seemed surprised that I took his words seriously, but I did.

  105. Lutheran says:

    “Him” means the pastor.

  106. Solomon Rodriguez says:

    “My mom’s mom was a Portuguese immigrant who gave birth to my mom when they lived in Brockton MA, so the events of Boston mean much to me. This Gran was a force to be reckoned with, the matriarch Catholic from the Azores.”

    Brockton MA was also the home of “Marvelous” Marvin Hagler

  107. Andrew says:

    Is it that these CC pastors don’t know any better or just following other examples or is it darker than that? Is vision casting like sourcery? This pastor is giving his so called 20/20 vision and starts off with a statement that appears he is denying Jesus as God. I find it unbelievable. And absolutely no other CC pastor says a thing about it.

  108. You all did very well at staying within the spirit of Mchael’s post. A few variance back into the ole bash CC mode, but for the most part, you all stayed on task. I think that is pretty great! And much more edifying. This was a great post and worthy of meditation snd disussion

  109. Linnea says:

    Wow…straight from the heart of God, Michael. What a beautiful testimony, and one I needed so much today!

  110. Ixtlan says:

    Pirate radio nails it.

  111. David sloane says:

    Mercy is to not get what we deserve to get.
    Grace is to get what we do not deserve…

    Zechariah 4:7
    Who art thou, O great mountain? before Zerubbabel thou shalt become a plain: and he shall bring forth the headstone thereof with shoutings, crying, Grace, grace unto it.

    Once while my friend Erik and I were out in the desert we felt that The Lord would have us shout grace at the things that He was about to bring to our minds attention. We both realized that the Holy Spirit had manifested His presence to us as we started to shout grace at the things that were being brought to mind.

    For me it started with those things that shamed me in my own life. They came one by one to my attention as I shouted grace at the recollection. I became aware of a release in my spirit as the things were lifted off from me.

    This actually went on for around three hours. Then it was finished and both Erik and I experienced such a blissful state. It lasted for around three months. It was a wonderful experience with the Holy Spirit that few have had in quite the way that we had.

    Your wonderful story, Michael , brought back to my memory my own experience that I had which I seriously believe was inspired by God. Grace is so wonderful when it is truly experienced in that special place with The Lord.

    I read every word of your story and was deeply moved by it…

    Thank you for getting up and tapping away at your keys, you spoke into my own life. And so did your grandma!

    Blessings

  112. Michael says:

    Linnea,

    I always feel better when I hear from you…thank you.

  113. Michael says:

    David…thank you, my friend.

  114. The Dude says:

    My mother and your grandmother are so much alike. Loving their wayward children so unconditionaly.

  115. Alex says:

    “My mother and your grandmother are so much alike. Loving their wayward children so unconditionaly.”

    Mine hates my guts and is suing me for speaking out about the abuse I suffered and witnessed and for the abuse reported by one of her other sons (as well as all the stuff reported by assistant CC pastors, CC bookkeepers, staff etc).

    Maybe I should have been more like Michael’s grandma with BG? Maybe I should have continued in denial and extended maximum grace to BG and kept my mouth shut? What do you think CC Steve’s? Should I have been more “loyal” and just ignored all the stuff?

  116. Alex says:

    Steve H said, “You all did very well at staying within the spirit of Mchael’s post. A few variance back into the ole bash CC mode, but for the most part, you all stayed on task”

    Pretty condescending. Pretty much a “trigger” for me, but I’m sure I’ll be the bad guy for pointing it out.

  117. Alex says:

    Well, they captured the 2nd Terrorist. I guess extreme Grace would say we should forgive him and love him even though he killed an 8-year-old boy and maimed and killed so many others.

    That would be a really tough one if I was the father of that 8-year-old boy. Ironic that I believe it likely that in a high-profile event like that, if it were Chuck Smith who lost his grandson to the terrorist, he would probably publicly “forgive” so as to portray a particular message to the watching public (as it would be a great PR opportunity).

    …yet, in a less public arena, we see Chuck and CC’s example of unforgiveness over and over and over, most recently in that BG said he has the support of Calvary Chapel in his ongoing lawsuits and Chuck blasted me from the CCCM pulpit in a very “unforgiving” manner.

    It is very telling of Selective Fundamentalism and the rank “For Show” hypocrisy. If God is real, if God is active in His creation (eventually), then I assume He deals with that stuff…or does He grace it over, like the message of this story?

  118. Alex says:

    Again, I hear all the words, all the wonderful stories etc. but there are MAJOR cross-currents and then the example (when I test it) speaks of true belief vs. nice sounding stories.

    At the end of the day, no one is really that “forgiving”…only to those they really really like, like a Grandma to a grandson she loves.

    Otherwise, unforgiveness and blood justice rules the day. Everyone examples it. I press buttons and folks want my head, which is understandable and a completely normal human reaction. I know, I want justice for all the much-more-terrible stuff done to me and others I love and care about.

    Preach to yourselves, as you all don’t really believe the b.s. you sell (by your example). If I kick Michael in the nuts, he wants blood. If I kick Hopkins in the nuts, he wants blood. If I rail on Calvary Chapel, the CC’-ites and others want blood. If I disrupt the blog, the PP loyalists want blood etc etc and so on.

    Chuck Smith, when push comes to shove, wants blood. BG wants blood. Steve W wants blood for me outing him (and so do his friends) etc etc.

    Unforgiveness and Grace? LOL. Yes, for those you like. For those loyal to you. For those who you care about. Grace for friends. Blood justice for “enemies”.

    That’s the True Belief above…as that is what is practiced, exampled etc, in all Groups…despite the nice stories.

    The truth cuts.

  119. Alex says:

    I still don’t know if God exists for sure.

    If He does exist, I still don’t know if Jesus is the YHWY/Jehovah Jesus of the OT who killed the “enemies” of Israel with the sword (including women and children) and if He is the Jesus of Revelation who slaughters HIs “enemies” with the sword from the White Horse….or if Jesus is the Gahndi Jesus we see in the NT who “loves” and “forgives” and preaches and teaches to “forgive unconditionally” (it is assumed) and that Grace covers all etc.

    Dunno.

    I don’t see the “extreme Grace” in action…not blindly. I see the extreme Grace for CC pastors by other CC pastors and Chuck Smith. I see the extreme Grace for a Grandma toward her grandson, some mothers toward their kids, me towards my kids, good friends toward other good friends etc.

    It just isn’t reality outside of those narrow lines of relationship and loyalty.

    I am more apt to believe that God and Jesus (one but two) are probably more like the OT and Revelation Jesus than they are the Gahndi Jesus (unfortunately)…as the last Jesus we see in Revelation is the one killing all His enemies and then tossing them in the Lake of Fire to be tormented forever and forever no end ever.

  120. Alex says:

    So, if all that is true, i guess the moral of the story is this:

    Make friends, make alliances, blood is thicker than water, be loyal at all costs. Grace for those in your “family” (like the Mafia) and the rest of the world are “enemies” who deserve justice by the sword.

    Make sure you are on the side of the God and Jesus of the OT and Revelation and then you’ll get the extreme Grace of the Gahndi Jesus of the NT and you can then get the forgiveness and grace no matter what you do…otherwise you’re an “enemy” no matter how “good” a person you are…and you’re toast.

    That’s pretty much the true narrative, minus the church-speak.

  121. Alex says:

    Calvary Chapel pretty much believes (as expressed by example and practice which is true belief) the dynamic in my #124. So does most of the rest of the “church”.

  122. Alex says:

    Now ban me and example the Paradox and contradiction that does appear in Scripture 🙂

    Extreme Grace and forgiveness seems to be entirely conditional on whether or not you are “in the familia”.

    It is assumed that if you are in the “Family” that there are some conditions to stay in the Family…and if the check-list isn’t there in your life (baptism, sacraments, fruit of the spirit…which is very subjective as many Atheists love their neighbor, have joy, peace, patience, self control etc etc), then you either “choose” to be out of the Family (Arminian and Lutheran position) or you were never a “real” Family member to begin with (Calvinist position).

    There seems to be a huge Paradox to the Grace/Forgiveness narrative inside those boxes. The only Extreme Grace narrative that is entirely unconditional and consistent is the Universal Reconciliation position. The other positions aren’t really extreme Grace. They are extreme Grace* with quite a disclaimer attached.

  123. Bob says:

    Alex:

    I have to step in and again go back to our last exchange and your need to believe in something which will give you a profitable day (and I don’t mean money).

    This kind of statement,

    ” I still don’t know if Jesus is the YHWY/Jehovah Jesus of the OT who killed the “enemies” of Israel with the sword (including women and children) and if He is the Jesus of Revelation who slaughters HIs “enemies” with the sword from the White Horse….or if Jesus is the Gahndi Jesus we see in the NT who “loves” and “forgives” and preaches and teaches to “forgive unconditionally” (it is assumed) and that Grace covers all etc.”

    Indicates (to me at least) that you line up with those who fail to closely read the scriptures and pay attention to context and the accounts. Additionally your comments fall in line more with popular culture than true biblical (amateur or profession) critiques. Ironically the kind of bible reading and public critique you demonstrate is not limited to one side of the faith or the other.

    Dude you sound to me as not just a skeptic but a full blown agnostic. If that is your religion then pursue it and quit kidding others and yourself you are a follower of Jesus.

    Just saying what I observe from you.

  124. Bob says:

    Alex:

    Now let me soften a bit; from the rapid fire posts over almost 2 hours early in the morning I have to ask, “did you have a rough night?”

    If so Dude let it go.

  125. Andrew says:

    “The only Extreme Grace narrative that is entirely unconditional and consistent is the Universal Reconciliation position.”

    This is not a position in the Bible. Jesus speaks of the “narrow” way that few find. Our God is a jealous God. Not everyone is part of the “bride of Christ”. Problem is if you tell your wife you are also married to another lady, she might trash you. Just saying…

  126. I swear, I am sure that Alex has pictures of Michael naked with a Billy goat. No way he gets to stay on the blog on his own. He must have something he is holding over Michael’s head.

  127. erunner says:

    “Otherwise, unforgiveness and blood justice rules the day. Everyone examples it. I press buttons and folks want my head, which is understandable and a completely normal human reaction. I know, I want justice for all the much-more-terrible stuff done to me and others I love and care about.

    Preach to yourselves, as you all don’t really believe the b.s. you sell (by your example). If I kick Michael in the nuts, he wants blood. If I kick Hopkins in the nuts, he wants blood. If I rail on Calvary Chapel, the CC’-ites and others want blood. If I disrupt the blog, the PP loyalists want blood etc etc and so on. ”

    Alex, It’s stuff like this and the stuff you’ve done over the past two years that led me to post that Michael made a mistake in letting you come back here. Now it seems you’re going to push until another decision has to be made.

    You were devastated by the court’s ruling that I’m sure you never saw coming and your online presence hasn’t been the same since.

    It was difficult for me to read your exchanges with Perry Robinson as it was clear you had met your match and yet you couldn’t see it. You don’t seem to believe you are ever wrong and if you had given Perry a chance maybe he could have helped you sort some stuff out on the intellectual side of things.

    I’m sorry that the system let you down. I really am. You say you want justice for the terrible things that happened to you. Everyone else wants that for you as well but the more you keep this stuff up you’re going to continue alienating people.

    Also, if you knew all of our off the blog stories maybe it might hit you that there are many who have suffered just as much and maybe even more than you have. Yet they have found ways to move forward without the acting out you are displaying. I imagine some of those people are the regulars who make up your blog.

    You stated you didn’t have anything to post there currently. Why not post your personal wrestlings over there and let your friends and those who have worked hard to support you all this time share with you. It can’t hurt and maybe you might be surprised in a good way.

    It’s difficult watching you carry on as you are. You may have two years before things finalize via the courts. Make them count for good Alex.

  128. I have said it a couple of times this week – perhaps I need to say it daily.

    Alex’s God is Bob G – Alex’s God has let him down. Alex has always been a man worshipper and to cover it up, he accuses everyone else who worships the God of the Bible as being false god worshipers.

    Alex, just admit that you put your money on the wrong God (BG) and convert to Christianity, If need be (and I offered this before) I will introduce you to Jesus Christ.

  129. Andrew says:

    MLD,

    I sometimes feel my God was a different BG at a different Calvary Chapel. It is hard to shake the bondage I was under and the friends I lost, etc.. etc.. etc.. I am glad others seem to affirm that something was deeply wrong such as the comment @ 111 where “pirate radio” nailed it. I do think there is something deeply spiritually wrong at CC.

    But MLD, it may be a good idea to just start sharing the real Jesus with others on this blog. I am getting tired of being bambozzled by a man made system that doesn’t care about people.

  130. Michael says:

    Alex,

    Any attempt at having a thread that focuses on something other than you and the things you repeat ad nauseum is labeled “graceless” and ‘proof’ of your Christian hating theories.
    That’s b.s.
    Go do this on your blog…don’t give me the line about how it’s not for this sort of discussion…it’s your blog and you can change the direction daily if you want to.
    I don’t have the time or energy to deal with you…and some people found this article and others like it to be helpful in growing in grace.
    Life is hard and really living the Christian life is harder…none of us need heckled from the stands.

  131. Michael says:

    MLD,

    That was a pretty low blow.
    Thanks.

  132. Shaun Sells says:

    I am breaking my dont interact with Alex rule:

    Alex you are struggling with two different graces. The grace of God and the grace of man.

    Gods grace does not let sin go free, it places the repercussions on Jesus Christ. God forgives believes because he punished Jesus in your place. That does not change if people call you a jerk or disagree with you. Gods grace still allows you to be free on the punishment due you for sin. Gods grace is perfect.

    Mans grace is temporary, temperamental, and not perfect. We aren’t God.

    Gods grace doesn’t stand alone, it has a friend in justice (dolled out to Jesus for believers, delayed until death because of Gods patience for unbelievers). It also has a friend in discipline (for those whom God loves), done in his way and in his time. Of course we can ignore Gods discipline and stand our whole lives in opposition to him and struggle with him. But, even for that believer Gods grace prevails, though they struggle.

    Mans justice and discipline is imperfect, and for the most part unsatisfactory. My brother was beat to death by men who are known to the police, they did not spend one night in jail. It is not fair or fun, but that sin will be paid for when they stand before God – either by them or by Christ – justice will be served.

    Alex, it seems you want us to be as gracious as God, yet we don’t have the power to bring grace, justice or discipline as clearly or fairly as God. You are testing mans grace by intentionally challenging everyone who believes in it but holding God guilty if we are not as gracious as He is. We will fail you, blame us not God. Remember though, that you are imperfect too, your grace, justice, and discipline will never match up to perfection – you have admitted as much in the past.

    The truth as I see it is that God loves you and is offering His perfect eternal grace to you if you will trust Him to handle the justice and discipline when people fail. If you can’t trust Him in that, the He isn’t your Lord.

    Please accept these words as they are intended, just a few words intended to help you see the peace that God offers when man fails.

  133. Michael says:

    Shaun,

    Thank you for sharing that…it can’t be easy.

  134. I offer this up to people who keep judging the church by the people associated with it.

    This guy tells me he quit going to the Lutheran church because he wanted to go to a church that practiced what they preached. My response was that that I preach and practice forgiveness – and he tells me “no, that’s not what I mean. I mean I went to this Lutheran church and later I found out that so and so was a drunk, there were kids on drugs, and the people were having affairs.”

    I thought to myself, sounds like these are the very people who need to be in church. But he kept on – saying that he wanted to go to a church where people weren’t doing those things.

    Well good luck with that I said – I have news for you, the people in your church are sinners like everyone else. I guarantee they are having affairs, they addicted to drugs, and probably drinking too much. But if you want to put your salvation in the hands of the guy sitting next to you in the pew, and how well he keeps the law for you, rather than on the forgiveness of sins being proclaimed from the pulpit on behalf of the only man who ever kept the law for anyone, go right on ahead and distrust Jesus, by all means put your faith in Joe the Plumber, But I saw his tool box last week, and it didn’t seem to sanctified.

