Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Sorry about that! Here is the link to the teaching I did at Billings Vineyard Church a while back

For some reason another post I did got crossed with the teaching post... but here is the teaching I did a while back...

~ emerging thought in Montana ~: iggyTALKS on iggyROCKS! podcast show 4


Can we make the Body of Christ more pure?

The thought is this...

Jesus came to save us and to cleans us from sin. It was His Blood that makes us pure. Yet, there seem to be some that think that Jesus can be made more pure with their help! They think that we must make the Body of Christ more pure by our works and man made doctrines.

What a slap in the face to Jesus!

If one can grasp that there is not one person that can add to the purity that is Jesus Christ then I hope they can see that there is not anything more to add to His purification.

If Jesus was and is pure, and he had no sin in Him, and we who are in Christ are placed in Him having had our sin forgiven and cleansed by His blood, how can we make the Body of Christ more pure by anything we do?

Grace is so awesome... and there is great fear that can come when one is faced with the freedom that comes with the Life of Christ. With that we are no longer bound by Laws except the Law of Love! We then are bound to love one another as Christ loved us.

It is Jesus Christ that purifies us... and in no way can we purify Jesus' Body, the church any better than He can... to think so lacks true faith in the sufficiency of the Grace of God and the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus.

To add anything to the works of Jesus is reducing Grace from its true glory.

Be Blessed,

Monday, July 30, 2007

The accusations fly and the implode continues....

This article seem to not even need any comments it speaks volumes itself as to how far Ken and Crew will go to slander and lie.

Note: There are a few that are discussing and exploring Universalism... yet not the type that all get "saved" in the end... as even Spenser Burke states: "I am a universalist that believes in Hell"... which should be an indication he is not "that" type of universalist as in "all get saved in the end". His view is that all are saved, unless you "opt out".

I do not agree with him ( ~ emerging thought in Montana ~: Universalism: Why I do not agree) as I do not see that Spenser has built he case, nor did Scot McKnight (Jesus Creed » Heretic’s Guide to Eternity 4) and many, many others... Spenser is a voice, who still believes in Hell... so the statement, "and exposes his universalism and his panentheism only to be told that he doesn’t speak for Emergent." is still not accurate... maybe "speaks within" out speaks as part of".

My other point is what is to be made of the statement that Paul states about the gaol of God through Jesus as in 1 Cor 15:28 " When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all." I think this verse sounds a little "panentheism" (What is panentheism?) I think there is a good case for the topic though I myself have not pursued that as a possibility.

The real issue is the insistent connection with the occult... it has become a sick obsession of Ken Silva. His statements like these are sadly what make him lose more and more credibility (if he had any);

"These words were written by Julie Clawson whose husband Mike was one of the planners of the Mideast Emergent "Gathering", which by the way also happens to a term Wiccans use as well for their meetings."

I guess anyone who "gathers" is now in league with Satan...

Acts 12:44. "On the next Sabbath almost the whole city gathered to hear the word of the Lord."
Matthew 18:20. "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."

The logic is just not there unless Ken is saying...

Well that is the over simplicity of his allegations.

SO it seems the only whining ( And the Whining of the Emergent Church Continues…) that does continue is Kens is somehow shocked about the response to the slanderous posters of Phil Johnson... That they were more Christ-like than the attack could ever be. As Ken shows his nasty side by calling this article "hit piece". (Motivation or Ridicule?) Yep, Julie Clawson is so vicious in her attack against Ken and Phil... LOL! It seems that Ken is opposed to anything that resemble Jesus Christ in action. I ma just wonder how Ken did not fit "semi-pelagian" in the article. Oh wait! He did! LOL!

Notice that Ken calls for fire from heaven?

"You see, "soon" it’s going to get mighty hot up in here…O Lord send us Thy fire…" ~Ken Silva

Maybe he needs reminded of the words of Jesus...

Luke 9: 54 - 56. "When the disciples James and John saw this, they asked, "Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them ?" But Jesus turned and rebuked them, and they went to another village. "

Be blessed,

Sunday, July 29, 2007

CRN off the deep end! Ken Silva starts to implode.

The ever elusive editor at CRN seems to have gone off the deep end. In this article The "editor" states pretty plainly that the "emerging church" and Anton LaVey's “Church of Satan“. are connected.

I just have to ask, how can CRN and SoL have any credibility left with outrageous headlines like this one?

"Anton Szandor LaVey on the Original Emerging Church the Church of Satan"

Anton LaVey's philosophy does not mesh with emergent too well. I think the big difference is that Anton is an atheist who believes in human potential and the "Devil" to him is anything that hold back humans from freely expressing themselves as to who they our.

While the emergents believe on Jesus Christ, see the devil and a person who is not out for any one's best interest.

