Who's Watching the Watchdogs II
Well, so much for thought-for-the-day. More like thought-for-the-week. Or in this case, thought-for-the-fortnight-and-a-half. For some of my more astute quarter dozen regular readers, you may have read this post last Sunday or Monday, then saw it disappear for awhile. That's because I was of two minds in posting it vs. not posting it, and as you can see, the posting mind won.
Yes, this is the long-awaited and oft-promised follow-up to the Who's Watching the Watchdogs post. And though I have said that this would provide enough blog fodder to post daily until the Lord's return, this is probably my next-to-last post on this topic. So I will list here just four issues (the stinkin' hilarious one I promised in a previous post, then three of a more serious nature) that I have with the Watchdog sites, (www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com for the purposes of this discussion), then follow it up later with my last Watchdog post (including why it is my last Watchdog post, and why two minds on this one), and then move on to happier thoughts in future posts.
1. I will cover the "stinkin' hiilarious" one first. I really shouldn't laugh, but if I didn't laugh, I'd cry. I found it an entertaining exercise to enter the name of any Christian leader whom I respected, and almost invariably they showed up on their shun list. Even Billy Graham, though they are not dumb enough to go all out after him, was criticized for once saying something nice about Pope John Paul II. But I digress.
One of my favorite preachers podcasting today is Mark Driscoll, of Mars Hill Church in Seattle. And sure enough, they had some major problems with his reading list posted on his website for church leaders in his "Acts 29" church planting network, and because of this, were urging John Piper to disinvite Mark Driscoll from speaking at his Desiring God conference last fall. To his credit, John Piper did not disinvite Mark Driscoll, and in fact gave him an impassioned defense, both in his introduction of him to speak, and in his conference closing comments. But again I digress.
As I was reading the Lighthouse Trails indictment against Mark Driscoll, I came across the following, which had me ROTFL, as the kids say nowadays...
"The question therefore has been put to us, is Driscoll a promoter of contemplative spirituality and the emerging church movement? Perhaps one of the best places to look for this answer is Driscoll's ministry, Acts 29 Network (incidentally, there is no Acts 29 in the Bible)."
Busted, Driscoll! There is no Acts 29 in the Bible! Maybe if you read it once in awhile you would know that!
Actually, I am pretty sure he does know that. In fact, that is the whole point, obviously lost on his inquisitors. We are Acts 29. It is up to us to carry on the mission of the church we read about in Acts 1-28. Get it?
2. Like Mark Driscoll, another lightning rod podcasting preacher, you either love him or you hate him, is Erwin McManus. Here are some kind words for Mr. McManus, embedded in an article about the equally "dangerous" David Jeremiah:
"Jeremiah's affinity with Erwin McManus, who says it is his goal to destroy Christianity, should cause discerning, Bible-believing Christians to take notice and be aware."
The level of hyperbole here is breathtaking. Really? Is that what Erwin McManus is all about? A modern day Saul, intent on persecuting and destroying all who call on the name of Jesus? Hardly.
Elsewhere amongst their newsletters, we get the full quote:
Emerging church leader, Erwin McManus says his "goal is to destroy Christianity as a world religion and be a recatalyst for the movement of Jesus Christ."
Christianity is not a religion but a relationship. I have heard Erwin say it, and many others before him. Hardly rises to the level of heresy. In fact, Jesus himself had a name for the strict religionists of his day - "you brood of vipers!"
Some other "dangerous" Christian leaders whom we are to avoid - Philip Yancey, Chuck Swindoll, Jack Hayford, Richard Foster, Moody Bible, Wheaton College, Bethel Seminary, you name it, they are all here. Anyone who dares speak of the mystery, the spiritual, the supernatural in Christian experience is suspect.
3. Another handy service they provide is the bookstore alert. They will let you know whenever their covert spies have found overtly non-Christian books in Christian bookstores, including books on Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam. Hindus and Buddhists and Muslims, oh my! So what is their point? Reading a book on Islam does not make me a Muslim, but it might make me better equipped to share Christ with a Muslim friend. I have read Adolph Hitler's Mein Kampf. If you ask me, required reading for any amateur WWII buff. But does that make me a Nazi? Nein.
4. Now we get to the crux of the matter. What their big hangup with "contemplative spirituality" is all about. The following is excerpted (though still lengthy) from the article "When You Pray, Say...":
"Between contemplative spirituality and biblical Christianity there reside watershed distinctions between first, the definition, and then, the practice of prayer. Simply stated, prayer is talking to God. In speaking to God, believers are free to disclose their hearts' deepest longings and vexations to him, including their feelings, fears, secrets, sins, praises, petitions, doubts, complaints, thanksgiving, troubles, and more, the prayers of Jesus and the saints in the Bible providing example.Within evangelicalism, the contemplative prayer movement is affecting this mediated understanding of prayer. The narrator in the "Be Still" DVD states that, "Contemplation is different from other types of Christian prayer." In explaining how this form of prayer differs from traditional prayer, Richard Foster says, "Contemplative prayer is listening prayer. It is attentiveness. . . . It's being all ears to what the Father has to say to us." He then quotes Nicholas Grou who requested, "O divine master, teach me this mute language which says so much."[1]
...