  135. victorious says:

    Alex the mercy and love of God through the Incarnation of Christ.
    God the Son has humbled Himself and entered fully and freely into the sufferings of a people who fully screwed with and screwed up all He created. He offered healing and redemption even for the people who were plotting His murder. Still He went to Calvary and gave all of Himself in the events of Calvary.

    This love was manifested publicly and this Savior rose from the dead to claim those who would call on His name and respond to His love. He ha secured,for us unfettered acces to live in and live by this rule of love.

    He will manifest and exercise His justice fully,freely and finally in the Day of the Lord, the Great White Throne and the Judgment seat of Christ.

    Secure your identity in relationship with the suffering Savior and set your hopes upon what He will do on the Final Day. He did not have to give us Calvary. He could have shown Himself only in judgment and all the Angels would have rejoiced eternally i, having observed His goodness.

    Instead He has given us Himself. Jesus is the Good Shepher and the King,of Kings and Lord of Lords. Maybe you would like to cease from judging Him, making excuses for yourself and learning to live in and by His love.

    That is reality.Everything else is aform of insanity that seeks to deny or distort that reality.

    Praying for you and your family personally.

  136. Kathy says:

    Alex: Everything you say is true. There is so little grace. I look into my own heart and I find so little grace and forgiveness. Just the other day, I wanted to go off on a kid who was jay-walking. I was so ashamed when I got home, what the hell is wrong with me? Thank God our salvation is not based on works but on his grace. You can die peacefully knowing this.

    As for your troubles, I’m very sorry, most will agree that you’ve been wronged. Unfortunately, we can’t do anything but stand beside you, offer our little bread and fish, and hope that God will provide a miracle. But we (at least I am, and I’m sure many more) are with you in Spirit and prayers, hoping that you will prevail.

    That being said, I’ll have to agree with e-runner, your behavior is very alienating. I still believe in your cause, but I don’t want much else to do with you. But that’s between you and God and us and the relationship you want to maintain/destroy. Shaun Sells hit it on the dot when he said you’re testing God by saying we’re not showing radical grace, then using it as an excuse to malign God (isn’t that what Satan does?). I’m not saying you’re Satan, but you’re using the same tactic. I’m sorry if I ever gave you the impression that I was anything more than a filthy rotten sinner saved by grace.

    Peace.

  137. Shaun…you took the bait 🙁

    I wonder if Alex isn’t a victim as much as he is narcissistic. From all appearances, whike he says he doesn’t he and his issues to be the center of attention, he can’t handle a thread that he is not in control of. Ironucally, he isor has become, the very thing he despises in a CC pastor. It supports the notion that “It takes one to know one”.

    If he and his issues are not the focus of attention, and a thread goes on to discuss good and wholesome topics, he will maniulate a discussion so that he can seize control of a discussion i.e. His grandmother hating him. That didn’t need to be said!

    How much longer will this community tolerate that?

  138. For those who speak disparagingly against the church, remember, even with it’s faults, the book of Revelation shows that the church is very near and dear to Christ’s heart. We need to make some radical changes in the church, but it is still valued by Jesus. Just saying we need to remember that.

  139. ( |o )====::: says:

    Celebrating with the people of Boston today. Enjoy freedom. Be thankful for each other.

  140. Andrew says:

    “For those who speak disparagingly against the church, remember, even with it’s faults, the book of Revelation shows that the church is very near and dear to Christ’s heart.”

    Steve, you talk about it being Christ’s church. But my CC church pastor seemed to deny that Jesus was even God. Some church that is. Are you going to say anything about that or just give this fellow affiliate pastor a pass?

  141. Michael says:

    Andrew,

    Exactly what the hell is Steve supposed to do about it?
    It wasn’t done on this blog…and the anti-church/anti bible ones were.

  142. Xenia says:

    But my CC church pastor seemed to deny that Jesus was even God.<<<<

    Oh really? Please link to a sermon where your pastor denies the deity of Christ.

  143. Xenia says:

    How much longer will this community tolerate that?<<<

    This community is not tolerating this. The blog owner is.

  144. Andrew says:

    Xenia, Please listen to the vision20/20 sermon review
    http://www.fightingforthefaith.com/2012/02/about-any-word-from-god.html

    It went something like this. “The greatest visionary in the all the world is not Abraham, the prophets and NOT even Jesus but rather it was God who created the world.”

    Michael, I am not asking Steve to do anything. I just want him to recognize that he is in affiliation with this guy. He can do what he wants. I would recommend he speak out against it but that is just me.

  145. ( |o )====::: says:

    “It went something like this. “The greatest visionary in the all the world is not Abraham, the prophets and NOT even Jesus but rather it was God who created the world.”

    Um, please tell me how this is a problem?

    God, the creator :: is :: the greatest visionary.
    Instead of parsing words of what is obviously a statement in isolation, possibly stated in less than an elegant way than you would prefer, perhaps you can simply be inspired to bless the God of creation who created you in His image and go out and inspire others to be creative and thank the person who fueled the inspiration?

  146. Steve Wright says:

    Andrew, I am not going to listen to a lengthy ODM radio program. I gave it five minutes thinking you linked us to the ‘problem’ statement, not knowing you were pimping a radio show.

    This is very simple. Name the senior pastor and the church. We can go check out the statement of faith on their website.

    I’ll even email the guy personally and ask him his belief on Christ if needed….

    Two sides, Andrew. Two sides before making a judgement. Get them both.

  147. Michael says:

    So…
    If Steve were a REAL pastor, he’d take the time out of his day to go listen to someone he doesn’t know and will probably never meet and write up a critique for all the people that read the Phoenix Preacher.
    It would accomplish absolutely nothing, but he should do it anyway.
    Bullspit.
    I really didn’t want to edit that…

  148. Andrew says:

    Steve,
    Just click on the link. You have the pastors name and church. But if you want to shoot me the messenger, then go ahead and do so. I already told you what happened to me in this church. I can tell I will get no sympathy here at all especially from you. Shoot the messenger and protect the affiliate pastors at all costs. Typical Calvary Chapel fair.

    Michael, these guys know each other or should by now. They go to the same senior pastor conferences. So I would say its bull shit to not listen to what they are passing off as Christianity. That is all I am saying.

  149. Andrew says:

    “We can go check out the statement of faith on their website.”

    I don’t give a hoot what is on anybody’s website. I care what they preach and their Visions that they endorse.

  150. Michael says:

    Andrew,

    There are a couple thousand CC pastors.
    Most of my friends in the movement have never met each other and wouldn’t know each other if they ran smack into each other.
    Not everyone goes to the SPC and when they do go they usually are with the guys they know locally.
    Your guy is completely across the country from Steve…

  151. Andrew says:

    “I’ll even email the guy personally and ask him his belief on Christ if needed…”‘

    Feel free to email the guy. I’m sure he will tell you what you want to hear. But like I said, I care what they preach and the Visions they endorse.

  152. Andrew says:

    Michael,

    I know for a fact that this guy was at the senior pastor conference in CA last year.

  153. Michael says:

    Furthermore…
    If the guy doesn’t understand basic Trinitarian theology then the people in that church should get off their dead asses and leave.
    It’s their fault he’s in the pulpit far more than it’s the problem of some other guy who never met him.
    At some point, people need to take responsibility for their spiritual health.

  154. Michael says:

    “I know for a fact that this guy was at the senior pastor conference in CA last year.”

    So what?
    Most of my friends were there too…and never spoke to each other.
    They didn’t know each other.

  155. Steve Wright says:

    Love believes all things. We are to also prove all things, and hold fast what is true.

    I will always believe someone until they show me a lie or gross misrepresentation – especially if they dig in and refuse to acknowledge their mistake when shown. Then I will be suspect of anything they ever say unless they show themselves faithful over time and earn that trust back.

    Andrew, I believed you that there might be a CC pastor out there who denied the deity of Christ.

    Here is the public statement of faith. Andrew, will you say now “I guess I was wrong, and misunderstood the pastor or maybe he misspoke” .

    If not, why should we ever believe a CC criticism you offer again?

    3. Jesus Christ

    We believe that Jesus Christ is fully God, who became fully human by a miraculous conception and virgin birth. He lived a life of perfect obedience, subservient to the will of the Father, and voluntarily atoned for the sins of men and women by dying on the cross as their substitute, and rose bodily from the grave, thus satisfying divine justice and accomplishing salvation for all who trust Him alone. He achieved victory over death and the powers of evil, and ascended into heaven where, as the only Mediator between God and humanity, He continually intercedes for His people. His return to this earth, or Second Coming, is the great hope of the church.

  156. Steve Wright says:

    I do not like to refer to the 2nd Person of the Triune Godhead as Jesus when discussing the time before the Incarnation.

    I think I am accurate in this belief. And in no way do I deny the Eternal Nature and Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ before the Incarnation.

    I cringe a little when I hear an OT theophany described as an example of “Jesus in the Old Testament” – because Jesus speaks to the Incarnation, and there was no Incarnation taking place before the Virgin Birth (Conception really), even though God did appear in the OT to man on occasion.

    Now….with that explanation, which is not given EVERY time I preach (though I do give it regularly as warranted) – I am sure someone could grab something I said about God and twist it to argue that Steve does not believe in the deity of Jesus.

    They would be wrong. And a simple question for clarification would explain what I meant. Especially if I was clumsy in saying so. Of course, I have hundreds of messages in the archives to offset one line from one message that some ODM ministry (and its followers) might want to make a stink over.

  157. Steve W,
    That ODM guy used to be a friend of mine – Chris Rosebrough – we went to Ocean Hills together. He taught the Adult Sunday School hour and was the first one chased out of OH when Skip came, because he taught a class the same time Skip wanted to preach.

    Skip’s idea was when he spoke, all hands were to be on deck.

    The part about Andrew’s old pastor begins somewhere between 1hr 05m – 1h 08m and runs for the remainder of the program. It was all about the false phenomena of Vision Casting which has always been a staple in many CCs over the years. January they have the year of prophecy in review and in February they would have a “Vision Casting” for the new year.

    I didn’t listen to the whole show and didn’t hear the “deny Jesus” part – but I do have a question – if he did say that, isn’t it an issue regardless of what the Statement of Faith says?

    We have troubles with many Lutheran congregations, who promise to uphold and teach what is contained in The Book of Concord and then deny what it teaches.

  158. victorious says:

    Andrew.

    Do you have any transcripts of this pastor teaching from texts such as John 1, Hebrews 1 or Colossians 1?

    What a person says or how they interact with these texts will reveal what they believe and how ell they may or may not articulate what they believe about the person of Jesus Christ.

  159. erunner says:

    Steve @ 157…. Sort of like Greg Laurie’s understanding of Jesus. Look hard enough and you’re bound to find something.

  160. Steve Wright says:

    The part about Andrew’s old pastor begins somewhere between 1hr 05m – 1h 08m

    We have troubles with many Lutheran congregations, who promise to uphold and teach what is contained in The Book of Concord and then deny what it teaches.

    if he did say that, isn’t it an issue regardless of what the Statement of Faith says?
    ———————————————————————
    You mean I was supposed to listen to an HOUR of that guy before I ever got to the point? 🙂

    MLD, I recognize you Lutherans have your problems 🙂

    But a CC pastor denying the deity of Jesus would be quite a rare thing indeed. And to actually craft a unique statement of faith for the website of that church, that he does not really believe, would be even rarer (more so than just say “We believe the Book of Concord” like you guys)

    So just like I was willing to give Andrew the benefit of the doubt and check out the claim, I’m also willing to give the pastor the benefit of the doubt. I know that won’t happen with a lot of people – giving a pastor, especially a CC pastor, the benefit of the doubt about what he actually believes because as we see regularly there are those who insist they know what YOU believe better than you do, and despite everything you might say.

    Like Victorious said, show me something clearly. Show me the pastor saying “Lots of people think Jesus is somehow God but He’s not” – Let’s hear the teachings on the key deity of Christ verses. Not tilt at this windmill.

  161. “But a CC pastor denying the deity of Jesus would be quite a rare thing indeed.”

    You are right – probably not an outright denial – probably more like, he may be God but not the chief God. 😉

  162. ( |o )====::: says:

    Andrew,
    Are pastors allowed to speak clumsily?
    Are worship musicians allowed to hit a few bad notes?
    Are artists allowed to stop, unfinished, and call it “done”?
    Is everyone supposed to narc on each other to the point of creating an environment of fear?

    Grace is giving each other a little room for improvement, yes?

  163. dave says:

    PCR is a scary show. Whenever I listen to Chris or similar guys like Miano, or Morrel I end up feeling a little more like becoming a spiritualist…. The guy has GOT to have better things to do.

  164. An interesting point about Ocean Hills – it looks like it was bought out by Mariners Church.

    http://www.oceanhillschurch.com/about-us/staff/

  165. Steve Wright says:

    G,

    I welcome it when someone comes up to me after a message and says “You know, you might have implied to some that…” – I also take it seriously because I do not want to be unclear in presenting the message.

    If it is Sunday, where I have four messages, I will adjust accordingly the rest of the day and then the next week probably go back to make clear what I otherwise might have confused.

    So I appreciate the grace like that you reference. I speak for over three hours each and every week just in the regular messages (not counting special events like a funeral). Bound to goof up a sentence once in awhile.

    But even more so, when it comes to what one believes, there is something about a reputation. Even if something came out wrong, anyone who has been around for any length of time is going to say “Well, I know Steve doesn’t mean THAT…He must have misspoke”

    Like hearing a classic song and recognizing the one bad note when it is played. You don’t accuse the artist of rewriting the song

  166. Xenia says:

    If this pastor stood up; and declared, like the Jehovah’s Witnesses do, that Jesus is a created being and is not part of the Trinity and not the Creator, then he’s a heretic. If, after working his way through the typically over-long evangelical teaching he mis-speaks, he should correct his error. He was careless and sloppy (and possibly poorly educated) but not necessarily heretical. The solution for this is shorter but more accurate sermons, IMO. The longer you talk, the greater the chance you will say something stupid. (This applies to more than preachers.)

  167. Andrew says:

    “Andrew,
    Are pastors allowed to speak clumsily?
    Are worship musicians allowed to hit a few bad notes?
    Are artists allowed to stop, unfinished, and call it “done”?
    Is everyone supposed to narc on each other to the point of creating an environment of fear?

    Grace is giving each other a little room for improvement, yes?”

    Maybe you missed it when I told you how I was “catapulted” out of this church. I have the attorney letter in my possession. Some grace that is for the congregant. But Michael is right everyone is responsible for their own spiritual health.

  168. Xenia says:

    Andrew, thank you for taking the time to find the link.

  169. Steve Wright says:

    Maybe you missed it when I told you how I was “catapulted” out of this church. I have the attorney letter in my possession. Some grace that is for the congregant. But Michael is right everyone is responsible for their own spiritual health.
    ——————————————————————-
    So you are deliberately misrepresenting the pastor’s view on the deity of Jesus?

    Is that deception seen as the path to greater belief and sympathy for your real beef with the guy?

    Is that the model Jesus gave us? Lie about your enemies on sometting everyone will take seriously like a foundational doctrinal statement, but then make sure when pushed to go back to your REAL agenda.

  170. Michael says:

    Andrew,

    This guy may be a scoundrel…and his teaching may be awful.
    What I heard was garbage.
    However, that does not make him a heretic.

  171. Steve Wright says:

    . If, after working his way through the typically over-long evangelical teaching
    ——————————————————–
    Just to be clear to my sister, Xenia. Two hours of those three each week are 4-30 minute messages. 🙂

    (I do drone for an hour on Wednesdays… 😉 )

  172. Andrew says:

    “So just like I was willing to give Andrew the benefit of the doubt and check out the claim, I’m also willing to give the pastor the benefit of the doubt. I know that won’t happen with a lot of people – giving a pastor, especially a CC pastor, the benefit of the doubt about what he actually believes because as we see regularly there are those who insist they know what YOU believe better than you do, and despite everything you might say”

    Steve, are you willing to give me the benefit of the doubt that I was wrongly excommunicated from this church? Or do you automatically give the CC senior pastor the benefit of the doubt in cases such as these?

  173. Michael says:

    G,

    Amen.
    I am either writing or speaking of the things of God every day.
    I have been imprecise, sloppy, and sometimes just wrong.
    My hope is that I stay open to correction and unafraid to admit error.

