92 thoughts on “Control Redux”

  1. All you have to do is enclose the quoted material in a blockquote tag

    <blockquote> some text here </blockquote>

  2. Now Darrell, we did not have the advantage of that morning’s Kool-aid, so what we saw would not be the same as what they saw. 🙂

    @K-wiley you said: “Have some respect for the minister. Insult his God if you wish.”

    Are you equating the minister to God or God to the minister? Seems the “minister” gets first billing in this statement. So who is to be worshipped and in what order?

  3. @Darrell: The pastor is my neighbor. I’ve known him all my life. He doesn’t attack people or steal personal items.

    @Rob: That’s funny. You don’t know him at all. He really is “fundamental” in that his beliefs have to be proved biblically wrong for him to change them. He still believes men’s virginity is important. Maybe he just felt he needed to stress it more to the girls that day. I admit I’m not sure there. I know he hasn’t changed his view though.

    @Don: God is to be worshipped. His message is the responsability of the minister. When the minister is lead of the spirit to preach, insulting the minister is insulting the one who raised him up. I’m not saying ministers are near perfect. I’m saying that it isn’t your place to decide their message was just them “being full of themselves” or something.

  4. @Jordan: Wow. That’s a straw man argument. Um – both. As I minister to others, he ministers to me. He learns from God and ministers to me. I learn from God and him and minister to others. He has the responability of presenting God’s message. I do too. His job is to minister to me – to help me grow in Christ. Where do you all get the idea that we worship our pastors? No, I don’t agree with him on *everything*, but I do value his godly wisdom.

  5. @Brandon: How does that apply to me? I’m simply giving leadership authority to him.

  6. I’m simply giving leadership authority to him.

    But I thought…

    God is to be worshipped. His message is the responsability of the minister. When the minister is lead of the spirit to preach, insulting the minister is insulting the one who raised him up.

    So who was it, you or God?

  7. So…
    @Jordan: Straw Man: Definition 3 http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/straw+man
    @Brandon: How picky are you?
    Lets see here so far:
    1.) You know me and my thoughts better than I do.
    2.) You know my pastor better than I do.
    3.) You know my faith better than I do.
    4.) You know my God better than I do.
    Have you ever stopped to consider that I have reversed these claims? I’ve told you about me, my pastor, my faith, and my God. You still say I’m wrong. In the end this doesn’t matter to me personally – it just shows how humble some of you are. You’ll attack a man trying to serve God with every fiber of his being, attempt to confuse any members of his congregation that are brave enough to stick up for him, and then try to bully anyone who survives the initial onslaught.
    Think about it.

  8. lolwut?

    I don’t recall saying any of those things. I can only assume you’re confusing me with someone else.

  9. Wow. I think a more pertinent definition for you might be: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rhetorical+question

    Ironically, by claiming my rhetorical question was a straw man argument, you’ve constructed a straw man argument.

    You’ll attack a man trying to serve God with every fiber of his being, attempt to confuse any members of his congregation that are brave enough to stick up for him, and then try to bully anyone who survives the initial onslaught.

    This one’s called ad hominem. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ad+hominem

    SFL: Lowering the level of discourse.

  10. @Jordan: There was no ongoing argument to answer. As to “lowering the level of discourse” I will state that this discourse was already as low as it could be – short of cursing or the like.

  11. There was no ongoing argument to answer.

    Huh? Non sequitur.

    As to “lowering the level of discourse” I will state that this discourse was already as low as it could be – short of cursing or the like.

    There with the ad hominem again. I’ve explained this expression too often on here recently. I’m bowing out.

  12. …ad hominem also requires me to state irrelevent information – which I didn’t do. If you can accuse us of anything in the books I can question your motives. The straw man was your sucker punching of a point that neither of us agreed on, but which was similar to my point. Textbook straw man.

  13. @K-Wiley

    I like how you typed your words and then put my words right under them. I see what you did there!

    I was just curious as to your statement, “insulting the minister is insulting the one who raised him up.” It just reminded me of a line from the post I linked: “Not bad for a position where the only entrance requirement is an invisible ‘call’ to preach.”

    At first you said that he should be immune to criticism because he was raised up by God. But then you said it should be because you were giving leadership authority to him. I perceived this to be a contradiction and asked for clarification.

    Just so it’s clear, I have no interest in proving anyone wrong and certainly not in “bullying” as you claim. My first thought when I heard the audio clip in this post was “nobody is forced to go to this church, so why would anyone willingly choose to subject themselves to this nonsense?” Then I realized that I grew up hearing much the same thing. I never really liked it, but I always assumed that it was for my advancement. I didn’t know any different. It was the only subculture I was ever exposed to.