Note also that "Satan" is called the accuser of the brethren, and I see that the is also the father of lies... with that I would have to say the those who accuse the brethren falsely and hate their brothers and think protecting truth with lies... seem to be more in league and have more in common with Anton Levay's church than even the one that the profess...

To further this thought here is the nine Satanic statements:

The Nine Satanic Statements

from The Satanic Bible, ©1969

Anton Szandor LaVey

1. Satan represents indulgence instead of

2. Satan represents vital existence instead of spiritual
pipe dreams!

3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom instead of
hypocritical self-deceit!

4. Satan represents kindness to those who
deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates!

5. Satan represents
vengeance instead of turning the other cheek!

6. Satan represents
responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires!

7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more
often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his “divine
spiritual and intellectual development,” has become the most vicious animal of

8. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to
physical, mental, or emotional gratification!

9. Satan has been the best
friend the Church has ever had, as He has kept it in business all these years!

In contrast here is Brian McLaren's Jesus Creed.

By Brian McLaren

We have confidence in Jesus
Who healed the sick,
the blind, and the paralyzed.
And even raised the dead.

He cast out
evil powers and
Confronted corrupt leaders.
He cleansed the temple.
He favored the poor.
He turned water into wine,
Walked on water,
calmed storms.

He died for the sins of the world,
Rose from the
dead, and ascended to the Father,
Sent the Holy Spirit.

We have confidence in Jesus
Who taught in word and example,
Sign and wonder.
He preached parables of the kingdom of God
On hillsides, from boats, in
the temple, in homes,
At banquets and parties, along the road, on beaches, in towns,
By day and by night.

He taught the way of love for God and
For stranger and enemy, for outcast and alien.

We have confidence in Jesus,
Who called disciples, led them,
Gave them new names and new purpose
And sent them out to preach good news.
He washed their feet as a servant.
He walked with them, ate with them,
Called them friends,
Rebuked them, encouraged them,
Promised to leave and then return,
And promised to be with them always.

He taught them to pray.
He rose early to pray, stole away to desolate places,
Fasted and faced agonizing temptations,
Wept in a garden,

And prayed, “Not my will but
your will be done.”
He rejoiced, he sang, he feasted, he wept.

We have confidence in Jesus,
So we follow him, learn his ways,
Seek to obey his teaching and live by his example.
We walk with him, walk in him, abide
in him, As a branch in a vine.

We have not seen him, but we love him.
His words are to us words of life eternal,
And to know him is to
know the true and living God.
We do not see him now, but we have confidence
in Jesus.


As I see it some at CRN seem to be preaching a different version of this… and would if honest rewrite it like this.

By The Editor of CRN (as perceived)

We have no confidence in Jesus
Who healed the sick, the blind, and the paralyzed.
And even raised the dead.
This would mean that we would have to believe in the Holy Spirit and
John MacArthur says he doesn't do these things anymore.

He cast out evil powers and
Confronted corrupt leaders.
He cleansed the temple.
He favored the poor.
He turned water into wine,
Walked on water, calmed storms.
That would take too much actual thought so we will ignore all that. Why not give kindness to those who agree with me and deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates!"

He died for the sins of the world,
Rose from the dead, and ascended to the Father,
Sent the Holy Spirit. But again John MacArthur says that we don't need that Holy Spirit guy... He is too charismatic and chaotic.

Having no confidence in Jesus
Who taught in word and example,
Sign and wonder.
He preached parables of the kingdom of God
On hillsides, from boats, in the temple, in homes,
At banquets and parties, along the road, on beaches, in towns, By day and by night.

He did not really show the way of love for God and neighbor,
For stranger and enemy,
for outcast and alien.

We have no confidence in Jesus,
Who called disciples, led them,
Gave them new names and new purpose
And sent them
out to preach good news.
He washed their feet as a servant.
He walked with them, ate with them,
Called them friends,
Rebuked them, encouraged them,
Promised to leave and then return,
And promised to be with them

He did not teach them to pray.
He did not rise early to pray, nor stole away to desolate places,
Fasted and faced agonizing temptations,
Wept in a garden,
And prayed, “Let them slander other as long as it is for truth.”
He did not rejoice, or sing, nor feasted, he wept over the different styles and models of churches and worship.

We have no confidence in Jesus,
So we don't follow him, or learn his ways,
Seek to obey his teaching and live by his example.
Other wise we might walk with him, walk in him, abide in him,
As a branch in a vine.

We have not seen him, but we know what we like.
His words are not for us words of life eternal for we must follow rules,
And to know him is to know the true and living God and that would interfere in building our own kingdoms.
We do not see him now, but we have confidence in Jesus take us away as we are so religious and worship according to our own preferences.