  174. Nonnie says:

    And the guitar man brings us back to the original topic….amazing grace! Thank you!

  175. mrtundraman says:

    “But a CC pastor denying the deity of Jesus would be quite a rare thing indeed.”

    How about this one”

    “The Father was not put in subject to the Son, but the Son willingly to the Father. Now, when this purpose is accomplished then Jesus will once again take His place in the Triune Godhead. And no longer will there be that, uh, position of a little lower than the angels, but now returned in the glory and as he prayed Father, glorify me with the glory I had with thee before the world ever was. When God said “Let us make man in our image and after our likeness”. And so, uh that’s the way that things are going to progress until there is just one God, the Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit ruling over the universe. All things then in subjection to Him. That God may be all and in all.”

  176. Michael says:

    Andrew,

    I want to believe you, but you haven’t put out the facts of your situation, just pieces of a story.
    We don’t know the whole story or the other side of the story.
    I may have sympathy for you to a degree, but I wouldn’t go to war with the little substance you’ve presented.

  177. Steve Wright says:

    Steve, are you willing to give me the benefit of the doubt that I was wrongly excommunicated from this church?
    —————————————-
    I already did.

    I then asked for more information to find out what actually happened and you refused to give it.

    Then you announced you were done conversing with me because I dared to ask questions.

    This was just a few days ago in the other thread. And like I said then, it obviously is not healthy to you to have so much anger and I don’t want to participate in it.

    And I don’t vision cast, but I do not for a second think this guy is a heretic – which anyone who denies the deity of Jesus most certainly happens to be.

  178. No one has a problem with the vision casting? That’s my issue.

    How do you disagree with him without disagreeing with God who gave him the vision?

  179. Andrew says:

    “This guy may be a scoundrel…and his teaching may be awful.
    What I heard was garbage.
    However, that does not make him a heretic.”

    That is true and I apologize to him if I have made that judgement. However, am I the worst sinner in the world that he can not even give me a simple yes or no answer whether I am allowed to go to any other Christian church in the entire world. This is what the regional church oversight had me do with this fellow. And by the way, that church recently gave a sermon on church discipline stating that they would honor the discipline of affiliate churches in the area. So because of this scoundrel I am excommunicated not just from his church but all CC churches in the entire area. That hurts Michael.

  180. Michael says:

    Andrew,

    “However, am I the worst sinner in the world that he can not even give me a simple yes or no answer whether I am allowed to go to any other Christian church in the entire world.”

    If you really need someone to answer that question for you, you need both a good church and therapy.

    That’s utterly foolish.

  181. Andrew, I have a question. How would they know if you showed up at another CC? It’s not like you have to sign in and it’s not like they hold the communion plate (or offering plate) from you.

  182. Michael says:

    MLD,

    I thought the whole presentation was unbiblical garbage.

  183. Andrew says:

    “If you really need someone to answer that question for you, you need both a good church and therapy.”

    I don’t need it. The regional CC pastor did.

  184. Michael says:

    So, if you believe that the CC regional guy can ban you from the whole church of God…you just need therapy.

    Furthermore, if you’re leaning Calvinist, why would you want to go to a CC?

    Find a good church and go there.

  185. Andrew says:

    Michael,
    I don’t believe that. I go to a wonderful church. I am saying it hurts being banned from the entire CC region. Why is that so hard to understand?

  186. Andrew says:

    “Furthermore, if you’re leaning Calvinist, why would you want to go to a CC?”
    Why are you giving me such a hard time Michael. I thought you had Calvinist leanings and thought your pastor was CC or something like that.

    Anyhow, I miss my friends there. I miss my brothers and sisters. I care about them. Can I not share that emotion without getting ripped to shreds.

  187. Michael says:

    It’s not.
    What’s hard to understand is why you expect people to jump on your bandwagon rebuking another guy when we don’t know the whole story or the guy who did it.
    I listened to his “vision casting”…and would consider it a badge of honor to be thrown out of that church and a mark of shame to have been there in the first place.

  188. Andrew says:

    “Andrew, I have a question. How would they know if you showed up at another CC? It’s not like you have to sign in and it’s not like they hold the communion plate (or offering plate) from you.”

    Sure I could sneak in somewhere. That is not the point. It is just sad that I can not see my old friends there. That is all I am saying.

  189. Michael says:

    “I thought you had Calvinist leanings…”
    I don’t lean, I fell completely over. 🙂
    I don’t attend my pastors church, as I pastor a church myself.
    Still, I think it’s important to be under submission to someone and have spiritual counsel.

  190. Andrew says:

    “I listened to his “vision casting”…and would consider it a badge of honor to be thrown out of that church and a mark of shame to have been there in the first place.”

    It is a honor Michael. But I would have never known really how bad it was without Chris Rosebrough and that nasty ODM site. But thank God for him or I would still be in more bondage.

  191. Andrew says:

    “No one has a problem with the vision casting? That’s my issue.

    How do you disagree with him without disagreeing with God who gave him the vision?”

    MLD, I have a problem with it but Steve doesn’t seem to. By the way, this guy offers a visioneering internship in the summer to teach the next generation of vision caster. That is just for starter.

  192. Michael says:

    Maybe Steve didnt have time to wade through an hour of belching…maybe?

  193. Nonnie says:

    Andrew, I just googled “Visioneering Internship” and to my surprise, I found this! Wow!

    http://www.ccdelco.com/internship/

  194. Andrew says:

    “So you are deliberately misrepresenting the pastor’s view on the deity of Jesus?

    Is that deception seen as the path to greater belief and sympathy for your real beef with the guy?

    Is that the model Jesus gave us? Lie about your enemies on sometting everyone will take seriously like a foundational doctrinal statement, but then make sure when pushed to go back to your REAL agenda.”

    Steve, I am not lying about anything. I never misrepresented this pastors views. I pointed out something he said which he has never retracted. In fact he will be doing a full vision talk in September and has his visioning internship this summer.

  195. ( |o )====::: says:

    Andrew,
    If you were missing enough social cues that those around you felt threatened enough to have police, civic or court action to keep you from interacting then, I’m gonna say this in all kindness, you were asserting your presence where others couldn’t or wouldn’t appreciate it and you need to be a blessing elsewhere where your love WILL be received and appreciated. You have no right to freedom of association when those you’re associating with aren’t feeling free. Then it becomes association by compulsion and that is nothing anyone wants

  196. Andrew says:

    Nonnie,
    I am telling you. This guy is not a small time pastor. He has big dreams and big visions. I think he has been mainly influenced by Mark Batterson’s Circle Maker which was their reading material for their 21 day Daniel fast.

  197. Steve Wright says:

    MLD, I have a problem with it but Steve doesn’t seem to.
    ———————————————-
    Excuse me for having to run an errand, and not seeing MLD’s question yet

    I was focused on the heresy charge about the deity of Jesus earlier – which I guess has been resolved and dropped.. So again, Andrew, you have made a judgement without knowledge or even knowing what I think about vision casting.

    You might stop that… 🙂

    I don’t “vision cast”. Anyone who had a relationship with my teachings by listening online, or more importantly is a part of our church fellowship would know that is not what we are about. And of course, those are also the people who would not judge falsely either.

    I’ve been asked about my “vision” for the church from time to time by well meaning, curious folks – much like I am asked why I never do an altar call. I think over the years I have spoken against altar calls maybe twice or so within a message, and probably the same for vision casting. I teach the Bible in my messages.

    What someone wants to do at their church, with their people, as the overseer is their call. Visions, tongues, altar calls, baptism every week, whatever….that is the beauty of the independent local church – and the beauty of God evaluating and leading us as leaders with the flock He has entrusted.

  198. Andrew says:

    “You have no right to freedom of association when those you’re associating with aren’t feeling free. Then it becomes association by compulsion and that is nothing anyone wants”

    You are right. Don’t challenge a vision caster because everyone in the church needs to fall inline. Like Michael said, its a badge of honor.

  199. Andrew says:

    “I was focused on the heresy charge about the deity of Jesus earlier – which I guess has been resolved and dropped”

    Nothing is dropped. Let us see a retraction what this guy said, ok? Not more visions. Not what a politician does by saying the opposite in another venue. That is called inconsistency.

  200. Andrew says:

    “What someone wants to do at their church, with their people, as the overseer is their call”

    Wrong. There is one church that is ruled by Christ. Someone can not just do what they want.

  201. Steve Wright says:

    Wrong. There is one church that is ruled by Christ. Someone can not just do what they want.
    ——————————————–
    Andrew, do you even go to church these days? Care to tell us at least the denomination group?

    Are you saying that your church models all that the Lutherans, Anglicans, Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists etc. all do. Are your services eight hours long? 🙂

    Or are you part of the only “true” church?

  202. Andrew says:

    “Andrew, do you even go to church these days? Care to tell us at least the denomination group?”

    I am very involved in my independent Church particularly in the English fellowship in a predominately Asian church. We are not perfect but I can’t think of anyone that thinks the pastor can just do what ever he wants. In fact we didn’t even have a pastor for over a year. Something unheard of in CC.

  203. Steve Wright says:

    t I can’t think of anyone that thinks the pastor can just do what ever he wants.
    ————————————————
    (sigh) So that is your interpretation for my writing this:

    What someone wants to do at their church, with their people, as the overseer is their call. Visions, tongues, altar calls, baptism every week, whatever….that is the beauty of the independent local church – and the beauty of God evaluating and leading us as leaders with the flock He has entrusted.

    I’m done Andrew. You have been challenged to one degree or another today by Xenia, MLD, G, Michael and me – and we all represent five unique church traditions.

    I will say I am very glad you are in fellowship and very involved there. Bless you.

  204. Andrew says:

    Steve,

    “Or are you part of the only “true” church?”

    Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Do you really think this is what my interpretation of my writing.

    The vision casters are the ones who think they are really the only ones hearing from God. And you as a senior pastor say these remarks is very saddening.

  205. Steve Wright says:

    Andrew, when the topic of discussion is the many and varied local churches that are part of the one Body of Christ universal, and I then read someone tell me there is only one church ruled by Jesus – then it gives me pause.

    Forgive me for misinterpreting your words.

  206. Andrew says:

    Steve
    I forgive you. But your point does shed light on why there is too much power given to a CC pastor. The collective wisdom of the congregation should be taken into consideration in a Moses Model church. I can testify that the church can survive without a pastor. Not ideal but it happened with us.

  207. covered says:

    Andrew,

    “In fact we didn’t even have a pastor for over a year. Something unheard of in CC”

    I’m curious as to why you think this was a good thing? I’m not picking a fight, just curious as to why you and others think that not having a shepherd is good?

  208. Steve Wright says:

    . I can testify that the church can survive without a pastor. Not ideal but it happened with us.
    —————————————————————–
    It happened with us too, Andrew.

    Total disability to the pastor, guest-speaker for the sermons, others knowing and doing their roles in terms of everything else (administration, security etc.) In our case it was several months….

  209. Andrew says:

    “I’m curious as to why you think this was a good thing?”

    You missed my last comment. I said it was not ideal but we were able to survive.

  210. Andrew says:

    “Total disability to the pastor, guest-speaker for the sermons, others knowing and doing their roles in terms of everything else (administration, security etc.) In our case it was several months….”

    So how did you get a pastor? You never answered my question before about membership. But without membership it is very difficult to really get a handle around the local church. Infact, I would say it is ripe for a “take over” from scoundrels.

  211. Steve Wright says:

    I’m the scoundrel that took over, Andrew 😉

    Seriously though, just about everyone here, at least participating in today’s thread knows this story – we are people with real backgrounds, history, for good or bad.

    Bring in the horn a little, converse awhile, and we all will get along fine.

    You will find we all have a lot in common, while at the same time being very unique and different too.

    Sort of like the Body of Christ! 🙂

  212. Andrew says:

    Steve,
    I really do need to go now. Its been enlightening for me. But consider implementing some sort of membership incase your entire leadership team for what ever reason became disabled. Seriously, the folks need to be part of the church in a more tangible way including ownership of the church’s assets. Something to think about.

  213. Steve Wright says:

    including ownership of the church’s assets
    —————————————————–
    I believe most churches in most denominations (at least those large enough to have assets) are 501c3 and as such the people (members or not) do NOT own the assets.

    There seems to be a lot of confusion at this blog about tax law.

    Our leadership team is about 3 dozen people so if they all get disabled at once, our community might be having bigger problems than just what is taking place at our church. 🙂

  214. ( |o )====::: says:

    Andrew,
    You linked the following statement to something I did not say and this is where you seem to have a blind spot, my friend…

    “You are right. Don’t challenge a vision caster because everyone in the church needs to fall inline. Like Michael said, its a badge of honor.”

    The thing you are missing, it is so basic to all human interaction: if you and someone else are not in agreement then you cannot walk together. If everyone else is agreeing that they are going to London and you’re going to Paris then its tea for them and caffe for you. If you insist on being upset then you’re way too sold that they’re the onlygame in town.

    Having once been CCCM I can understand the “nobody does it better” DNA from ChuckSr but it’s just not an enslavement that Jesus wants for any of us. If we deny the greater family & works of God it is to our folly.

    Be glad Jesus has brought you to a mountaintop to see the greatness of His Kingdom

  215. ( |o )====::: says:

    “…the stone rejected was valuable” is the principle at work here. You were rejected but that needs to be the point of liberation & reinvention

  216. ( |o )====::: says:

    and I’m truly sorry you still feel hurt. Most here will feel that same compassion

  217. Andrew says:

    ( |o )====:::,

    I understand your point. But I really didn’t have problem with anybody but senior pastor. When the police were called it was not because I was acting inappropriately or didn’t pick up on social clues but because the senior pastor instructed the home group leader to do this. And as I mentioned, I never received the terms of my excommunication until years later making me look like the bad guy. This is about the senior pastor and me and not anyone really else in the church. Although those that want to fiercely defend the pastor and his vision then of course they will side with him. But the problem resides with no one else but me and pastor and he refuses to meet with me alone to discuss.

  218. mrtundraman says:

    “I believe most churches in most denominations (at least those large enough to have assets) are 501c3 and as such the people (members or not) do NOT own the assets.”

    In most denominations if the local church has a split, the part of the church which stays loyal to the denomination legally keeps the church.

    Further, if a local church folds the assets go back to the denomination.

    If a CC folds the only part of the assets which go back to CCCM are debts held by CCCM.

    The sort of church Steve describes is one where the members have no voice. When Steve describes “the church” he is speaking about the leadership of the church which became leaders because they were chosen by the leadership.

  219. Unfortunately, I don’t have time to read all the comments, so I’ll just leave this drive-by:

    Michael, I love this story. Your grandma sounds like a real gem.

    Rob Murphy, your #29 describes me so well. Thank you for the encouragement!

  220. ( |o )====::: says:

    Andrew,
    Got it.
    Again, sorry for the hurt you’re feeling. Wish you the best.

  221. Please Note says:

    Loved this post, Michael, thank you !

    Great insight from others on the topic, too; thanks to all who took the time to weigh-in with their thoughts on grace.

  222. Andrew says:

    ( |o )====:::

    “God, the creator :: is :: the greatest visionary.
    Instead of parsing words of what is obviously a statement in isolation, possibly stated in less than an elegant way than you would prefer, perhaps you can simply be inspired to bless the God of creation who created you in His image and go out and inspire others to be creative and thank the person who fueled the inspiration?”

    Sure, and my point of all of this is that that Person is Jesus.

  223. Andrew says:

    “I do not like to refer to the 2nd Person of the Triune Godhead as Jesus when discussing the time before the Incarnation.

    I think I am accurate in this belief. And in no way do I deny the Eternal Nature and Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ before the Incarnation”

    Steve W. Read your paragraph above. Your second paragraph contradicts your first.
    Shouldn’t you say instead, “And in no way do I deny the Eternal Nature and Deity of the Lord 2nd Person of the Triune Godhead before the Incarnation”

    But Jesus said before Abraham was I AM.

  224. PP Vet says:

    A heretic is someone who openly maintains a heresy.

    Only self-appointed doctrine police go after someone for a single statement.