Yet other evangelical speakers, pastors and authors are also embracing and recommending contemplative prayer with the goal of hearing God directly speak to them. One testifies, "And so I've just begun . . . to make a conscious effort to be in a time of prayer and, yes, to speak to him, but then to consciously say, 'Okay, I'm done talkin' now, because I'm just gonna sit here in the stillness and wait to see what it is that you want to say to me'."[2] The question therefore arises, is contemplative prayer, or cultivating "the quiet," supported in Scripture? Is it a spiritual discipline encouraged in God's Word? Or is this manner of prayer simply a device of human invention?...
Read entire article, "WHEN YOU PRAY, SAY . . ."
Did you get out of that what I did? Prayer is, and must remain, one-way communication. It is talking to God, not listening to God. Once you start listening to God, you are now dabbling in that spooky occult stuff. The author asks the question, "The question therefore arises, is contemplative prayer, or cultivating "the quiet," supported in Scripture? Is it a spiritual discipline encouraged in God's Word?" He says no, but I say that prayer as two-way communication is all over Scripture.
In the interest of time, I will share only one of my favorite Psalms:
1 How long, O LORD ? Will you forget me forever?
How long will you hide your face from me?
2 How long must I wrestle with my thoughts
and every day have sorrow in my heart?
How long will my enemy triumph over me?
3 Look on me and answer, O LORD my God.
Give light to my eyes, or I will sleep in death;
4 my enemy will say, "I have overcome him,"
and my foes will rejoice when I fall.
5 But I trust in your unfailing love;
my heart rejoices in your salvation.
6 I will sing to the LORD,
for he has been good to me.
-Psalm 13
David is agonizing over God's silence. He is pleading with God to talk to him. "Look on me and answer, O LORD my God." He is listening and longing for an answer as to why he is in distress. But note that in the end, even in the silence, he is singing for joy on the basis of what he already knows of God.
So go ahead. Talk to God. Listen to God. And trust, rejoice, sing, even in the silent times.
Yes, this is the long-awaited and oft-promised follow-up to the Who's Watching the Watchdogs post. And though I have said that this would provide enough blog fodder to post daily until the Lord's return, this is probably my next-to-last post on this topic. So I will list here just four issues (the stinkin' hilarious one I promised in a previous post, then three of a more serious nature) that I have with the Watchdog sites, (www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com for the purposes of this discussion), then follow it up later with my last Watchdog post (including why it is my last Watchdog post, and why two minds on this one), and then move on to happier thoughts in future posts.
1. I will cover the "stinkin' hiilarious" one first. I really shouldn't laugh, but if I didn't laugh, I'd cry. I found it an entertaining exercise to enter the name of any Christian leader whom I respected, and almost invariably they showed up on their shun list. Even Billy Graham, though they are not dumb enough to go all out after him, was criticized for once saying something nice about Pope John Paul II. But I digress.
One of my favorite preachers podcasting today is Mark Driscoll, of Mars Hill Church in Seattle. And sure enough, they had some major problems with his reading list posted on his website for church leaders in his "Acts 29" church planting network, and because of this, were urging John Piper to disinvite Mark Driscoll from speaking at his Desiring God conference last fall. To his credit, John Piper did not disinvite Mark Driscoll, and in fact gave him an impassioned defense, both in his introduction of him to speak, and in his conference closing comments. But again I digress.
As I was reading the Lighthouse Trails indictment against Mark Driscoll, I came across the following, which had me ROTFL, as the kids say nowadays...
"The question therefore has been put to us, is Driscoll a promoter of contemplative spirituality and the emerging church movement? Perhaps one of the best places to look for this answer is Driscoll's ministry, Acts 29 Network (incidentally, there is no Acts 29 in the Bible)."
Busted, Driscoll! There is no Acts 29 in the Bible! Maybe if you read it once in awhile you would know that!
Actually, I am pretty sure he does know that. In fact, that is the whole point, obviously lost on his inquisitors. We are Acts 29. It is up to us to carry on the mission of the church we read about in Acts 1-28. Get it?
2. Like Mark Driscoll, another lightning rod podcasting preacher, you either love him or you hate him, is Erwin McManus. Here are some kind words for Mr. McManus, embedded in an article about the equally "dangerous" David Jeremiah:
"Jeremiah's affinity with Erwin McManus, who says it is his goal to destroy Christianity, should cause discerning, Bible-believing Christians to take notice and be aware."