So it seems that as the editor of CRN follows the way of his master, he has more in common with the Satanic Church than the emerging church ever will or has. Ken Silva needs serious prayer.

If one wants to discuss this more go to
CRN.info's article to see what others are saying about the "editors" assertion that there is a connection. I still see more of a connection with CRN and the Satanic church as they seem to fulfill number four of the Nine Satanic Statements.

"4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on

Be Blessed,

God at Work or Just Me? Tozer Devotional

God at Work or Just Me?

To apply pressure, a person projects himself or herself into the minds and consciences of people made in the image of God and forces them psychologically to do something they have no particular reason for wanting to do. They are not basically interested in it and have no satisfactory reason for doing it, but they are under pressure. If they do not have a reason for doing what they are going to do, they will not know why they are invovled. Then when they get out they will not be sure that they were in, and so the whole process makes for weak, spineless religion. This violates the law of human nature, which dictates that all valid acts must arise from a natural urge or from a convinced mind. An example of a natural urge is when you are hungry. You may be very hungry, but your hunger does not have a high intellectual content in it. Nobody needs to stand up and say, "Now, all you who are hungry raise your hands." You know you are hungry, and you just go out to eat. Hunger is a natural urge. Another legimate reason for an act is a convinced mind. I am convinced that I ought to do something, and I do it because I have a conviction that it ought to be done. Those are the only two reasons for doing anything. If I force people under psychological pressure and steamroll them into doing something because they are too weak to resist, I have violated their nature. Our approach to getting people out of the rut, then, must not be to pressure them to do something they don't want to do. Instead, we must present the truth and let the Holy Spirit prompt them to want to escape.

Lord, my greatest offensive weapon is prayer--believing, trustful prayer. I want to be Your instrument but keep me from trying to do what only You can do.
. . . Unless I go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. When he comes, he will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment:— John 16:7-8

Can we trust the Holy Spirit to convict of sin, to reveal Christ, to open the minds of people to understand spiritual truth? If He doesn't do it, it doesn't get done despite all our efforts.

Saturday, July 28, 2007

The Five Solas: Sola Scriptura: updated

The Five Solas

One of the wonders and beauties of the emerging church is that while I have been a part of it, I have had to dig deeper and think harder about my faith. In that I have had struggles and questions… and have take a lot of heat… mostly unwarranted as the person would usually misrepresent my view and most of twist to fit the label placed on me.

I wanted to state here the five Solas and my thought and research on them.

SOLA SCRIPTURA (Scripture Alone)

“The inerrant Scripture is the sole source of written divine revelation, which alone can bind the conscience. The Bible alone teaches all that is necessary for our salvation from sin and is the standard by which all Christian behavior must be measured.

We deny that any creed, council or individual may bind a Christian's conscience, that the Holy Spirit speaks independently of or contrary to what is set forth in the Bible, or that personal spiritual experience can ever be a vehicle of revelation.“

I love the bible, I find it the most amazing and life changing book I have ever know. My respect for it has increased with each year I have walked with the Lord, yet I have always struggled in that what is meant by some as “inerrancy”. It seems that I have only seen at least two types and I hope to show that another view is capable without diminishing “inerrancy and infallibility” as well as the “authority” of Scripture.

Straight out I do believe all Scripture is “God Breathed”. I have no issue at all saying it is “inspired”, though I see many have misrepresented people like Brian McLaren on this topic.

I see agree wholeheartedly with this definition, except for one thing… what is the definition of “inerrant”?

1. One view is that the bible even as translated is without error and infallible. The hold that the Bible has been preserved even when translated to another language. Many hold this view, yet I think few have thought it through as translations are not always totally accurate as subtle nuances can be lost.
2. Another view is that the original text as written or the “autographa” is not available to actually check this out, so much faith must be used to believe this view. It is usually held by those who may not hold that the Bible as far as translations is inerrant and that there are in fact some ancient text that do indeed contradict each other.

So what to do? You either seem to have to check you head at the door or walk by faith and just never know…. Yet there does seem to be another view I have found I think is most accurate. It is the view that the bible is without error in that it is God inspired and all it teaches about truth is without error, also of its inability to err.

What I am getting at is that I am one who must place faith in Jesus and take God at His word… and in that believe all that is revealed in the scripture was to point me to Jesus… and in that the bible is without any error. Again, I know I will take heat on this yet as I approach this with an open heart and in all honesty I cannot say that I see that translations are without error. I do see that God was able to preserve His word even in the hands of men to an incredible degree! In that I see that the “transmission” was also inerrant as God’s written word was faithfully copied in its original language. I am amazed at how many copies of manuscripts we do have that all seem to agree on the major points of truth and if be different, it is usually over a spelling of a name or something as trivial.