    Years ago this site was a place to ponder the systemic shortcomings of Calvary Chapel, and secondarily other authoritarian movements. What a blessing it was for recovering saints.

    Then one day five or six or seven years ago someone said Benny Hinn was a heretic. I patiently pointed out, Well, you may think he is a fraud, but he is not a heretic, in fact here is his statement of faith.

    So for that I was called a Benny Hinn lover. And the tone here migrated to becoming more of removing abusive leaders from ministry and to a lesser degree enforcing doctrinal correctness in the earth.

    Of course those efforts were failures, and over time our fearless leader recognized that he was gifted at helping people come to terms with authoritarian and eccentric leaders, and less gifted at slaying dragons.

    So I point that out to say, Let’s not return to becoming an inquisition that goes after errant leaders. That is not what we are good at.

    What we are good at is learning how to deal with them ourselves, and maybe helping others do the same.

    So you heard a CC pastor preach something heretical? Well, good, let’s all go over how we deal with that. How we are enfranchised and empowered to think for ourselves, even if we once attended churches where that sort of thing was very much discouraged.

    There will always be leaders like that, and we probably will be happier if we just don’t arrest our own growth while we are waiting for them to repent. Because the sad truth is, with some rare exceptions, they probably will not repent, at least not very soon. And someone with a different job description than ours will have to worry about nailing them.

    So let’s instead talk about how we have learned to take responsibility for our own growth and maturity. To graze over the entire wide and wonderful garden of God’s truth.

    How we define ourselves according to our documented divine inheritance, and how we are equipped to discern, and learning to better discern, between good and evil.

    Whether that good and that evil is in a pulpit, in a book, or in ourselves.

  225. Alex says:

    MLD said, “I swear, I am sure that Alex has pictures of Michael naked with a Billy goat. No way he gets to stay on the blog on his own. He must have something he is holding over Michael’s head.”

    Actually, MIchael is probably extending similar grace to me as Chuck is to BG. I’ve pledged friendship and loyalty to Michael and supported him, BG does it in spades with Chuck. It illustrates the thesis I presented above (which has not been successfully refuted, only further enforced).

  226. mrtundraman says:

    “Only self-appointed doctrine police go after someone for a single statement.”

    How many does it take? Shouldn’t this one be enough?

    “The Father was not put in subject to the Son, but the Son willingly to the Father. Now, when this purpose is accomplished then Jesus will once again take His place in the Triune Godhead. And no longer will there be that, uh, position of a little lower than the angels, but now returned in the glory and as he prayed Father, glorify me with the glory I had with thee before the world ever was. When God said “Let us make man in our image and after our likeness”. And so, uh that’s the way that things are going to progress until there is just one God, the Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit ruling over the universe. All things then in subjection to Him. That God may be all and in all.”

  227. mrtundraman says:

    “Only self-appointed doctrine police go after someone for a single statement.”

    Test all things…

    Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge…

  228. Alex says:

    And, MLD demonstrates complete gracelessness as he considers me an “enemy” for going after him and his buddies before. When I offer an olive branch to him, he tends to treat me much better and tones it down.

    It examples (even more) what I presented above…there is no real “turn the other cheek” and no real extreme Grace unless one pledges the loyalty and “submits” to the particular authority in a particular Group or relationship.

    I disagree with Shaun above, it is with both God and man.

    With God, the fact is there is not unconditional grace, it is entirely conditional on some sort of illusive “salvation” that has the correct understanding (and professes it) of a certain set of creeds (depending on the denomination) and has a certain requirement of check-list items like baptism, sacraments and then “good fruit” (but again, many Buddhists, Atheists etc have “good fruit” and love their neighbor, have joy, peace, self control etc). The vast majority of humanity gets no grace, they (assumed) will suffer eternally forever and ever no end in agonizing hell with no chance to correct the situation. That is the opposite of grace. If God is preeminent, then He has the power to extend grace or not. In the case of many, the mere rejection of the Gospel or the lack of hearing the Gospel is not a valid excuse to put the preeminence back on man, as that makes man more powerful for God and the sole determinant in the Grace equation…yet Grace, by definition, is something “not earned” and “unmerited”.

    Grace* is completely merited in the Divine Contract presented by the vast majority of Christian Religion. It is not “unmerited” and has pre-conditions. That is fact and I can demonstrate this by asking each of you “why do you believe you are saved?” Each of your answers includes pre-conditions and merits: Correct understanding of the Gospel, correct doctrine, demonstrating fruits of the spirit, works including baptism, sacraments, helping the poor etc.

    Man’s Grace* is similar/same. It is not “unmerited” in general.

  229. Alex says:

    With regards to the “Correct Doctrine” argument.

    Here’s the really funny thing: Those outside of Apostolic Succession are no different than Joseph Smith and the Mormons.

    Chuck Smith = Joseph Smith

    The “Correct Doctrine Police” = Joseph Smith

    Here’s why: What makes “Correct Doctrine” correct doctrine?

    In the bible, Paul the Apostle defined what was and wasn’t “correct doctrine”…so much so that Paul’s writings BECAME the “correct doctrine”.

    The Text is like the Constitution of the United States.

    It is not the individual words on the pages that are “correct doctrine”…it is the FUNCTION of the PROPER AUTHORITY interpreting and defining “what” the correct interpretation actually is.

    In the Early Early Church, that Authority was Paul the Apostle.

    With regards to the Constitution, it is the Supreme Court.

    Today, anyone who has an opinion defines “their” “Correct Doctrine”.

    You are all Joseph Smith, no different. You pick what you want from where you want and then codify your own Belief System of “correct doctrine” based on what makes most sense to you.

    You appeal to Scripture as the “Authority” yet your positions and views are a function of interpretation of that same Scripture and you assume that Gurus in your Box and your own opinion = “Correct Doctrine”

    The reality is, only Jesus and Paul the Apostle had “Correct Doctrine”…and if Apostolic Succession is true, then you need to trace that line to today to see who has the Authority to do the “Proper Interpretation” as Paul is dead.

    Now, it may be true that “Correct Interpretation” and “Correct Doctrine” changed after Paul…but that makes it a Free-For-All and explains why there are 9,000 to 30,000 differences of opinion “100% Correct Doctrine” and none really have a much better argument than Joseph Smith on claiming “Correct!”

    …God told you this and that and you appeal (loosely) to Scripture. Same diff.

  230. mrtundraman says:

    Let’s judge a statement against the background of all other statements on a subject. The above statement by Chuck Smith (9:49am) was found by doing a text search of all of Chuck Smith’s statements (his tapes are conveniently transcribed) for the words Trinity and all related words such as Triune. The statement was found and it’s clearly got serious problems since Jesus never left the Triune Godhead. Smith has made very few actual statements about the Trinity, Most of the rest explain that he doesn’t understand the Trinity. There are none which contradict Smith’s statement above.

    The statement is in widely available format (tape and transcripts) as well as given as Bible Commentary. It is used by the Calvary Chapel Bible College as the core of the curriculum so it’s being used to teach students.

    The statement is consistent with Pentecostalism where the notion is that Jesus ceased to be God in the kenosis (emptying).

    Seems to me like it meets all tests to be something which needs to be publicly questioned.

  231. mrtundraman says:

    “You are all Joseph Smith, no different. You pick what you want from where you want and then codify your own Belief System of “correct doctrine” based on what makes most sense to you.”

    While I think I get your point there is one significant difference. Joseph Smith wrote additional books and called them Scripture, in fact, greater than the existing Scripture since the existing books had errors.

    Joseph’s interpretation of Scripture only has lasting power since he wrote new Scripture to use to interpret the previous Scripture. Minus the additional books, he had nothing to offer that would have lasted.

  232. Alex says:

    I know folks will hate me for being so blunt, but that’s the truth as I process it through logic/reason and from much hashing out and observation and critical thinking. It is what it is and you can name-call etc all you want. I wish the Faith wasn’t so whacky and made more sense, but it is what it is. Hopefully God is much more merciful and much more Gracious than presented by the vast majority of Christianity.

  233. Alex says:

    MTM said, “Joseph Smith wrote additional books and called them Scripture,”

    Yes, agreed, yet some of the works of a Packer or a Calvin or a Chuck Smith or an NT Wright or a Rick Warren take on the same characteristics for folks as the “correct interpretation” of the real Scripture becomes a function of what folks read in the extra-biblical books of the Gurus…so in that sense it is also Scripture to them as it defines their “correct understanding” etc of the bible.

  234. mrtundraman says:

    “Seems to me like it meets all tests to be something which needs to be publicly questioned.”

    And who is there in CC who would publicly question such a statement. Folks like Steve will question the statement after they leave but never while they are involved in the organization. While they are in the organization they will protect the brand at all costs.

  235. “why do you believe you are saved?”

    Because I was chosen before the foundation of the world, Eph 1:4. Now that is grace! Nothing resting on me, but all on God, who gives grace!
    This was an excellent post Michael! None of us deserve the grace we get from God!

  236. mrtundraman says:

    Alex, As big a fan of NT Wright as I am would not compare his writings to Scripture. He might be one of the brightest lights around but his light is only bright to the degree that it reflects the light of Scripture. Does anyone put together all the pieces perfectly? Not so much, Wright included. The best someone can do it put more pieces together and better than the others of his day.

  237. Alex says:

    Derek said, “Because I was chosen before the foundation of the world, Eph 1:4. Now that is grace! Nothing resting on me, but all on God, who gives grace!”

    OK, then why doesn’t God give that Grace* to “all”? Why just a select few? Seems pretty ungracious to the vast majority who are pre-selected for hell…

  238. Alex says:

    Derek, how do you know you are one of the lucky few and special and got picked to be on the Grace* team? Because you say so? Isn’t there supposed to be other stuff from a check-list that tells you you are on the team?

  239. Alex says:

    I call bullspit. Not many of you can defend your whacky position. It becomes quite a function of Goal Post moving and contradiction when closely examined.

  240. Alex, read your bible. The answers are there if you aren’t blind to them.

    For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.

    I refer you to Romans 9 with the qualification that God does not have to explain himself to me or you. I don’t have to explain him either, because this is a part of the mind of God that he has not fully revealed and is part of his sovereignty.

    Everything does not have a good logical answer and frankly I don’t sit around worrying about finding one.

    Shaun was right. We are all imperfect beings on here and if you keep trying to compare us to some “ideal” you will be sorely disappointed. Only God is perfect, we are just waiting for the redemption of our bodies when all will be in a much better state than now.

    Have a good day.

  241. Alex says:

    Derek, I’m well familiar with the Calvinist position. It seems one of the only two logical outcomes if the bible is logical:

    1. Fatalism: God picks winners and losers.

    2. Universal Reconciliation: Love wins.

    The in-between stuff (like CC) is really just an inconsistent illogical position that puts the crux of “salvation” on the individual’s ability to do a list of stuff and even then the motives are questioned and it becomes a very nebulous “God knows the heart!” determinant.

  242. Alex says:

    Derek said, “Alex, read your bible. The answers are there if you aren’t blind to them.”

    I do, all the time.

    Which of the 9,000 to 30,000 different “correct interpretations” am I to believe?

    Should I just read it and make up my own opinions? I do that and express some on here and then Michael tells me to go read books (that I’ve already read) and to agree with those as if they are on par with Scripture….

  243. Alex says:

    Heck, maybe the Charismatics are right. Turn off your brain and roll around and bark like a dog and speak in gibberish. Maybe that’s the ticket.

  244. Alex asked:
    “why do you believe you are saved?”
    I answered.
    You said my answer would be “Each of your answers includes pre-conditions and merits:”
    Which precondition or merit did I include in my answer?

  245. Thing is, “Love Wins” position in no way negates Jesus’ call to make all humans His disciples, in fact the world would be a far better place if we simply present Him from the gospels to everyone and let them choose who is the best to follow.

    I don’t think we’d have “radicalized followers of Jesus” doing anything except loving people too much.

    They surely wouldn’t be detonating pressure cooker IEDs in the name of His love.

    Ok, gotta go till the garden and thank God for the opportunity to pull weeds

  246. PP Vet says:

    MTM, the argument that you are so in love with the Bride that you want to protect her from the heresy of CS does not wash. Nor the claim that you are called by heaven to publicly correct his Christology.

    A much more likely explanation is that you have a bug up your bum and have come here to torment us and further some agenda rooted in your own insecurity and hurt.

    If you want to be fair, synthesize the body of the man’s public work. I believe you will find he is pretty orthodox.

  247. Alex says:

    Derek said, “Which precondition or merit did I include in my answer?”

    It is implied, unless you agree with the “Love Wins” Universal Reconciliation position…

  248. Sorry, not following you. What precondition or merit of mine is implied by my answer?

  249. Alex says:

    I think one of the biggest ironies brought out by this thread is that the OMD’s are really much like Joseph Smith and his theological and end-times opinions. They see God as giving them some sort of ‘special revelation’ and Tea Leave Reading ability and then they make professions and prognostications that are on par with Scripture to their followers.

    They have no basis and appeal to Authority, other than their particular read of Scripture and “what God has revealed to me”…sometimes exclusively to them. Kind of like the angel Maroni visiting Joseph Smith and giving him a “special word” directly from God.

    The ODM’s read headlines and world events and get all sorts of “special revelations” about what it all means…yet the vast majority in Christianity who we assume has the same “Holy Spirit” doesn’t see it the same way. God tells the ODM’s one thing, and the rest of Christianity a bunch of other things.

    The ODM’s interpret this as: They have the only Truth and they have received (much like Joseph Smith) a special revelation from God that no one else has and that they are the “true believers” and if you don’t “see” this special revelation, then you aren’t a true believer and hell-fodder. Very Joseph Smith-esque.

  250. Alex says:

    Derek said, “Sorry, not following you. What precondition or merit of mine is implied by my answer?”

    You assume you are saved, correct?

    Is an Atheist saved? A Mormon? Why not?

  251. Alex says:

    I want you to struggle through it Derek, not to one-up you, but so you’ll really understand the position I’m asserting and why.

  252. That is not an answer to my question.
    I know I am saved.
    Mormons and atheists are not in this discussion.
    Like it says in Star Wars “Stay on target!”
    A precondition means something I must meet (meaning something I must do) before being saved and merit means something I have to do to keep myself saved after the fact.
    Now, what precondition or merit did I imply by my answer?

  253. Michael says:

    Alex,

    As I’ve said, this would make a great thread on your blog or one of the multitude of blogs that seek to undermine the faith.
    It’s not good on my blog.
    I’m tired of repeating myself.
    Faith is a gift from God…by faith we believe…by faith I believe that God spoke and preserved His word down to us.
    By faith, not by logic or philosophical wrangling.
    My calling in life is to strengthen faith, not undermine it.
    Take this elsewhere.

  254. Ah well.
    Thank you for making me think with this post Michael. I have been pondering it all weekend.
    Leave you with a verse I was reading earlier.
    For from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. (John 1:16, ESV)

    Grace just piled up on more grace! What a beautiful thing!

  255. mrtundraman says:

    “If you want to be fair, synthesize the body of the man’s public work. I believe you will find he is pretty orthodox.”

    As I explained above. I did search all of Smith’s commentary transcripts and came to the conclusion that he’s no where near orthodox.

  256. Michael says:

    Derek,

    Thank you.

    If as Alex has stated, he has read the works of Packer, Wright, etc, and is not convinced, no one here will be able to help him.

  257. mrtundraman says:

    I also went to the Chapel Store at CCCM to the tape library. I asked for a catalog and specifically looked ans also asked for anything on the Trinity, There were no tapes on the Trinity but more than a dozen on the Anti-Christ.

    Now if this was a traditional Protestant Church, there’d be at least one tape a year on the Trinity as preached on Trinity Sunday.

  258. Alex says:

    Michael, strangely, I have Faith and my expressions are not Anti-Faith. They just disagree with your Box of faith.

  259. Alex says:

    Derek said, “A precondition means something I must meet (meaning something I must do) before being saved and merit means something I have to do to keep myself saved after the fact.
    Now, what precondition or merit did I imply by my answer?”