The level of hyperbole here is breathtaking. Really? Is that what Erwin McManus is all about? A modern day Saul, intent on persecuting and destroying all who call on the name of Jesus? Hardly.
Elsewhere amongst their newsletters, we get the full quote:
Emerging church leader, Erwin McManus says his "goal is to destroy Christianity as a world religion and be a recatalyst for the movement of Jesus Christ."
Christianity is not a religion but a relationship. I have heard Erwin say it, and many others before him. Hardly rises to the level of heresy. In fact, Jesus himself had a name for the strict religionists of his day - "you brood of vipers!"
Some other "dangerous" Christian leaders whom we are to avoid - Philip Yancey, Chuck Swindoll, Jack Hayford, Richard Foster, Moody Bible, Wheaton College, Bethel Seminary, you name it, they are all here. Anyone who dares speak of the mystery, the spiritual, the supernatural in Christian experience is suspect.
3. Another handy service they provide is the bookstore alert. They will let you know whenever their covert spies have found overtly non-Christian books in Christian bookstores, including books on Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam. Hindus and Buddhists and Muslims, oh my! So what is their point? Reading a book on Islam does not make me a Muslim, but it might make me better equipped to share Christ with a Muslim friend. I have read Adolph Hitler's Mein Kampf. If you ask me, required reading for any amateur WWII buff. But does that make me a Nazi? Nein.
4. Now we get to the crux of the matter. What their big hangup with "contemplative spirituality" is all about. The following is excerpted (though still lengthy) from the article "When You Pray, Say...":
"Between contemplative spirituality and biblical Christianity there reside watershed distinctions between first, the definition, and then, the practice of prayer. Simply stated, prayer is talking to God. In speaking to God, believers are free to disclose their hearts' deepest longings and vexations to him, including their feelings, fears, secrets, sins, praises, petitions, doubts, complaints, thanksgiving, troubles, and more, the prayers of Jesus and the saints in the Bible providing example.Within evangelicalism, the contemplative prayer movement is affecting this mediated understanding of prayer. The narrator in the "Be Still" DVD states that, "Contemplation is different from other types of Christian prayer." In explaining how this form of prayer differs from traditional prayer, Richard Foster says, "Contemplative prayer is listening prayer. It is attentiveness. . . . It's being all ears to what the Father has to say to us." He then quotes Nicholas Grou who requested, "O divine master, teach me this mute language which says so much."[1]
...
Yet other evangelical speakers, pastors and authors are also embracing and recommending contemplative prayer with the goal of hearing God directly speak to them. One testifies, "And so I've just begun . . . to make a conscious effort to be in a time of prayer and, yes, to speak to him, but then to consciously say, 'Okay, I'm done talkin' now, because I'm just gonna sit here in the stillness and wait to see what it is that you want to say to me'."[2] The question therefore arises, is contemplative prayer, or cultivating "the quiet," supported in Scripture? Is it a spiritual discipline encouraged in God's Word? Or is this manner of prayer simply a device of human invention?...
Read entire article, "WHEN YOU PRAY, SAY . . ."
Did you get out of that what I did? Prayer is, and must remain, one-way communication. It is talking to God, not listening to God. Once you start listening to God, you are now dabbling in that spooky occult stuff. The author asks the question, "The question therefore arises, is contemplative prayer, or cultivating "the quiet," supported in Scripture? Is it a spiritual discipline encouraged in God's Word?" He says no, but I say that prayer as two-way communication is all over Scripture.
In the interest of time, I will share only one of my favorite Psalms:
1 How long, O LORD ? Will you forget me forever?
How long will you hide your face from me?
2 How long must I wrestle with my thoughts
and every day have sorrow in my heart?
How long will my enemy triumph over me?
3 Look on me and answer, O LORD my God.
Give light to my eyes, or I will sleep in death;
4 my enemy will say, "I have overcome him,"
and my foes will rejoice when I fall.
5 But I trust in your unfailing love;
my heart rejoices in your salvation.
6 I will sing to the LORD,
for he has been good to me.
-Psalm 13
David is agonizing over God's silence. He is pleading with God to talk to him. "Look on me and answer, O LORD my God." He is listening and longing for an answer as to why he is in distress. But note that in the end, even in the silence, he is singing for joy on the basis of what he already knows of God.
So go ahead. Talk to God. Listen to God. And trust, rejoice, sing, even in the silent times.
posted by wilsonte | 8:46 AM
1 Comments:
Tom, I'm glad no one knows who we are or Consumed Ministries would be on that list!
Post a Comment
<< Home