I see on these levels or of the concepts of inspiration, transmission, translation, and interpretation the Bible is a very consistent and trust worthy document. Though I see the weakest link is the last two, I see that God is faithful by the Holy Spirit to fill in the missing or wrongly translated or interpreted parts.

Contrary to what some have said about me, my struggles with and my in ability to state emphatically I believe in “inerrancy” of scripture, does not mean I see it without authority. It does not mean I do not think it to contain all truth needed for one to learn to walk in Christ Jesus… It does mean that at times I am brutally honest with myself and others in my struggle to believe on some things.

So I affirm part of SOLA SCRIPTURA and will state that I believe that all the truth on Salvation, the Bible teaches is without error, and that the transmissions of these truths were preserved by God’s hand. I also affirm that God spoke to men and inspired them to write His word and these men were faithful and accurate in what God spoke and what they wrote, and that the Bible itself is God breathed.
Now, I emphasize the "written" yet do also realize that we "walk" by faith which is "physical". To state as is stated above and if I understand correctly, that one cannot experience revelation outside of scripture I disagree with, but with a great cautionary caveat. That all personal revelation need still be run pass the filter of scripture as to whether it be of God or not. God will not contradict Himself and say to a person that Jesus is just a prophet and not God, while it is taught clearly in Scripture that Jesus is God and Creator of all the is created. So, one may experience a revelation from nature or from general observation as we are dealing with "Persons" in the Trinity. I am not saying that God will give "new" revelation apart from what is revealed in the bible.

Be Blessed,

Emerging sense of Humor, and its dignity.

In response to Phil Johnson's over the top slanderous posters... (we do have a sense of humor but Phil's take on this seems more judgmental than actually constructive) Emerging Grace submits these much more accurate and beautiful posters to all.

Be Blessed,

(July 28 11:05 a bit of an update and thought on the Phil Johnson's posters:

As I took a look at them I realized that many were actually what I have encountered from John MacAruthurites. Interestingly the one that "Truth" where Phil's byline is,

"It's an adventure, not an axiom. A story still unfolding, not a tale already told. It's the journey that counts, not the destination, Right?"

And the more accurate version at emerging grace that simply states:

"Plain and simple; Jesus is the Truth"

I think the most revealing thing is how Phil views "transparency":

"Underneath the mask I am still a clown, just a lot meaner and scarier than you thought."

and once again, from emerging grace:

"Willing to take off the mask, no more hiding."

To me as well as the contrast on authenticity as Phil stating that one does not have to hide being "crazy" and emerging Graces "We are all broken eikons"... I see that the truth comes out about Lordship theology. You simply cannot be a real person but must hide behind a mask so no one will see the real you and judge you... in almost all these posters by Phil I think reveal his heart and the heart of the theology he is under [Not the Calvinism btw as there are many loving Calvinists.] It is a bit scary to think that this act of aggression is also mostly projection of his own beliefs.)

The mystic ladder of Divine love, according to Saint Bernard and Saint Thomas Step two

The second step causes the soul to seek God without ceasing. Wherefore, when the Bride says that she sought Him by night upon her bed (when she had swooned away according to the first step of love) and found Him not, she said: ‘I will arise and will seek Him Whom my soul loveth.

This, as we say, the soul does without ceasing as David counsels it, saying: ’seek ye ever the face of God, and seek ye Him in all things, tarrying not until ye find Him; like the Bride, who, having enquired for Him of the watchmen, passed on at once and left them. Mary Magdalene did not even notice the angels at the sepulchre. On this step the soul now walks so anxiously that it seeks the Beloved in all things. In whatsoever it thinks, it thinks at once of the Beloved. Of whatsoever it speaks, in whatsoever matters present themselves, it is speaking and communing at once with the Beloved. When it eats, when it sleeps, when it watches, when it does aught soever, all its care is about the Beloved, as is said above with respect to the yearnings of love. And now, as love begins to recover its health and find new strength in the love of this second step, it begins at once to mount to the third, by means of a certain degree [The word in the Spanish is that elsewhere translated ’step.’] of new purgation in the night, as we shall afterwards describe, which produces in the soul the following effects.

Dark night of the Soul By St. John of the Cross.

Friday, July 27, 2007

I could not help it... The DeVille made me do it!

OK this guy called rev scottie has been making some waves as he exposed SoL in how dishonest they are in who gets posted on their comments.

In this he made up a name and then posted mean and nasty things against his friends who were being spoken very meanly about at SoL... (what a surprise!)

So, I noticed a post that seemed to be a bit out of sync with what I know about the emergent church... and some poor guy named Jeff

Now Jeff also posted at rev scottie's blog:

"Slice" is a nightmare of a site. (I'm the "Jeff" about whom Ingrid created an "Emergent Quote of the Day" post, then blocked most of my lengthy, good-faith comments on that same post.) I told her I was leaving the site, and the recent rant about comment rights seems at least partially directed at me.