    You assume Salvation by Grace, yet you assume that there is something different about you than Atheists and Mormons. You would say that you have the following that validate your Saved-ness juxtaposed to others who lack these preconditions to be officially saved:

    1. Correct understanding of the correct Jesus and the correct doctrine etc.

    2. Fruit manifested as fruits of the spirit

    3. A profession of faith

    4. Baptism and Sacraments etc.

    Those are all “things” that your box deems as “must haves” to be saved or you really aren’t truly “chosen”, no?

    Whereas, the others lack those “things” which is why you would say they aren’t “saved”…ergo your Grace* requires preconditions that you assume were “given” to you…and others were not “given” the same check-list of stuff to be “saved”…ergo in your Box grace is conditional and merited for some reason unknown to us. God “chose” you and gave you the check-list of stuff and He chose not to give it to others based on merits only God knows, but it is still merit-based, as the “evidence” must be present in the form of actions/works/professions that validate true Faith.

    Unmerited Grace, from the logical perspective, would mean precisely that: God would extend Grace to all and impart belief to all, but that isn’t shown to be true empirically. Therefore we must assume that if Grace is truly unconditional and unmerited in the literal sense, then Love Wins.

    If not, then God picks and chooses and bestows the merits to those who chooses for unknown reasons (which are still merits and it is assumed by many throughout history that He ‘sees’ the heart before folks are born physically etc to explain away the Double-Predestination paradox in the Hyper-Calvinist position…which is merit-based as it depends on a person’s heart and God’s foreknowledge of what they would do once they were alive physically, etc).

  260. Alex says:

    The other support for my #264 above is this:

    I have posed the question in various forms many times on here: What about the person who never hears the Gospel? Are they in hell?

    Many say that God wouldn’t put someone in hell who didn’t have a chance to believe. He would somehow reveal HImself to that person in some form and give them a chance before casting them into hell.

    Well, that is a precondition and merit-based. A person’s eternity in hell resides on their response at that moment.

    The converse to that is to acknowledge that the Gospel and “correct Jesus” is impossible to preach to all humans who have ever lived. Many have never heard the Gospel message and never heard about the ‘correct Jesus’ therefore in your box it would be assumed they cannot be saved, having never had the opportunity to be saved and were not given Grace and were destined for hell with no chance.

    This is why I say there are only two logical positions presented in the Scripture: Fatalism and Love Wins.

    The rest is merit-based and preconditional Grace no matter which box outside of the two boxes I describe above.

    So, Derek, you are either in a merit-based Grace* box or you are a Fatalist who believes that God picks winners and losers and many folks have zero shot at Salvation and are hell-fodder.

  261. mrtundraman says:

    “So, Derek, you are either in a merit-based Grace* box or you are a Fatalist who believes that God picks winners and losers and many folks have zero shot at Salvation and are hell-fodder.”

    Or is it possible that faith is not a work?

  262. Nonnie says:

    So, Alex, are you wilfully choosing to disrespect Michael and his request? (number 255)

  263. Alex says:

    Nonnie, I disagree with Michael’s 255, it is a misrepresentation of my participation. I am doning none-other than what this “community’ is known for, hashing out doctrinal and theological issues and trying to makes sense of the stuff. I am no more disrespecting Michael than anyone else who disagrees with his positions and states such over and over.

  264. Nonnie says:

    “I am no more disrespecting Michael than anyone else who disagrees with his positions and states such over and over.”

    Alex, YOU are the only one doing this…there is no one else doing this over and over and over and over…………. Please have a some respect, whether you disagree or not.

  265. Michael says:

    I have asked politely and graciously repeatedly.
    I’m done now.
    Take it to your own blog or I have no options but to moderate you.

  266. PP Vet says:

    “I believe that God is one yet is manifested in the distinct persons of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” Chuck Smith, 1994, Why Grace Changes Everything, page 175 (in Chapter 11).

    I am not here to defend Chuck. Just tryIng to make sure we present accurate positions.

  267. I find Alex and MTM to be funny. They continually bring up the bad actions and bad teachings of Chuck Smith and CC on a blog that for over 7 years has rejected the actions and teachings of Chuck Smith – but they think there is shock value, like it is going to offend our senses. Geez 90% of the people who interact here have already left CC and reject being under the teaching of Chuck Smith. Shouldn’t you take your case to pro Chuck and pro CC blogs.

    So who are you trying to inform? Talk about dead from the neck up…

  268. mrtundraman says:

    PP Vet – who wrote that quote? Just because a book has Chuck Smith’s name on the title doesn’t mean he wrote it.

    MLD – Why the constant stream of insults?

  269. PP Vet says:

    That is Chuck speaking in the first person. Those are his words.

  270. PP Vet says:

    On the next page he is quoting himself, recounting a conversation that he had: “I believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are separate personalities, though there is one God.”

  271. mrtundraman says:

    “On the next page he is quoting himself, recounting a conversation that he had: “I believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are separate personalities, though there is one God.””

    Sounds like Chuck… More heterodoxy…

    http://calvarychapel.pbworks.com/w/page/13146616/Chuck-Smith-Trinity-First-Page

    Your defense is making Chuck look even worse.

  272. PP Vet says:

    Well, even though MLD has little or no formal theological education, and is very unsophisticated in these matters, I have to agree with MLD on this. Any problems in CS’s concept of the Trinity are pretty subtle at worst, and nobody here cares.

  273. mrtundraman says:

    “Any problems in CS’s concept of the Trinity are pretty subtle at worst…”

    Saying Jesus left the Triune Godhead isn’t really all that subtle.

    “…and nobody here cares.”

    Sad, but I suspect you are mostly correct. I think that right doctrine matters, but I’m pretty sure that the vast majority of people could care less.

  274. I don’t care what Chuck Smith teaches, he is not my pastor. I don’t care about the false teachings of the Orthodox Church either – when they teach their works based salvation, or their false assumptions about apostolic succession, – how does that affect me?

  275. mrtundraman says:

    I agree that the difference between the words “separate” and “distinct” are subtle, but they are important. The historical church dealt with these issues in the first centuries and spent a lot of time and effort to establish what constitutes Christian doctrine and what isn’t Christian doctrine.

    Now, as Protestants, we feel free to do as we please and revisit any issue we want to revisit. But I think we would do well to pay some attention to those who went before us in the faith.

    YMMV.

  276. mrtundraman says:

    What is the role of historical theology in our own faith? For Lutherans, the baseline was struck in the 1520s with Luther. For the Orthodox, the baseline was struck in the first couple of centuries with the first councils of the church. For CCites it all started in the mid 1960s.

  277. Lutherans do not start at a baseline in the 1520s. You will not find a single Lutheran teacher of old or modern day who thinks Lutheran theology begins at that point.

    Lutherans just went back to the original teachings and made corrections to the errors of the previous more dominant churches.

    Orthodoxy may say they go back to the beginning, but that does not mean that they did not have error from the very beginning. Bad theology that is 2,000 yrs old is still bad theology.

  278. mrtundraman says:

    “Lutherans do not start at a baseline in the 1520s. You will not find a single Lutheran teacher of old or modern day who thinks Lutheran theology begins at that point.”

    MLD, sorry I used a word that you are apparently not familiar with. “Baseline” is not the same as” beginning”.

    “Lutherans just went back to the original teachings and made corrections to the errors of the previous more dominant churches.”

    And that’s what it means “to strike a baseline”.

  279. Steve Wright says:

    For CCites it all started in the mid 1960s.
    —————————————
    That’s just plain stupid….

  280. mrtundraman says:

    Steve – Often things seem stupid to us because we can’t or won’t face them directly.

  281. Steve,
    Don’t worry about MTM – he is a religious rogue.
    He went to a Lutheran church and lies to the pastor – and then blamed the pastor for his lack of salvation.
    He went to CC because he thought it was cook, and when they wouldn’t listen to his version of the Bible, he went on a nearly 20 yr terror rant against them.
    After a brief stint with the Missionary Alliance Church (no telling what scortched earth tactics he used leaving there, he has followed Perry Robinson into the Orthodox Church, which he refused to join. I am sure that he is playing them for a new blog rant.

  282. he thought it was cook = he thought it was cool

  283. mrtundraman says:

    Lutheranism started because Luther thought that the Catholic Church had it wrong.

    Calvary Chapel started because Chuck Smith thought that the Foursquare Church had it wrong.

    The Orthodox church started because the Apostles came and preached the Gospel to them and the people in Asia Minor thought that the Apostles had it right.

    Isn’t the difference apparent? I’m not Orthodox but I can see the difference.

  284. PP Vet says:

    Well, this round to MTM. Every group typically has to “baseline” its practice and theology when it starts.

    CS presents much of the CC “baseline” in “Calvary Chapel Distinctives”. Luther laid out the Lutheran baseline. Whether the ideas were all or almost all pulled from prior generations is not the point.

  285. PP Vet says:

    Of course whether or not older is better is another question entirely.

  286. Steve Wright says:

    So do the words “it”..”all”…”started” have some special meaning in your world too The phrase you used was “the role of historical theology in our own faith”

    Yep. Nothing I believe, especially about the Nature of God and the Trinity, showed up until the mid 60s.

    At least most people critical of dispensationalists give us enough years to go back to Darby. Your point was wrong, and not just wrong…but stupid.

    If you insist on combining common words to make your own expressions, don’t blame the rest of us for not understanding you (or thinking you are talking about tennis when you ‘strike a baseline’)

    Look, it’s clear that you have an underlying itch for an argument, no matter how inane, and if you can get some licks in on Calvary Chapel while you are at it…all the better.

    Have fun with that.

  287. mrtundraman says:

    “Don’t worry about MTM – he is a religious rogue.”

    I am a rebel for sure.

    “He went to a Lutheran church and lies to the pastor – and then blamed the pastor for his lack of salvation.”

    I never lied to the pastor. He knew I was not a Christian when he “confirmed” me. Yet he went through with it. I don’t think I even repeated after him not wanting to be a hypocrite and he was OK with that.

    “He went to CC because he thought it was cook, and when they wouldn’t listen to his version of the Bible, he went on a nearly 20 yr terror rant against them.”

    Slander, as usual. Never asked them to believe my version of anything. My “rant” against them started when I ran into them on arcc-c and they denied Chuck Smith ever predicted 1981 as the return of Christ.

    “After a brief stint with the Missionary Alliance Church”

    Not sure where you pulled that one out of. I attended a CMA church for a short time because it was the only local church which got the resurrection right. Their pastor is a nice guy with pretty solid theology.

    “(no telling what scortched earth tactics he used leaving there,”

    No scorched earth. They are fine people, just too fundie for me.

    “he has followed Perry Robinson into the Orthodox Church, which he refused to join. I am sure that he is playing them for a new blog rant.”

    I’ve had rants against the EOC in the past. They didn’t like the original research I did on the historical roots of their teaching on the Perpetual Virginity of Mary and that was back in the mid 90s. I just think they have it righter than most other churches around but I am a Protestant not Orthodox..

  288. Ixtlan says:

    “They didn’t like the original research I did on the historical roots of their teaching on the Perpetual Virginity of Mary and that was back in the mid 90s. I just think they have it righter than most other churches around but I am a Protestant not Orthodox..”

    do you have this research posted on the web?

    I could almost be pursued to be Ortho, but their soteriology is at best, problematic to me.
    Plus, I like music from this millenium, although the chants are cool…. not cook.

  289. mrtundraman says:

    “Well, this round to MTM. Every group typically has to “baseline” its practice and theology when it starts. CS presents much of the CC “baseline” in “Calvary Chapel Distinctives”. Luther laid out the Lutheran baseline. Whether the ideas were all or almost all pulled from prior generations is not the point.”

    PP, yes, you get the point. To say that something is baselined is not to sau that there were no historical antecedents to the baselining. What else would it be that was baselined?

    Every denomination bears the marks of its start.

  290. Steve Wright says:

    I know MLD – Most people who claim to follow Jesus would be embarrassed if their boorish behavior was so bad that they actually got kicked off a public blog (especially a blog with a reputation for allowing a wide range of voices). At the least they might tone the adversarial charge down a little when given grace by the owner.

    But some wear that as a badge of honor.

    Tell me whenever MTM makes an effort to post an agreement or support of something written here by anyone concerning our common faith and walk in the Lord.

    (Not counting his Amens to posts that simply beat him to the criticism of others)

  291. PP Vet says:

    The Mormons have a lovely “Baseline Change” process that has allowed them to remove polygamy and admit blacks.

    But the principle of a baseline still applies.

    Of course every group thinks that they have it right and is offended over what they view as an implication that they invented new doctrine.

    But that is not the point. The point is, when you start, you define your distinctives, etc., and that is your baseline.

    When you allow interracial marriage a la BJU, for example, you have changed your baseline.

  292. PP Vet says:

    MTM, MLD and SW hate to lose and have resorted to ad hominem attacks. They should be embarrassed.

    I am always amazed at how rarely anyone here admits they were wrong.

    Our fearless leader does, Dave Rolph would, Babylon’s Dread can do it albeit begrudgingly. But not many others.

    Not you, either, apparently.

  293. mrtundraman says:

    I found the paper on the web at:

    http://lifeofjesus2001.tripod.com/bvm-pvb.htm

    The part that got the Orthodox going was when I quoted Bishop Basil’s (William Essey) seminary thesis on the origin of the dogma of the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary. He has a quote where he admits a late date for the teaching Footnote 57.

    MLD might appreciate this:

    Historically, the Protestant church has had those who affirm the doctrine of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. Calvin, Luther, Zwingli and others taught the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, but the teaching has fallen into disrepute in Protestant circles in more recent times

    So much for MLD’s claim “Lutherans just went back to the original teachings and made corrections to the errors of the previous more dominant churches.”

    They must have missed that one…

  294. mrtundraman says:

    Steve wrote “So do the words “it”..”all”…”started” have some special meaning in your world too The phrase you used was “the role of historical theology in our own faith””

    Baseline can be found in the dictionary.

    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/baseline

  295. mrtundraman says:

    “MTM, MLD and SW hate to lose and have resorted to ad hominem attacks. ”

    Did I do an ad hom? I didn’t intend to…

  296. PP Vet says:

    Sorry I was not clear. I was addressing you, MTM, not including you.

    Should have said:

    MTM: MLD and SW hate to lose … Etc.

  297. PP Vet says:

    I find your presence here refreshing because this place is usually just blowhards.

  298. mrtundraman says:

    PPV, I’m not above doing an ad hom but I didn’t remember doing one in this instance. Thanks for the clarification.

  299. PP Vet says:

    At least you understand logic, reason, and the principles of honest and constructive debate.

  300. Steve Wright says:

    SW hate to lose and have resorted to ad hominem attacks
    —————————————–
    PP Vet – I received the first personal attack my friend. I began by commenting about a misrepresentation of my belief system. Nothing personal at all.

    I’m not really trying to “win” or “lose” – or frankly trying to even play a game. I just think silly comments about someone else’s belief system are worthy of response. Does it tend to go downhill fast after that, sure, and I’ll take my responsibility accordingly and apologize to the community for not ignoring the online proverbial “nose tweaking”

    I’ve never heard the expression “strike a baseline” used in any meaningful manner in theological conversation. If Tundra can share us a link to others using the term in theology discussions, and not just what is in his mind, then I will consider myself educated. Google seems to be coming up empty.

    I’ve understood the idea to speak of a starting point, or a boundary. Like in budgeting, science experiments (sports of course). The idea that my theological starting point is found in new teachings of the 1960s is ludicrous.

    Of course, if tundra was just stating the obvious, that Calvary Chapel began in the 1960s, well obviously that is common sense. But if you think that was his point in the original comment, more power to you….

  301. PP Vet says:

    Well, I knew exactly what he meant by strike a baseline.

    If what you are saying is, “Sorry, I did not really know what was meant by ‘baseline'”, then fair enough.

    That would make you the first CC pastor in the history of this site to issue a humble and direct apology.

    Unfortunately, what you seem to be saying in a just slightly passive aggressive way really is, “MTM is a jerk”.

    Which is what I meant by ad hominem.