    So I totally get it. I was there once.

    But then I discovered an entire world of grace and truth that existed outside my little circle. I discovered that there’s so much more to life than going to church every Sunday for my weekly spanking. So, if anything, I wish that everyone with a background like mine has the opportunity to make the same discovery. If you don’t understand what I’m saying now, that’s fine. Perhaps you will in time, or perhaps not.

  14. If I may intrude for a little bit, I would like to first of all ask that we not get personal; the words of the pastor are in question, not our knowledge of debate terminology. I will offer my view on this; take it or leave it, but it is what I believe is a possibility. He is talking about having something taken away from someone. Would it be at least possible that he said the “possessing your phones” line to make the illustration more personal? To make it apply to the individuals right there in a specific situation, without being serious? I have heard that done several times, and in none of the situations was it misunderstandable in the context of the message while I was sitting there listening.

    Also, just an idea, it might be more civil and we might actually get somewhere if we worry less about proving the other party wrong, and more about reaching an understanding. Maybe if Party A and Party B were operating under the assumption that the other was actually composed of good Christians who are really trying to do right. It is perfectly normal, and I respect K-Wiley for defending his pastor. I really do not think that anyone, just from sermon clips online, can know this pastor as well as he does. If he said that his pastor was not making a serious threat, as I do not know this man’s sense of humor, I will take his word for it.

    Well, I do not like protracted argument, so I hope that something I said may bring this to a close. I would suggest both parties to examine their side, and make sure that they are not in the wrong before attacking the other side. Hope it is helpful!

    JN

  15. No problem. I understand what you’re saying. I disagree, but I do understand. Thanks for clarifying your question. Here’s my answer. I believe his message – if percieved as from the Holy Spirit, is beyond my critiquing. I see his message as from the Holy Spirit and give him a position of leadership in my life. I hope this clears it up some.

  16. I’m saying that it isn’t your place to decide their message was just them “being full of themselves” or something.

    So “everything” they spout from behind the “sacred desk” is God breathed and we are just supposed to accept it as “inspired”?

    1. The Bereans in the Book of Acts searched the Scriptures to verify what they were being taught by PAUL…..

      Why then should you turn off your brain when listening to man less educated in the Scriptures than Paul?

  17. No problem. I understand what you’re saying. I disagree, but I do understand. Thanks for clarifying your question. Here’s my answer. I believe his message – if percieved as from the Holy Spirit, is beyond my critiquing. I see his message as from the Holy Spirit and give him a position of leadership in my life. I hope this clears it up some.

    Sounds good to me, as you phrased it here. If you want to accept your pastor’s words as being divinely inspired, that’s certainly your prerogative. And if we want to express our disagreement, that’s our prerogative. We can still be friends. 🙂

  18. Mine is not the burden of proof, you have claimed special inspiration, your’s is the burden of proof.

  19. “These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11).

  20. @Don: Actually it should be up to you. I stated my belief as a counter to yours. I’ll give what I have anyway though.

    1.) Inspiration of scripture:
    II Tim. 3:16a
    2.) Proper use of the scriptures
    II Tim. 3:16b
    3.) Call of the pastor
    Eph. 4:11
    4.) Function of the pastor
    I Cor. 1:21
    Eph. 4:12
    5.) Function of the Holy Spirit
    John 14:26
    6.) Responsibility of the pastor
    Heb. 13:17

    From this I think it would be an obvious conclusion that it is the pastors responsibility to preach the Word of God. If he does this his messages will be beyond personal reproach – as long as he is still fulfilling his other duties too. It is when a pastor steps out from under this umbrella and gives a sermon of his opinions that he is open for correction. This is why a pastor should hold the responsibility of preaching scripture so high in his priorities.
    Care to share your side?