I agree that that site is stunningly divisive. I'm concerned that the heavy censorship may not be known to its users, creating a very imbalanced, unhealthy community. I've never been more frustrated or treated more poorly online in my life (and I post regularly on Slashdot and Fark!)

Thanks for posting your experience as well,

Posted by: Jeff Benson July 26, 2007 at 02:26 PM

With that as a background I just could not resist...

So I posted this rather non offensive comment:

"The biggest difference between the emerging approach and as it is
Is that we would walk and talk with this guy as our friend and answer his questions lovingly.We would not “expose” him and mock him…
It amazes me that it is assumed that “all” emergents think this way when in fact they do not.

People are at many different places in their
lives. Some just have questions and doubt that need our love and kindness to help guide them…
So this post to me is a bit appalling as you trample on someone who may be seriously looking a Jesus and truly wants to believe.


Obviously it was not posted as it was against their view...


I did this obvious fake comment:

“Hue DeVille Says:
You have to say those emergents are sure ignorant Of the
truth.Unfortunately Christianity seems to me being sieged by this plague.

Let’s be sure that we do not allow access to them In our
churches.Everyone should be sure to pray against them.”

Now notice that if you look at the capitalized letters…
it spells out


Busted again! And they call themselves a discernment ministry?

(Update: The comment was deleted... and Jeff has still not been able to defend himself on SoL and Ingrid continues to slander Jeff and all the rest of the emerging church with her lie. So as you read SoL... remember YOU C LIE. I also wanted to point out that some there who are on Ingrid's side wanted to actually converse and Ingrid denied them... here is a commont from one such person there

Cliff in WI Says:

Jeff, I agree with you that the
Bible is complicated. It is amazing. What part of it do you have such a problem with? If you have read it (I will assume you have a grasp of its
message) why do you make those claims? I noticed you used the words flawed and human in your description. What parts are flawed? I take it when you said human, you meant it was mankind’s ideas and thoughts. Really? How do you come up with that?
You’re putting your eternal soul on the line. Do you really want to stay there? You may not want to hear that people here
will pray for you and really care about what happens with you. We will and we do. I would like to know how you have come to your conclusion(s).
Thank you

Jeff has been denied being able to even answer this person who was truly concerned... and Ingrid did not seem to care at all. If one is going to be a discernment ministry and make accusations... and the people desire dialog, to deny them seems truly dishonest. To not let them speak and speak for them tell people
what YOU THINK they believe and not letting them speak for themselves is
more dishonest.
BTW Ingrid's repsonse to Jeff's quote was this:
"Response: Well Jeff, how can you know for sure that biblical fundamentalists are wrong? Are you sure about that?"
Interestingly she never let him respond back.)

Thursday, July 26, 2007

Just one of those thoughts that keep gnawing at me…

Just one of those thoughts that keep gnawing at me… which will most probably get me some blanks stares at best from the Lordship Salvation crowd.

First off I want to say, Jesus is Lord… but more He is God, which trump a Lord… as I see it.

Jesus, also being God was through Whom all creation came… so again, just by default I think He is Lord…

Now saying that, the issues to me is what does it matter that one accepts Jesus exactly in the right manner… This reeks of works as it means one need do something so exact to please God. It places works on salvation.

Now, that is not the big issue.

Most of the “Lordship Salvation (referred to as LS from now on as my fingers are tired) are Calvinist or of some sort of Calvinist bent. Nothing that bad there I can’t put up with, yet part of TULIP… (It is a sort of Calvinist shorthand just look it up if you have not heard of it before) is Irresistible Grace which is the teaching that when God calls someone who is “Elect” they cannot resist God’s Grace. Now I am not going into all that at this point, but if one is “elect” and called by God by His grace, then how can they accept Jesus wrongly? I mean it seems that as the teaching of irresistible grace states, God calls someone and they cannot resist.

So, here we have a group of people who teach on one hand that God Grace cannot be resisted and that Whom He calls being the “Elect” are already saved from the foundation of the world… worried about how someone state their faith? They are worried that someone does not accept Jesus with the right words or understanding? They seem to negate God’s sovereignty by the very teaching of LS.
So, which one is it… that one has to accept Jesus with just the right words and understanding or that God calls His Elect by Grace and they cannot resist it.

To me this is just a vain argument over “words” that is warned against is scripture. In fact for the most part I have only found the fruit LS bears is like this…

Beware of divisive people… 2 Tim 2:23 Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels.

I will end this with this thought, In Romans10:13, it does not say "Everyone who calls Jesus Lord will be saved." It doe s say, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."
It is God Who reveals Who Jesus is, as Ephesians 3:4-5 states:
“In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets.”