  302. Steve Wright says:

    My last word. What was written above was as follows. The ENTIRE post was:

    (quote) What is the role of historical theology in our own faith? For Lutherans, the baseline was struck in the 1520s with Luther. For the Orthodox, the baseline was struck in the first couple of centuries with the first councils of the church. For CCites it all started in the mid 1960s. (end quote)

    The…role…of…historical…theology…in…our…own…faith.

    I engaged that point, and that point alone. Of course, things were moved, redefined, Mormons and interracial marriage entered the picture and so forth….

    Here’s the only thing on our online doctrinal statement of faith. Our baseline so to speak. I hardly think it is original to the 1960s, and concerns many issues of which those ancient councils addressed. Someone might believe differently on some items certainly without entering heretical territory. But why someone would just want to argue that those who claim to believe what they actually believe (quote) “can’t or won’t face them directly”. is beyond me,

    ———————————————–
    We believe:
    The Bible is the Word of God and without error in all issues to which it speaks. It is our authority in all areas of doctrine and life.

    There is one God, eternal, a Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The three Persons of the one Godhead share equally, fully, and simultaneously in all the attributes of God. God is the Creator of the universe and all things within it.

    The eternal Son, Jesus Christ, took on humanity by means of the Virgin Birth. He was born sinless, and lived a sinless life. He died as the sacrifice for the sins of all mankind. He physically rose from the dead, and ascended to heaven. He will someday return and setup His kingdom upon the earth.

    The first man, Adam, was created by God sinless, but chose to disobey God’s command, bringing sin and death upon himself and a curse to this world. As a result, all individuals since are born with a sinful nature, separated from God, and in need of salvation.

    Salvation is a gift of God’s grace through personal faith in Jesus Christ. The gospel describes this saving faith as belief in Jesus’ death for one’s sins, and belief in His resurrection. After death, those who have believed the gospel will live forever in the heavenly presence of God, while those who have not believed the gospel will be separated from God in hell for all eternity for their sins.

    The moment one sincerely believes the gospel, he/she is born again, and only then is truly a Christian. All Christians are indwelt by the Holy Spirit at the moment of salvation, and should seek to live a holy life, pleasing to God. Although a Christian may sin, these sins are still forgiven by God on the merits of Jesus Christ. However, the evidence of true salvation will show itself in the growth and development of a Godly lifestyle under the direction and power of the Holy Spirit.

  303. MTM,
    “So much for MLD’s claim “Lutherans just went back to the original teachings and made corrections to the errors of the previous more dominant churches.”

    Luther was a process. Many things taught by early Luther were not taught by later Luther – and surprise, Luther was not the only :Lutheran” Can you find that teaching int he book of concord?

  304. MTM,
    Why don’t you post a link to your church so we can see what it’s all about.

    The last time I asked, you posted links to the Orthodox Church. Why do you continually deceive?

    Are you afraid if someone finds out who you really associate with that you will come under some shame?

    Pony up big boy.

  305. I love how PP Vet does his strut. Oh, so offended by ad hominids yet as I look back he pissed first, with his “Well, even though MLD has little or no formal theological education, and is very unsophisticated in these matters,”

    Sad how he doesn’t see it in himself.

  306. Apple of His Eye says:

    That was the best, just the best!

  307. PP Vet says:

    That was not ad hominem, MLD. That was a gratuitous insult, which of course was done in love because I know it will only make you stronger.

    If you had made a point in a debate with me, and instead of addressing the substance of what you were saying, I tried to dismiss the merit of your statements by diminishing you as their source, that would be ad hominem.

    There was no debate between us at that point. I was agreeing with you!

    Understanding all this is second nature to MTM. I may disagree with him on many things, but at least he is educated, smart, and mentally disciplined, and somewhat rigorous in his thinking.

    But it is painful explaining these things to you because you cannot stay on topic and follow a logical train of thought!

  308. PP Vet says:

    If I were talking to Neanderthals, that would be “ad hominid”.

    Come to think of it ….

  309. mrtundraman says:

    “The eternal Son, Jesus Christ, took on humanity by means of the Virgin Birth. He was born sinless, and lived a sinless life. He died as the sacrifice for the sins of all mankind. He physically rose from the dead, and ascended to heaven. He will someday return and setup His kingdom upon the earth.”

    Steve, Does Jesus rule now?

  310. mrtundraman says:

    Steve Wright wrote – “Here’s the only thing on our online doctrinal statement of faith. Our baseline so to speak. I hardly think it is original to the 1960s, and concerns many issues of which those ancient councils addressed. ”

    The additions and omissions are what make it interesting. Why do a different statement than the Nicene Creed, for instance? Most other churches use the historical language. Luther and others would have stuck with the creed, but they redefined the words to mean something other than what the words meant to the original authors. That’s what cults do, and that’s what our Protestant Fathers did.

  311. mrtundraman says:

    “MTM,
    Why don’t you post a link to your church so we can see what it’s all about.”

    After watching you savage a church I don’t even belong to, why would I give you the ammo to savage one that I do like? I don’t make a point of my denomination or put it into my UserID so it’s not relevant and frankly, none of your business.

  312. Andrew says:

    “For CCites it all started in the mid 1960s.
    —————————————
    That’s just plain stupid….”

    Not really. It all started when Chuck had a vision and was given a new name “shepherd”. I think its recorded in his Harvest book.

  313. mrtundraman says:

    Steve wrote “The eternal Son, Jesus Christ, took on humanity by means of the Virgin Birth.”

    The traditional creeds include the role of the Holy Spirit. Why is that missing? Seems like it was an important part of the Incarnation, right? At least important enough to merit mentioning as the traditional creeds have done —“[Jesus was] conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary”…

    “The first man, Adam, was created by God sinless, but chose to disobey God’s command, bringing sin and death upon himself and a curse to this world. As a result, all individuals since are born with a sinful nature, separated from God, and in need of salvation.”

    That statement, about man having a sinful nature, is problematic. I’d leave it to someone like Perry to explain about “natures” but it’s language which is not found in Scripture. It also presupposes the Roman Catholic view of original sin, as opposed to the Eastern Orthodox view…

    More later…

  314. Andrew says:

    And what we seeing going on in CC now is starting now in 2012-2013. Its called VISIONEERING and researching new and novel ways to do ministry by receiving VISIONS. Newer is better in the new CC with the NEW generation because the 40 year pastors are just plain stubborn and the 20 year pastors have fresh new ideas. :).

  315. MTM,
    “After watching you savage a church I don’t even belong to, why would I give you the ammo to savage one that I do like?”

    I don’t think that MTM is capable of making a statement without lying. When asked what church he belong to he said (or at least posted) Orthodox.

    Now when challenged, he changes and says he is not Orthodox? The only point to his benefit, is that he does feel shame once in a while for some of the lies.

    *** MTM *** I didn’t savage the EO – I take issue with 2 points. (1) salvation by works (2) apostolic succession – that’s it.

    Unlike you, I don’t write papers about Mary’s sex life.

  316. MTM,
    “I don’t make a point of my denomination or put it into my UserID ”

    Who have you ever seen put their denomination in their User ID? Surely it is not me.

    Anyone who claims to have 2 Master’s degrees in any theological discipline would know that Luther’s influence in trans denominational … someone who has touched all, including I am sure the secret society you now belong to.

  317. Andrew says:

    40 years is the typical life-cycle time of an organization according to my ex “vision casting” pastor. If CC was started in the 60-70, then the CC organization is at the end of its run according to said pastor. Its do for a re-haul or a complete make over I would imagine in this guys estimation. In his vision (however) I don’t believe the isolated statement with the downgrade of Jesus (as less than God of creation) that was brought up was so isolated but rather maybe the beginning of this new phenomenon of completely new theology. I’m not sure its a slip of the tongue either. I think this pastor took some heat from this vision but he has defended it. A couple weeks after this, he did say that they were robustly trinitarian. But when he started to talk about the trinity he spent more time talking about a nuclear bomb called the “trinity” that the Israel army had or something like that. And he thought that was so cool and relevant. It made me want to gag. Not sure what to think of all this but rather I’m gad I am outed.

  318. Andrew, specifically, what is the 1 thing that got you kicked out of your CC? I doubt good, honest people would call the cops on you without some reason, even if that reason were false, they believed you did SOMETHING to warrant such treatment. What was that something?

  319. Xenia says:

    I don’t recall MTM ever saying he was a member of the Orthodox Church.

  320. He claims to have attended, but then very recently said “well I never went through chrismation.”

    The point was, when asked his “affiliation, he put up a couple of Ortho web sites.

    He is a deceiver.

  321. Xenia says:

    He is not Orthodox and never claimed to be. I recall several posts where he said he was interested in Orthodoxy and admired much of it but was a Protestant at heart and never joined.

    Just admit you were wrong, MLD. Here’s a template, since this is hard for you:

    “I was mistaken when I said MTM was Orthodox. True, he says he has attended an EO parish over the years and has linked to some EO sites but in my enthusiasm to disparage MTM I posted something that wasn’t true. I am sorry and I will try to be more accurate in the future.”

    See how easy that was?

    (I follow MTM’s interest in Orthodoxy because I hope he does join one day!)

  322. Xenia says:

    Eastern Orthodoxy is different from Calvary Chapel in that regular attendance does not make you a member. You have to formally join and be received either by baptism or chrismation. Non-members cannot received Communion. (I only wrote this to clarify the issue for folks who attend churches w/o formal membership who don’t get what the big deal is.)

  323. Sorry Xenia,
    But when I asked, that was the deceptive information he gave. I take people at their word, so if someone “indicates” that they attend or belong to a certain church, who am I to say they don’t.

    Besides, I don’t care where he goes to church – the best I can tell by his theology, he is a Mason who has an inordinate interest in Mary’s sex life.

  324. Andrew says:

    ” they believed you did SOMETHING to warrant such treatment. What was that something?”

    It was because I challenged the pastor, his treatment of me, his visions, etc.. etc..etc.. There was other stuff such as I was housemates with a homosexual that I met in the men’s group. I was angry that the leadership seemed to imply that we were in a relationship together and didn’t have a problem with it but seemed to encourage it short of advocating a committed relationship like in a marriage. That was a biggie for me. Just saying….

  325. Xenia says:

    He gave the information that he attended an EO church now and then but on several occasions clearly posted that he could not join because he was too much of a Protestant. I also take people at their word and MTM’s word is “I never joined.”

    You have to win every discussion, don’t you? Have you ever asked yourself why this is?

  326. So there were several issues that led to you being kicked out?

  327. OK, Xenia –
    your effort to win this discussion has worn me down. You win,

    I was wrong to believe MTM, who in less than the past 2 weeks indicated he attended an EO church – I never said member. Even in this discussion I said I asked him which church he “affiliated” with.

  328. Andrew says:

    “So there were several issues that led to you being kicked out?”

    Nope, only insubordination.

  329. Andrew says:

    “Based on your ongoing email communication to discredit and defame the reputation of our church and Pastoral staff, it has become clear that you are not willing at this time to submit to the leadership and authority of the Senior Pastor and Elders of Calvary Chapel. As a result, the Board of Elders has made the difficult decision to disassociate you from fellowship with the Church.”

    Josh, That is it in a nutshell. I guess further posts on a blog constitute defaming as well. Anyway, it is what it is. I don’t really care anymore. As MLD said, you can’t disagree with a “vision caster” cause you are disagreeing with God.

  330. covered says:

    Andrew, from what I can see from your #326 it seems as though you didn’t agree with something that your pastor believes or teaches and other people understood your objections to his belief/teaching. To make matters worse, they accuse you of having a homosexual relationship or becoming friends with a homosexual and for this reason, you were kicked of Calvary Chapel? It seems as though there’s more to this. If you disagreed with the doctrine of your pastor and if you were in a relationship that others within your church dissapproved of, why wouldn’t you just walk out on your own and dust off your sandals? Why did it come to a situation that was very volatile and confrontational? It seems as though you could had good enough reasons to walk our without the drama.

  331. Xenia says:

    Thank you, MLD. May the good Lord bless you today, as I am sure He does!

  332. Andrew, I ask these pointed questions, not because I think you are a liar or a bad guy, it just seems that you’ve lost track of your narrative on this blog. Here’s how it’s gone so far:

    You got kicked out for mentioning Calvin in a bible study.
    You realized your pastor was a heretic, denying the deity of Christ.
    You got kicked out for disagreeing with the pastor over at least 5 different things.
    You got kicked out for living with a gay man.

    It is just too scattered. It is perfectly acceptable to comment on this blog without mentioning you history, but when you do mention your history you should be as accurate as possible to make sure to keep your integrity intact.

  333. “Based on your ongoing email communication to discredit and defame the reputation of our church and Pastoral staff, it has become clear that you are not willing at this time to submit to the leadership and authority of the Senior Pastor and Elders of Calvary Chapel. As a result, the Board of Elders has made the difficult decision to disassociate you from fellowship with the Church.”

    Based on that, I agree with the church.

  334. PP Vet says:

    Well, MTM, we are making progress.

    MLD and SW now understand what “baseline” means, and they understand what an “ad hominem” argument is, and how it differs from an old-fashioned insult.

    Shall we school them in the concept of a forum of ideas, and how it works?

    And how scurrilous it is to mine for personal information about someone as fodder for further attacks?

    “What church do you belong to, MTM? Perhaps I can find some flaw in it and use that to discredit you.”

    That sort of garbage has no place in a forum of ideas, in civilized debate.

  335. Andrew says:

    “If you disagreed with the doctrine of your pastor and if you were in a relationship that others within your church dissapproved of”

    You are like my old CC. Did you even read my post? This CC was gay friendly and I am not which I didn’t understand at the time. Just cause I have gay housemate doesn’t make me gay. that is what the church assumed, encouraged, etc…

  336. PP Vet says:

    On the other hand, if you constantly and annoyingly promoted your own sectarian view as being the solution to all the world’s ills, I would feel obligated to poke fun at your religious Shangri-La of course.

  337. Andrew @ 337 – We’ve been reading all your posts, and it is hard to follow, so give us a little allowance here.

    It seems, according to the church, that you sent out a lot of emails disagreeing with the pastor, etc, and were therefore brought under church discipline.

    I don’t see anything wrong with that for the church’s side, but I also don’t think there is any shame in that for you. Lots of good men have been disciplined by churches. The two choices you have, are to submit to the discipline, or move on. I think you should just move on.

    I am sure it has been painful, and I’m sorry you had to endure that, but church discipline was never meant to be enjoyable.

  338. Andrew says:

    Josh,

    I am in the process of moving on. But my point is that this was not “true” biblical church discipline. but quite the opposite. But to your point, God does discipline those he loves and it is quite a badge of honor to be thrown out of this church. God did it for my own good because light can not dwell with darkness.

  339. How would this church have done this in a more biblical fashion? Honest question.

  340. Andrew says:

    Josh,
    “The two choices you have, are to submit to the discipline, or move on. I think you should just move on.”

    I did submit to the discipline. I haven’t sent an email in years to that church. But until their discipline is revoked in writing, I will not attend a single fellowship. Even after that, I probably won’t go. Haven’t really wanted to go anyway in long time other than to leave in peace but I feel compelled to speak out against their VISIONEERING internship and “vision casting” which is putting people in bondage.

  341. I honestly don’t see the beef then. Sounds like you said your piece, and can now move on from a fellowship that you disagree with. I had a very similar experience.

  342. Andrew says:

    “How would this church have done this in a more biblical fashion? Honest question.”

    1. Well, for starters the Senior pastor should have approached me in person following the Matt 18 process. He never did.

    2. The pastor should have met with me in person when I had concerns about his behavior, teaching etc.. Pastor never was willing.

    3. The excommunication letter should have been sent to me via certified mail. It never was. I found out literally years later when regional pastor got it and sent it to me.

    4. When the discipline was put into affect, it should have gone to the entire local church so that they could pray for me. Instead this church discipline was hidden from site and most people don’t even know who I am now.

    5. There is absolutely nothing in letter about restoration other than complete submission to the church pastor. They should have very clear guidelines, what they need other than a blanket statement that they want my submission.

    6. Church discipline should be concerned about restoration to the body and not primarily about submission to pastor as was evident from the letter I never personally received other than through a third party years later.