  21. @ Johnny: I actually hadn’t thought of how well it tied into the illustration. Good point! I am willing to believe that most here are “good Christians”, I could even be convinced that all here are at least a Christian – good or bad. My address here would be pointless if I thought the “other side” wasn’t saved. I just think some have crossed a line in attacking my pastor, offending many of our congregation, and then claiming that they do it for everyone’s good. I’ll admit that I find this fun. That is probably not a really good thing. That doesn’t make this any less my fight though. He is my pastor. I will back him up as long as he is doing what is right. No one here can prove he did something wrong. Thanks for your comment. I didn’t see it till now. 😉

  22. @ K-Wiley
    I agree with you about Scripture, that it is to be preached in all seasons, reverently and soberly. The Word of God is precious and powerful.
    We part company on the “Call” of the pastor. Most in the IFB-KJVO are “self-called” and do so in order to fulfill an “office”. The God given gifts in Ephesians 4 are the gifts of apostling, evangelizing, and preaching/teaching in order to equip every member of the body for the ministry not just offices to be filled.
    There should also be a multiplicity of elders not the one man dictatorship we find in most pulpits. The IFB sets up one man in the position of the local pope and no one should ever come against “God’s Anointed.” (btw, God’s anointed is a King of Israel, a Priest serving in the Temple, or all of the Born Again believers of God… the priesthood of all believers; not just the man in the pulpit.)

    From this I think it would be an obvious conclusion that it is the pastors responsibility to preach the Word of God. If he does this his messages will be beyond personal reproach – as long as he is still fulfilling his other duties too. It is when a pastor steps out from under this umbrella and gives a sermon of his opinions that he is open for correction.

    Just remember the man in the pulpit is just a man and unless you are charasmatic/pentacostal and believe his words from the pulpit are of extra-biblical inspriation then his teaching should be the exposition of the Word of God.
    The pastorate is not an office to be filled, it is not an office that sanctifies the supposed holder of it… it is a gift from God to be exercised in order to prepare the whole body for ministry. Too often in the IFB-KJVO movement the pastorate is a Cult of Personality where the “Church” is defined by the “pastor.” The “Church” is not defined by the “pastor” it is defined by the Word of God, and God gives the gifts mentioned in Ephesians 4 to help the “Church.”
    There’s my side.

  23. If I may, I would like to mention that every KJVO church and pastor I have met takes that position for different reasons than people like Ruckman. They believe that it is a better translation, not more inspired.

    I also think that Satan uses non-intentional generalizations to tear down the church. Your assessment of the IFB-KJVO church is right about some churches, but not about the majority. Let me put it like this. Take Calvinists and Armenians. To a Calvinist, people in the middle are Armenians. To an Armenian, people in the middle are Calvinists. The ones in the middle do not line up with either side, but people on the left take them for the far right, and people on the right take them as the far left. The loudest people in the IFB movement are the ones who take their “pastoral authority” for their own benefit. Every IFB church that I have attended takes the Bible as the final authority, not simply the pastor. Pastors make mistakes, but the Word of God never does. All of the pastors I have heard preach the Word of God.

    JN

  24. Questions for those other than Wiley and Johnny:

    1) Are you trying to refute our beliefs, or show how many debate terms you can rocket launch at us?

    2) What do you hope to accomplish in this debate?

  25. Those “debate terms” are the refutation for the arguments made. If you don’t understand them, then it’s going to be difficult to have a discussion.

    As for “what do you hope to accomplish”….I think the answer there is “defend against spurious accusations made by someone attempting to defend the indefensible.” Or words to that effect.

  26. Those “debate terms” are the refutation for the arguments made. If you don’t understand them, then it’s going to be difficult to have a discussion.

    Darrell to the rescue again. 😀 Far from trying to show off, the whole point of those “debate terms” is to guide discussion in the most productive way possible. When you buck against or ignore them, debate stalls because of faulty or outright fallacious argument.

    defend against spurious accusations made by someone attempting to defend the indefensible.

    Ditto. Which is why so many “debate terms” are coming up–because those arguments don’t work. If there is a legitimate, rational basis for something, I want to know what it is, not why I’m wrong for asking or what someone else has believed or what no one is even saying.

  27. So reverting to the root subject of this post:

    You cant put down your cell phone for two hours on a Sunday morning (out the 168 hours you have in a week) to listen to what God has in store for you?

    Perhaps Satan wasn’t able to keep you from ghoing to church, but he can at least distract you and possibly others around you.

    Now, when a minister does not approve of texting in church, is it because he’s some stuffy, old-fashioned, selfish person? Or because he wants you to pay attention to God’s word?

    Also, may God judge those who criticize true servants of His.

    1. I believe the main problem here was the threat of stealing personal property. Someone who steals (pastor or not) another’s personal property should be held liable to the law.

  28. And as I recall, there are others who have made not-so-legitimate accusations…

  29. I approve of texting in IFB churches. I’ve never heard anything worthwhile in them so you might as well keep yourself occupied.

Comments are closed.