I think as far as Salvation is concerned… If someone is in God’s hands, someone is in much better hands some man who teaches that there is some formula that includes magical words that can lead to salvation.

The bottom line is LS should be an affront to the True Calvinist... and one would wonder that it would be more likely taught out of the Arminian camp. Being neither, I just see it as a waste of time to debate. But... here I am! LOL!

Be Blessed,

The mystic ladder of Divine love, according to Saint Bernard and Saint Thomas

WE observe, then, that the steps of this ladder of love by which the soul mounts, one by one, to God, are ten. The first step of love causes the soul to languish, and this to its advantage. The Bride is speaking from this step of love when she says: ‘I adjure you, daughters of Jerusalem, that, if ye find my Beloved, ye tell Him that I am sick with love.’

This sickness, however, is not unto death, but for the glory of God, for in this sickness the soul swoons as to sin and as to all things that are not God, for the sake of God Himself, even as David testifies, saying: ‘My soul hath swooned away’. —that is, with respect to all things, for Thy salvation. For just as a sick man first of all loses his appetite and taste for all food, and his colour changes, so likewise in this degree of love the soul loses its taste and desire for all things and changes its colour and the other accidentals of its past life, like one in love. The soul falls not into this sickness if excess of heat be not communicated to it from above, even as is expressed in that verse of David which says: Pluviam voluntariam segregabis, Deus, haereditati tuae, et infirmata est, etc. This sickness and swooning to all things, which is the beginning and the first step on the road to God, we clearly described above, when we were speaking of the annihilation wherein the soul finds itself when it begins to climb this ladder of contemplative purgation, when it can find no pleasure, support, consolation or abiding-place in anything soever. Wherefore from this step it begins at once to climb to the second.

From CHAPTER XIX of Dark Night of the Soul by St. John of the Cross

Thoughts on predestination...

I have been thinking (not to hard though so be pre-warned) about predestination.

I wonder if even though God foreknows, and has predestined those in Christ to be conformed to His Image, that all are predestined, yet not all will believe that.

Meaning that Peter states that the will of God is that none should perish... 2 Peter 3: 9.

"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance."

Now I hope that you can see that this verse is not about the "elect" but toward the lost. Yet, it seems that not all will go according to Gods will and some will be lost. Or the other idea is that there is some sort of Universalism, which I do not buy into as the bulk of scripture seems contrary to that idea.

Yet, if it is about "all the elect coming to repentance", then I think that we miss that God is still losing those who are not elect. Meaning that I the will of God is salvation for all mankind and all are forgiven, (not just the elect or there be not justice in the judgment against the non elect) there seems that there still is this aspect that some will be outside of God's will... which puts a damper on the Sovereignty of God and I can see why some choose Calvinism.

Yet, I see that there is another way to look at this.

I see that all are predestined... meaning all mankind was created in the image of God, yet choose not to fulfill that vocation. Instead, they choose not to walk in accordance to God's will but their own. God can rightly judge and be totally just in that man forsakes His will and man deserves his judgment,

Now, if all are predestined to salvation, yet some do not accept God's will in this they are lost. This may be close to what Spencer Burke was trying to convey in his book Heretics Guide to Eternity, but I think he fell short in that explanation. (Sorry Spence!)

The bible states God predestined us to be in Jesus before the creation of the world... yet also the bible teaches in Ephesians 1: 9-12

"And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment--to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ. 11. In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory."

Notice that God reveals this mystery of His will that He purposed in Christ and Him (Jesus) we are also chosen. So if one is not in Jesus THEN they are not chosen. For one must be in Christ to be chosen. Jesus was the One that was predestined and revealed according to the plan of God to bring all things into conformity through Jesus.

Now, again I have not fleshed this all out, but the point is this if you have gotten this far and missed what I am saying, which I would not doubt could happen.

Jesus was predestined to bring all things into conformity with God’s will. We were not in Christ at the creation of the world...

1. So point one I quote 1 Peter 1:20 -21 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.

2. Point 2 is that we were not in Christ at the foundation of the world. The only verse that state something like this is 1 Peter 1-2

"Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To God's elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance.”

Now if one looks closely that it does not say that you existed in Jesus before creation... it states that because of God's foreknowledge that the elect have been chosen, yet it is through the sanctifying work of the Spirit for the obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by His Blood... it all still hinges on being in Christ for it is Jesus that was foreknown and predestined... and to be part of that predestination one still need be in Christ.

Note Peter goes on in verse 20 -21:

“He [Jesus] was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God."

This is not about God knowing you and choosing you before the creation of the world... but knowing Jesus and His destination.

I know the next verse to be brought up is Ephesians 1: 4 -6.

"For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will-- to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves."