    7. Pastor should repent of his “vision casting”.

  343. Vision casting is really a nebulous term that is only bad if the “vision” is bad. A business could cast a vision for the future that would have nothing to do with God. I don’t like the term, but in itself it is not heretical.

  344. Andrew says:

    “I honestly don’t see the beef then”

    The beef is this. People need to be warned about what is going on. It is hard to sit back and be complacent about this.

  345. covered says:

    Andrew, I want to extend a bit of grace to you in response to your comment “You are like my old CC…” You don’t know me and to assume that I am a CC or that I am like a CC was out of line. I am inquiring as to your situation because the “pieces” of information that you put out on the blog when they get attached to your heightened anger, frustration and hatred toward all things CC makes me wonder what the heck happened? It doesn’t seem to line up. It went from not trusting your pastor to being involved with people that you should have not been involved with to sort of a nation wide ban from all CC’s. Certainly you can see our confusion. Before you respond please be aware that I too came from a dysfunctional relationship that involves my previous life with CC so don’t assume that I am CC or affiliated in any way, I am not.

  346. Andrew says:

    “Vision casting is really a nebulous term that is only bad if the “vision” is bad”

    If you get a chance listen to the podcast link I posted from my ex CC pastor. He explains what vision casting is all about. He took every single bible verse he quoted out of context. He starts with God the great visionary. Giving Adam and Eve a vision to be fruitful and multiply all the way up to Jesus giving his vision to go out into all the world and make disciples of men. Clearly this pastor interprets COMMANDS God gave with Visions. Nothing nebulous about that. Just saying…..

  347. “The beef is this. People need to be warned about what is going on. It is hard to sit back and be complacent about this.”

    The warn away. Don’t let the fear of man stop you.

  348. I will listen if you tell me where his part starts. I don’t have the time to wade through a bunch of stuff.

    But I thought the problem was that he denied the deity of Christ?

  349. Andrew says:

    ” It went from not trusting your pastor to being involved with people that you should have not been involved”

    There you go again. Covered. I already told you they encouraged me to live with this gay man before I even knew he was gay. They knew however. They encouraged this and even went as far as to tell me that it was an answer to prayer because this guy was very good friends with the leadership. So I am the bad guy because I view homosexuality as a sin.

  350. Andrew says:

    “nation wide ban from all CC’s”

    I never said this. I said the regional pastor in sermon mentioned that his church honors church discipline from other CCs.

  351. PP Vet,
    “Funny you should support his position. MTM never responds to my questions or the answers I provide – and he does not dismiss what I say but only dismisses Luther, Lutherans and his old Lutheran pastor.

    So, I think it is fair in conversations with him to know what type Masonic Temple he belongs to.

  352. Andrew says:

    “I will listen if you tell me where his part starts. I don’t have the time to wade through a bunch of stuff.

    But I thought the problem was that he denied the deity of Christ?”

    Start at the second hour. The problem is everything the guy says in this sermon.

  353. Bob says:

    Andrew:

    Hey, how was your weekend? Mine was blessed, God provided me the opportunity to fellowship and study His words with others and work on a young ladies car. It was the first time I really had a chance to get to know her father (not a believer) as we worked together to get her car back on the road.

    Yes I know how these men, like your former pastor, will manipulate and misquote scripture for their benefit, but he’s not the first nor the last. The only answer I have to you is to let you know how blessed you are for God to provide the opportunity to demonstrate the wickedness of men (even those who are called “men of God”) and the importance of know Him through His recorded words.

    Ok here we are in the second day of a new week and I’m sure God will provide more opportunities for the both of us to walk with Him and not some phony.

  354. Andrew says:

    Bob,

    Had a really good weekend too. Thanks for asking. Spent some good quality time with my in laws and my wife. I’m sorry we started off wrong the other day but seems we may get along fine after all. Thanks again.

  355. Nonnie says:

    Andrew, I honestly think your life will go much better if you will just walk away from what happened to you, and ask the Lord to direct you to another Bible teaching fellowship.

    **Be warned , that you will never find the perfect church. What you keep going over is going to eat you up if you continue in it.

    The Vision Casting stuff is a gimmick that lots of churches have to come up with, and perhaps they call it by a different name. I listened to the pastor’s message and I don’t think he was literally saying he had a “vision” (as in I SAW something and now this is what we are going to do) I believe he was just using that TERM as a little gimmicky term to explain what he and the leadership are planning for that church. I don’t think there was anything “spiritual” about it…just a bunch of church growth plans they have come up with and they have given it a nifty name.
    Just walk away and shake the dust off of your feet. You obviously were not happy there, didn’t respect the pastor or leadership and found you needed to talk negatively about them. WHY would you want to continue there?
    Ask the Lord to direct you to folks that love Jesus and love and honour His word, and find out where they go to church. Don’t tell them about your previous experiences, just start fresh.
    I pray that you will have a new beginning and find a sweet fellowship.

  356. Andrew says:

    “Andrew, I honestly think your life will go much better if you will just walk away from what happened to you, and ask the Lord to direct you to another Bible teaching fellowship”

    If you haven’t read all of my posts, The Lord already has. I occasionally teach Sunday school class as well as Bible study in a home fellowship at my church.

  357. Andrew says:

    “Don’t tell them about your previous experiences, just start fresh.”

    This sounds like one of Larry Taylor principals on how to be an assistant pastor. Sorry can’t hope on that band wagon. I warn my brothers and sisters of DANGER if I see it.

  358. Not too much danger with that guy though. Surfacy and empty? Sure. No heresy though. Roseborough interjecting the commentary makes it sound worse, of course. But I agree with Nonnie, he never claimed to have a Rick Joyner type vision from God.

  359. Andrew says:

    “he never claimed to have a Rick Joyner type vision from God.”

    Maybe not, just more like a Mark Batterson “Honi the circle maker” type of epiphany.

  360. That’s the point. It’s softball garbage, not something that needs to be warned about. The people receiving that stuff are not ignorant. They are getting exactly what they want. If they wanted deeper theological truth, they would go to another church.

  361. PP Vet says:

    “MTM never responds to MLD.”

    On the contrary – The pattern is that you put forth a point, MTM responds and shuts you down totally, and then you attack him personally.

    To whit:

    You said he had no scholastic standing. He pointed out he has a master’s degree in divinity.

    You said that Luther did not establish a baseline in 1520. He explained what a baseline is.

    You called him a rogue and some other accusations, and he patiently responded to each one.

    How do you live with yourself?

    Do you believe that if you continually and forcefully misrepresent the conversation, people will start to believe you?

  362. Andrew says:

    “Not too much danger with that guy though. Surfacy and empty? Sure. No heresy though.”

    Well this pastor had a problem with the counsel of Ephesus and called it heresy. He said it completely wrong to call Mary the mother of God when referring to Jesus and instead called Mary the mother “earthy” of Jesus. This sounds clearly like Nestorian heresy to me. Just saying….

  363. Xenia says:

    Mary the mother of God when referring to Jesus and instead called Mary the mother “earthy” of Jesus. This sounds clearly like Nestorian heresy to me.<<<

    It is the Nestorian heresy. You are quite astute!

  364. Nonnie says:

    This is what I said, in context: “Ask the Lord to direct you to folks that love Jesus and love and honour His word, and find out where they go to church. Don’t tell them about your previous experiences, just start fresh.
    I pray that you will have a new beginning and find a sweet fellowship.”

    I said don’t tell them about your previous experience in context of “starting fresh.” In order to protect YOU, not your former pastor. If someone new comes into a fellowship and all he/she can talk about is how horrible his former church was, then that is not going to be a way to build new and positive relationships with folks. Red flags are going to pop up in people’s minds about you. After you have gotten to know people, had some fellowship, then I would imagine, in the natural course of friendship, you will be able to share what you have gone through. I suppose I should have said, “In the beginning, don’t tell them about your previous experiences, just start fresh.”

    I hope that makes it clearer as to what I was saying.

    I am very glad you are in fellowship with other folks. Sorry, I guess I missed that in other posts.

  365. So, your problem with him now includes another statement, this time on Mary? That’s fine, Andrew. You are hell-bent on fighting this fight. Seems silly to me, and a waste of good passion, but you have to do what you think is right. Be blessed.

  366. Xenia says:

    Most evangelical churches are Nestorian so if you go to one, that’s almost certainly what you will get. Nothing too unusual about your pastor in this regard, he is a typical evangelical.

  367. Andrew says:

    Xenia,

    I really had no idea that most churches were Nestorian. You might be right which is something I am learning about on my own. To me its scary and never thought CC was Nestorian until heard this guy.

  368. Never heard of Nestorian, but a brief look at Wikipedia would say that almost no Evangelical churches are nestorian.

  369. Andrew says:

    Josh,
    Clearly this guy was Nestorian when he refers to Mary the mother “earthly” of Jesus and calls the counsel of Ephesus heresy.

    This is about Christology. Nestorians have two Jesus persons. One earthly and one heavenly. Separating them to just a degree that no one knows which one for sure died on the cross. The man Jesus or the God Jesus?

  370. @ 371 – Andrew, I don’t know ANYONE who believes that way.

    Do you have a link where this pastor says such?

  371. Andrew says:

    “Do you have a link where this pastor says such?”

    He preached this sermon shortly after starting the book of Acts right after that Vision20/20 vision casting sermon. Unfortunately you may have to pay for the message now.

  372. Xenia says:

    Nestorianism has some subtleties to it. For example, believing that Mary was basically a “hollow tube” through which the Lord passed is a form of Nestorianism. (Yes, I have heard this term actually used.) Not being comfortable with the term “Theotokos” (Mother of God) is an aspect of Nestorianism. I never heard an evangelical pastor who was happy with the phrase “Mother of God” when referring to Mary. Evangelicals might not consider this to be much of a heresy Nestorians believe in the Incarnation and the deity of Christ so they are not like JW’s. They are not Arians, they are Trinitarians.

  373. Xenia says:

    On EO message boards there are long discussions on this topic.

  374. Andrew says:

    Xenia,
    ” I never heard an evangelical pastor who was happy with the phrase “Mother of God” when referring to Mary”

    I am not a pastor but I don’t have a problem with it. Neither does RC Sproul senior which I consider mildly an evangelical. But its not about the title of Mary and more about the Christology. It seems the crusifiction is more of just and example for us to follow rather than an atonement for our sins in the Nestorian understanding that only Christ the man suffered on the cross. This is the serious problem I have.

  375. Xenia says:

    But its not about the title of Mary and more about the Christology.<<<

    That's right. It's not so much about who Mary is as who Jesus is.

    But the evangelicals strongly believe in the deity of Christ and the Incarnation.

    So, I don't have much more to say on this topic, I guess.

  376. A woman gave birth to God
    God died one afternoon
    The universe is run by a man

    Deal with it!

  377. Andrew says:

    “But the evangelicals strongly believe in the deity of Christ and the Incarnation”

    But they just don’t like to call this deity Jesus before the incarnation. (i.e. Steve W). I still consider myself an evangelical just not a CC one.

  378. Andrew, I’d bet a million bucks that is not what your ex-pastor believes.

  379. Xenia says:

    One more thing…. Once David Hocking visited my old CC and he made a statement concerning Mary’s motherhood of Jesus that was so odious that it even shook up my pastor. I won’t repeat it here.

  380. Andrew says:

    Josh,
    We will never be able to prove anything cause my ex-pastor is pretty much emergent which is a beautiful theological system to work in for him. We are probably both right and both wrong and a million other combinations with this guy… just saying……

  381. Xenia says:

    Well, my former CC pastor certainly believed in the many OT Christophanies. “This was Jesus,” he would point out when preaching through certain OT passages. Especially the Burning Bush, the “I AM.”

  382. Give it up Andrew. You hate the guy and want to discredit him in any way possible. Now he’s emergent?

    Come one man. You got kicked out of the church. I’m sorry that happened. Revenge will not help you feel better.

  383. Xenia @ 383 – Yes, that is the most common, Steve W. is the only person I’ve heard give that view, and he was very nuanced in what he was saying. Andrew has taken that one statement and applied it to all evangelicals.

  384. Andrew says:

    Of course he is emergent. Listen to the entire podcast again. He even says “its all emerging” on that podcast. This is not revenge at all Josh. I am stating the truth whether you can accept it or not.

  385. Xenia says:

    And Steve believes it *was* the Second Person of the Trinity in those Christophanies, he just doesn’t want to use name “Jesus” before He was actually given the name by his parents.

  386. I’m tired of listening to the podcast.

    I don’t think the guy is a great bible preacher. That puts him in the majority of preachers that I’ve heard.

    Using the word emerge has nothing to do with the Emergent movement.

    It is absolutely revenge. You were hurt and want to hurt back.

    My accepting or not accepting is completely irrelevant.

  387. Andrew says:

    Josh,
    Well you just judged my motives. Are you God that you can read my mind and make such a judgement like that? I would love to see the guy repent.

  388. Andrew says:

    ” he just doesn’t want to use name “Jesus” before He was actually given the name by his parents.”

    I forget but wasn’t it an angel that told them to give his name “Jesus” which means God with us?

  389. Andrew, you are judging (*and possibly slandering) this guy over and over. I would like to see you live a happy, peaceful life.

    Jesus does not mean God with us. That is Emmanuel. Jesus means salvation from God, basically.

  390. Andrew says:

    My bad, think Jesus means God is salvation. Emmanuel I think is God with us.

  391. Andrew says:

    Josh,
    Why don’t you just join this guys church. You seem to act like them accusing me of slander. How did I slander him?

  392. Xenia says:

    I forget but wasn’t it an angel that told them to give his name “Jesus” which means God with us?<<<

    Yes, Gabriel, at the Annunciation.

  393. Andrew says:

    Xenia, Thanks.

  394. Michael says:

    Andrew,

    Define “emergent”.

  395. Andrew, I am happy at my church, which is very small and nothing like the church he pastors. Perhaps you should do the same? Find another church where you are happy (perhaps you have) and forget about this guy.

    I said *possibly* slandering – You have attributed so much evil to him in the past few days. If it is not true, isn’t that slander?

  396. Andrew says:

    Define “emergent”. from wiki.

    “Emerging churches are fluid, hard to define, and varied; they contrast themselves with what has gone before by using the term “inherited church.”[6][7] Key themes of the emerging church are couched in the language of reform, Praxis-oriented lifestyles, Post-evangelical thought, and incorporation or acknowledgment of political and Postmodern elements.[8] Terminological confusion has occurred because of the use of words with similar etymology. When used as descriptors “emerging” and “emergent” can be interchangeable. However, when used as names, they are different. In this case “Emerging” refers to the whole informal, church-based, global movement, whilst “Emergent” to a formal, organisational subset associated with Brian McLaren: the “Emergent stream”

  397. Andrew says:

    “Perhaps you should do the same? Find another church where you are happy (perhaps you have) and forget about this guy.”

    How many times do I have to say this? I go to a wonderful church now. I won’t forget anything. I learned so much about bad theology that I am so thankful.

  398. So you really think he is linked to Brian Mclaren?

  399. Michael says:

    Andrew,
    That was hilarious.
    You accuse someone of being an “emergent”, then offer a paragraph that basically says the term is undefinable.
    It’s a blanket pejorative used to discredit someone who thinks outside your box without defining what the offense actually is.
    It’s lazy, irresponsible, and sinful.

  400. @400 – That is great! It just seems unhealthy to still be hung-up on this loser. I would invest in my new fellowship, and not put too much more energy into the old, bad one.

  401. Andrew says:

    So Michael I probably meant to say emerging rather than emergent.

  402. Michael says:

    Andrew,

    Define “emerging”.

  403. Well, in that case, everything in the universe, including you, is emerging.

  404. Anti- Calvin
    Vision Caster
    Pro-gay
    Doesn’t believe in the deity of Christ
    Nestorian…

    And just a meanie in general.

    Listen Andrew, I’m not taking up for this guy. Frankly, he’s not worth the effort it would take for me to look him up and figure out who he is and what he believes. It’s not worth your effort either. There are much more productive things to do with your passion. You been drinking from the Abused well for too long. The nectar is so sweet, but trust me, it is deadly. Forgive this guy, and move on. You’ll love the view on the other side.