Note still it says "For He chose us IN HIM before the creation of the world" not "He chose us to be in Him before the creation of the world."

The difference is still that we must be IN HIM... meaning we must be IN CHRIST, to be part of His predestination... and be conformed to His Image.

Predestination as taught by some seems predicated on the idea man is am immortal being that has always existed... the bible teaches man is not an immortal being and that immortality is only though Jesus Christ for He is the only immortal One. (1 Timothy 6:15) This is where Gnosticism has entered Christianity as Plato taught that man was immortal and existed with God before creation.

Again, before you go off on me, this is just the beginnings of my thoughts on this and I have yet to fully flesh this out but I hope that one can see that Christianity is based all on Jesus and Who He is and not about man or that some are "special" and have been elected to be chosen over others for salvation.

Be Blessed,

Romans 8: 29-30. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Everyone has bad theology

I find it interesting that some are quick to condemn others, yet even when someone shows hey believe on Jesus, they still find a way to say others are not saved...

I think it also interesting that many other groups are not vilified as them yet have some pretty bad theology behind their "saved by grace through faith".

A Calvinist has a different view than a Quaker, a Baptist has a different view than a Lutheran, and an Assembly of God person different from an evangelical... and so on all have a bit of a different take on the topic.

Yet, we seem to not accept who we think is the worse when in the end John states that the two things that are the "commandments" are, "Believe in Jesus, and love one another"...

It seems that only because other groups in the early church began to claim and add other teachings... as in the Gnostic, that the Christian church began adding other "qualifiers"... none of which make a person saved or not, but are there to help identify one who is an authentic believer in Jesus. They were road markers to show that one is on the right road, but they are not spots that prove one is saved... that is a logical leap.

We seemed to have added to the teachings of what it takes to become a Christian. We seemed to miss that though these road markers are there to show us direction that one does not need to fully believe and understand these to be saved. It is as if we are asking some to become theologians before they can get saved... yet then we turn around and just say, “You need to accept Jesus into your heart.

Now even that is technically wrong! Jesus does not come to live in the kingdom or our hearts; He came to bring our hearts into His Kingdom! He did not come to live and dwell in our pathetic little lives; He came to give us New Life... His Life... and make us New Creations... we did not give our life to Jesus, we had no life as the bible teaches... we gave our death to Jesus or rather we acknowledged our death and turned to Jesus to receive His Life Eternal.

Yet, we speak and act and teach and promote unbiblical ideas every day... and then turn and condemn other for doing the same thing.

There is a big difference between one who promotes another Jesus... and one who believes on Jesus of the bible for salvation... and there seems to be a huge lack of understanding and trust of the Holy Spirit in how a person need grow in Christ.

Yet, some seem to think that what they believe is without flaw. I have run into some that that are so with out love of others that they are nothing but banging gongs and crashing cymbals in their defense of their belief. Yet, saying that, it seems to be almost an insult to those fine instruments. It seems best to me to do as the bible teaches... and that is to love one another... and that is by giving away the Grace and Mercy and Love... and administering Justice, which is not all attached to God's wrath, but is what can set captives free literally. I see that if these things are overlooked, then we are doing things in the flesh and are no different than this world. These are the things that are the markers of a true believer.


Wednesday, July 25, 2007

Will the real James White please stand up?

In this bizarre fray with some in the Lordship Salvation camp... in which a emerging perosn who "does not beleive in truth" was arguing for a pure biblica view of truth and pointing out that many Christians have infused Platonist Realism and other modernistic views, I had unfortunately confused Jim W. with James R. White. He surprised me with a visit to my blog and commented on this article.

I did there and will once again apologize for that unfortunate mistake and also am very thankful that Jim W. is NOT James R. White. It seems that the real James White has a ton more class and can show much more grace.

So, James I do once again apologize for this and hope that you will accept my apology and any thing I did say to or about you in good spirit as I did not mean any malice toward you. As I stated to you I do not agree with you on some points, but in no way do I not consider you a brother in Christ. Noted again I am not a Calvinist yet I am not anti Calvinist.

James R. White made mention of this on his blog... so I am semi famous... again... LOL!

On My "Issues" and Other Stuff James R. White
I fine-tuned my Google Blog Search gadget and got rid of all the references to basketball and politics. As a result, I found this article by "iggy" from Billings, Montana. Thankfully, iggy later admitted his error, and recognized that there might just be more than one person on the Internet with the initials JW, or "Jim W.," etc. If I'm going to comment on a blog somewhere, I will almost always identify myself with the signature (developed back in the 1980s for use on our BBS) of "James>>>" along with our website, www.aomin.org. If the comment system uses nicks instead of names, you will often see DrOakley or a variant thereof (my nick in our chat channel). For someone who makes himself so easily available, I have no reason to hide when commenting out there in the blogosphere, as rarely as I do that.