  405. Andrew says:

    “It’s a blanket pejorative used to discredit someone who thinks outside your box without defining what the offense actually is.
    It’s lazy, irresponsible, and sinful”

    Michael, I never said all in the emerging church is sinful. So your accusations of me are overboard. I am still learning about this phenomena. My concerns was that this ex pastor was all over the map theologically that I don’t think he cared which way he fell. One aspect of the emerging church is their sloppiness in theological rigor and their postmodern affinity of no absolutes. (i.e. homosexual really not that sinful)

  406. Andrew says:

    Josh @408.

    I am not out to hurt anyone.

  407. Michael says:

    Someone who refers me to an inexplicable paragraph on wikipedia to explain a theological position should never accuse someone else of a lack of theological rigor.

  408. @ 409 – You are only hurting you. Stop digging up stuff on this guy. Stop learning about things you think he might be guilty on. Don’t put another ounce of effort into this man. Just move on. It is possible, and it is incredibly freeing. Right now, he has great control over you. Drop it, and you are free. Free to pursue happiness, fellowship, and Jesus. Right now, you are too focused on another man.

  409. Andrew says:

    “Someone who refers me to an inexplicable paragraph on wikipedia to explain a theological position should never accuse someone else of a lack of theological rigor”

    Michael, in all do respects I was talking with my wife when I responded to you and didn’t give it a lot of thought. Big different with me and this guy is that I am not standing in the pulpit preaching a sermon.

  410. @ 412 – We still expect accuracy here, even though it is not a pulpit.

  411. Andrew says:

    So smarty pants Michael,

    Give me your definition of emergent.
    Give me your definition of emerging.

  412. Andrew, stop it. He’s not the one who accused someone of being Emergent in an attempt to discredit him. That was you, so the burden lies on you to only use words that you understand.

  413. Andrew says:

    “We still expect accuracy here, even though it is not a pulpit”

    Yep, and I am willing to be corrected.

  414. Lutheran says:

    I think it would behoove everyone on here, myself included, to dispense as much as possible with generalities, especially when speaking of groups we’re not currently conversant with.

    There is no one evangelical position on everything. I doubt all EO churches are carbon copies of one another, either. Same with Catholics, Baptists, Anglicans, emergents, CCers, charismatics, Lutherans and Calvinists.

  415. Michael says:

    Andrew,

    Learn something here…

    I don’t use those terms precisely because they are largely undefined and they lead to nothing but confusion.

    They are ODM blanket curse words with no objective meaning whatsoever.

    When I challenged you for a definition of your accusation I knew that you would be unable to provide one…because there really isn’t one.

  416. PP Vet says:

    It is heartwarming that this thread about a grandmother’s love has generated 418 comments so far.

    Obviously grandmothers are very important people!

  417. Andrew says:

    “Andrew, stop it. He’s not the one who accused someone of being Emergent in an attempt to discredit him. That was you, so the burden lies on you to only use words that you understand.”

    Sure, I meant to say emerging rather than emergent. As I stated there is good and bad with the emerging church. So it wasn’t all about discrediting. Now that bad part about emerging is regarding the affinity of post-modernity of no absolute truths. And then I mentioned the acceptance of homosexuality in my church. That is it. I don’t need to say any more. If you think I slandered him than so be it. I just don’t like it when Michael accuses me of sinning in the way he did. That in my opinion is very wrong.

  418. You used a word and you didn’t know what it meant. It could have only been to discredit your old pastor.

    You don’t need this in your life. Forgiveness is beautiful.

  419. Andrew says:

    “When I challenged you for a definition of your accusation I knew that you would be unable to provide one…because there really isn’t one.”

    It seems the affinity for post modernity is the only real concrete definition. This was my concern all along. With no absolutes, Homosexuality is no longer sinful.

  420. “It seems the affinity for post modernity is the only real concrete definition. This was my concern all along. With no absolutes, Homosexuality is no longer sinful.”

    And that isn’t meant to discredit your old pastor? Sure it is.

  421. Andrew says:

    “You used a word and you didn’t know what it meant. It could have only been to discredit your old pastor.”

    I knew what it meant. I mis typed. I meant to say emerging rather than emergent.

  422. Andrew says:

    “And that isn’t meant to discredit your old pastor? Sure it is.”

    Actually I think the guy may be proud of the label. He has sounded like my previous HR representative at work at times with all the talk about diversity. So I am not sure it is an insult to him. Just saying….

  423. Michael says:

    Andrew,

    You’re throwing stuff up against the wall and hoping it sticks.
    Josh has spoken wisely.

  424. Ok, buddy. You are in a bit of denial. I’m going to leave you with it for today, but I hope you’ll just consider dropping the whole thing. On your present course, your old pastor is still hurting you. You have the choice of leaving that pain behind. I’d love to see you get honest with yourself so that you are able to find healing.

  425. Andrew says:

    Michael,
    I don’t think you or Josh has spoken wisely. This is not about my ex CC pastor in my opinion. This is about the church that I dearly love. I guess I will just go away. That is what you seem to want. Anyways, nice knowing you.

  426. Michael says:

    Whether you stay or leave is your decision.
    If you are unable to receive correction you will become exactly what you despise….

  427. Reuben says:

    Truth^

  428. Andrew says:

    “If you are unable to receive correction you will become exactly what you despise….”

    Sure, but is it that I despise and what correction? Your correction or my ex CC pastor’s correction? That is a real low blow if you ask me and I think you know it.

  429. Michael says:

    Andrew,

    You are making lots of accusations without demonstrating that you have the clarity of thought to make some of them.
    I listened to your former pastors tape and recognized the problems…but you have had many problems pointed out in your postings here that you refuse to recognize.
    You are doing the same thing you accuse him of…refusing to receive correction.

  430. Steve Wright says:

    The deity of Jesus is so fundamental to our faith, and thus, so denied by all other faiths (and the world) that I reference it in almost every Sunday message, and often take a couple minutes to explain the Hypostatic Union – though I don’t know that I have ever said the word “hypostatic” in doing so 🙂

    I believe Xenia might have some issues with reference to the Hypostatic Union, but I think she would come far short of saying those who hold to the Hypostatic Union understanding are simply Nestorians.

    In any event, any suggestion yours truly somehow is soft or unclear about the deity of Jesus is laughable and belied by hundreds of messages to the contrary (no matter how I may choose to nuance Theophanies in the OT)

    And as an aside, whenever Mary comes up in Scripture (not that often) I am quite clear how wrong it is to “bash” Mary in response to those who have exalted her to an unscriptural position.

  431. Andrew says:

    Michael.

    I already posted that I was open to correction. But you are sounding more and more like my ex CC pastor in that you want me to submit to your authority. Sorry but I’m glad I don’t go to your church.

  432. Xenia says:

    Lutheran, yeah, I kind of want to back away from my broad-brushing of calling evangelicals “Nestorian.” It’s a topic we bat around on EO boards but is only offensive here. Genuine Nestorianism is a heresy and I don’t think evangelicals have heretical christology. I kind of pounced on the word when Andrew mentioned it, my apologies to everyone.

  433. Xenia says:

    Steve. I think I got over carried away with the Nestorian business. Forgive me.

  434. Andrew says:

    Xenia,

    I guess that Nestorian heresy is no big deal after all. Hmmm. Anyway, got to go.

  435. Xenia says:

    Nestorianism is a big deal, I just don’t think it applies to all evangelicals, as I had gleefully posted.

  436. Steve Wright says:

    Xenia, like I said above @433…I already knew what you meant. (Thus is seen the advantage of community over time where people are given the benefit of the doubt as to their beliefs before jumping all over a couple words in a post or recorded message)

    Blessings. No forgiveness needed.

  437. Michael says:

    Andrew,

    I asked you for simple definitions to define your accusations.
    You were unable to do so.
    You just keep throwing stuff to obscure that.
    I’m not the only one to call you on this…the community has responded as well to try to help you see beyond your anger.
    I’m glad you don’t go to my church, too…

  438. Nonnie says:

    Giving your opinion with humility and in love, and being willing to come back and say ” I may have mis-spoken, here is a better way of putting it, etc, etc”…. or even” I am sorry…..” these make for excellent conversation.

  439. Andrew,
    You continually talk about your ex pastor likesome guys in my office talk about their ex wives.

    Get over it – you are divorced from him and remarried to another church.

    It is disrepectful to your current church to keep talking about your former.

  440. mrtundraman says:

    “Genuine Nestorianism is a heresy and I don’t think evangelicals have heretical christology.”

    I think some Evangelicals do have a heretical Christology since some (a minority, I think) teach that the kenosis was so complete that Jesus was a man only and not God when He was here on the Earth. They make statements to the effect that Jesus will rejoin the Triune Godhead at some future time.

    I have ZERO problem with calling Mary the mother of God since that’s what Elizabeth said to Mary in her greeting:

    “And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”

    Who is the Lord, but the Lord God?

  441. mrtundraman says:

    Xenia, I am neither a catechumen (studying under the pastor to join) nor have I been Chrismated (received the gift the the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands), but I have off and on attended an Antiochian Orthodox church for the last seven years or so. I would consider being Chrismated but I got stuck on the Perpetual Virginity. The priest (and I don’t want to get him in any trouble here) said that it was not an absolute requirement and that I could have reservations about that doctrine, but in good conscience I couldn’t work my way through that issue. I think that the dogma of the PV of the BVM was a later accretion to the faith and the evidence, I think, supports that. But the idea is so woven into the worship that I couldn’t get past it. That’s not to say that I don’t get blessed by worship at the OC, I really do.

  442. mrtundraman says:

    Xenia, You might find it interesting that my Protestant oldest son has started attending a Greek church near his [Presbyterian] college. He really likes the church since they have a discussion group at the church after the service where they talk about historical theology and explain what the historical basis of the faith is. In fact, he said to me that he wants to attend the Antiochian church with me this summer when he comes home from school.

    I would be proud of him if he became Orthodox (I’m proud either way). I’m just thankful he never became Presbyterian. I gave him a good dose of anti-Calvinist Bible passages before college so he went well inoculated against Calvinism. He got a strong Calvinist roommate his first year and I had opportunity to share the Orthodox faith with his roommate. It was interesting.

  443. mrtundraman says:

    MLD “Get over it”

    Said nobody who understands what being abused is about to someone who was abused….

  444. mrtundraman says:

    The Antiochian website is reporting the kidnapping of Metropolitan Paul (Yazigi) of the Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese Of Aleppo, the brother of His Beatitude Patriarch John X, as well as Mar Gregorios Yohanna Ibrahim of the Syriac Archdiocese of Aleppo. They were abducted by terrorists in a suburb of Aleppo. Please pray for their safe release.

  445. mrtundraman says:

    Steve wrote – “I believe Xenia might have some issues with reference to the Hypostatic Union”

    Why do you say this?

  446. MTM,”
    “MLD “Get over it”

    The same advise I give my friends who bitch about their ex wives and are remarried.

    But hey, if you guys want to live in the past – go ahead. Drag around the black cloud and try to drag everyone else to your level of misery.

  447. mrtundraman says:

    “The same advise I give my friends who bitch about their ex wives and are remarried.”

    And I’m sure they think the same thing about you that others do…

  448. MTM,
    So why do you think it is advantageous to continue complaining about a situation you have left?

    If I have a bad experience at a market and have chosen to shop elsewhere, I don’t complain about the old market 6 yrs later … you do.

  449. mrtundraman says:

    “MTM,
    So why do you think it is advantageous to continue complaining about a situation you have left?”

    Because I believe it is a part of healing. When you tell victims to get over it you deny the justice of God for them. You re-abuse them.

  450. mrtundraman says:

    “If I have a bad experience at a market and have chosen to shop elsewhere, I don’t complain about the old market 6 yrs later … you do.”

    And if a woman is sexually assaulted do you give her the same advise? That she needs to get over it?

  451. Xenia says:

    The Orthodox believe in the Hypostatic Union. I saw what Steve wrote up there but didn’t quite know what he meant.

  452. Xenia says:

    MTM, I am happy to hear about your son. 🙂

  453. That’s a criminal matter.

    Look, I have asked this of many people here, at CCA (when they let me on) and SCCL.
    “What do you think that you may have done to at least contribute to this situation?

    100% replied that they had done nothing wrong. Look, I don’t have time for people who can’t see that they may have helped to aggravate the situation.

  454. Xenia says:

    The Orthodox hierarchs were kidnapped by the rebels, the very people our gov’t is sending money to. The Arab Spring has been a disaster for the Christian populations of these countries.

  455. mrtundraman says:

    “The Orthodox believe in the Hypostatic Union. I saw what Steve wrote up there but didn’t quite know what he meant.”

    I was sure that was the case since it came from 1st Ephesus (I think).

    Maybe he’s confused about the Chalcedonias or some other ancient splinter group?

  456. mrtundraman says:

    MLD, So if a woman is sexually assaulted do you give her the same advise? That she needs to get over it?

  457. Steve Wright says:

    The Orthodox believe in the Hypostatic Union. I saw what Steve wrote up there but didn’t quite know what he meant.
    ——————————————-
    Xenia, is it just a difference in the semantics of the creed? I’m only going by what I read, so if I am wrong on that score, let me know.

  458. MTM,
    Your 458 is a repeat – I answered in #456 “That’s a criminal matter.”

  459. mrtundraman says:

    MLD – I won’t dog you to answer what you apparently can’t answer…

  460. mrtundraman says:

    Steve wrote – “Xenia, is it just a difference in the semantics of the creed? I’m only going by what I read, so if I am wrong on that score, let me know.”

    Where did you read that the Orthodox have a problem with the hypostatic union? From what I can tell they are the ones who came up with the understanding to start with. It’s part of their baseline – the councils of the church.

  461. MTM,
    I am sorry that you equate Andrew being asked to leave his church with rape. I am sure that somehow you have come to peace with making no distinctions – but that seems to be your history.

  462. mrtundraman says:

    MLD, I was making a point and as usual you took the bait. You compared it to having a bad day shopping years ago and continuing to complain about the store. Hardly a fair comparison to spiritual abuse in a church.

  463. Steve Wright says:

    Where did you read that the Orthodox have a problem with the hypostatic union?
    ———————————————————

    I thought the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox churches have a small division when it comes to Chalcedon as being an accepted ecumencial council, or in rejecting it.

    That when one says (as you do) “the Orthodox” one needs to point out a distinction.

    But I know little about what divides “the Orthodox”, and so I asked Xenia.

  464. MTM,
    You bringing up rape into the conversation is like those who inject Hitler into a conversation.

    I am sure it is an effective way to keep your followers energized.

  465. Xenia says:

    I thought the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox churches have a small division when it comes to Chalcedon as being an accepted ecumencial council, or in rejecting it.<<<

    That's true. The non-Chalcedonian churches (Oriental Orthodox, such as the Coptic Christians) are monophysites, that is to say, they believe Christ has one nature. The Eastern Orthodox believe Christ has two natures: 100 percent God and 100 percent man. Both groups believe in the deity of Christ and the Trinity.

    Regular Orthodoxy (Church of Greece, Church of Russia, etc.) is called "Eastern Orthodoxy." The Monophysite, non-Chalcedonian churches are generally called "Oriental Orthodox." <—- These would be the Copts, the Ethiopians and I think the Armenians. Of all the groups that the Eastern Orthodox are not in communion with, we are closest to the Oriental Orthodox and generally have warm regards for them.

  466. Xenia says:

    All to say, the Eastern Orthodox believe in the hypostatic union.

  467. Steve Wright says:

    Thank you Xenia. That too was my understanding. I did not understand why the Chalcedonias were stated as an ancient splinter group (post 458)…if you are in AGREEMENT with the Chalcedon council….

    Is there some group known as the Chalcedonias that are unrelated to this discussion?

  468. Xenia says:

    Steve, I don’t know of any other group that uses the name “Chalcedonian” other than the Christians who accept the Council of Chalcedon, with is the majority of the Christian world- Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic and I think most Protestants.

  469. Steve Wright says:

    Thanks for the info Xenia.

    I simply try to preach it as you stated above:

    “Christ has two natures: 100 percent God and 100 percent man”

    I always add the sinless to ‘man’ (which I know you do too). .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.