The rest of the article is here.

Thanks again James for your gracious spirit. Though like I mentioned before I would like to here your perspective on Lordship Salvation.


Punk'd of Laodicia

I had a great laugh this morning... especially after all I went through as i was trying to correct someone on how misinformed he was on emergent/emerging. It was a complete wash as no matter what I stated... even when we agreed... I was wrong and a liar and whatever else they decided to judge me about...

I mean I AM an emerging folk, I think I might know a bit more than they? Nope, they told me what I beleive and insisted they were right.

I found this first at CRNinfo, then I read it at MMI.

Slice Website Punked Yesterday, I talked about how the Slice website has twice in the past month deleted articles from their website without explanation or apology. The first was a story Ingrid got totally wrong. She backtracked, then deleted. Yesterday, she withdrew a story about Tammy Faye and her eternal destiny. Yesterday, news came that the Slice site has been being punked. .

One man who says he was treated unfairly at Slice has taken a different approach. He’s been posting there to see how silly his comments can be and still be taken seriously. According to Rev. Scotty, “I said some really stupid and outright mean things, used scripture way out of context and just made up stuff to post. As long as my target was one of the people they disagreed with I was able to say anything I wanted even to the point of calling a fellow pastor and friend a “dirty old man”.”

While I’m not condoning “Dr Louis” alias, I do find it funny that a group that is constantly calling out people for taking scripture out of context would allow this comment to stand:

I think Rev Scottie (Which I’m not sure if he is even an ordained Reverend) should carefully consider what it means to not be “conformed to this world.” I personaly feel that a goatee signifies a rebelious spirit. I believe this is the type of beard spoken of in Leviticus 19:27.

You can see the exchange here. You’ll notice that Rev. Scottie is the first to comment; then his altar ego, Dr Louis chimes in against himself.

Oh, by the way… Leviticus 19:27 says: Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.

You can see Rev. Scottie's site here.

Be Blessed,


Tuesday, July 24, 2007

John Anderson writes about A Weekend Emergent Village Experience

Another great article here by John H Armstrong on A Weekend Emergent Village Experience.

"I was particularly pleased to share lunch with Doug Pagitt and Tony Jones, both from Solomon’s Porch in Minneapolis. Two more delightful brothers I have not met recently. Yes, these men are subversive for sure, but then so was Jesus. They raise lots of questions that are disturbing, and maybe at times they overstate themselves a bit, which I rather like much of the time. But they are not professional hucksters for a new fad at all. They clearly love the gospel, love people, and care profoundly about the mission of Christ."

Also a bit of a note, the Emergent Village Podcast is now on iggyROCKS! (link to the right----->)

Be Blessed,

Scot McKnight... The Whole Gospel

I highly reccomend that one take a listen to Scot McKnight's podcast called The Whole Gospel.


John Smulo interviews Michael Frost

John Smulo has created missional apologetics which is a great resource for all things "missional". You will find some great articles and interviews.

Here is an interview with Michael Frost.


More of the fruit of Lordship Salvation with Jim W.

I am really getting tired of this... but Jim W. wanted to let me know more of his love for me.

So here is an update here: I errored that this was James White (who has his own issues) and that this is the mysterious Jim W. It seems with this last comment he still thinks himself of some kind of superior Christian than me and others.

Here is the final comment toward me it is on the same link as above.

Jim W on July 24th, 2007
iggy, you just dont learn, do you? Now you claim
that I am “James White”. I wish I had half his Biblical knowledge. Shoot, I’d
settle for 1/4.
So, once again, you twist and slander someone who points out
your error by slandering someone else.
I have no idea how you arrive that
producing good fruit is works salvation. We produce good fruit by the grace of
God. Unless we are born again, all our works as as filthy rags. Once we are born
again, we do the will of God which is to grow in His Word, His grace, His
knowledge and by doing what He wills, we produce good fruit. That has nothing to
do with our salvation. Faith without works is dead. Remember that verse? It’s
popular with the emergent crowd. Usually used to say that we must do good works
to be saved. That’s works righteousness, which is false, and neither John Mac,
nor I, nor Jim B, nor Tony (here) believe that line of thought. Instead, our
faith in God produces good works (fruit).
And again, you claim I’m spitting
on you in my denunciation of you. How sad that you need to see correction as
people spitting on you. Do you accuse God of spitting on you when He chastens
you as He would a wayward child? Only if you are truly saved will God do this,
if you are still unregenerate, God could care less. So, maybe, just maybe,
you’re relying on your human understanding too far, relying on your sad
“friends”, MacLaren and Jones and their twisted lore for your faith and perhaps
God is using people like Tony and Jim B to show you the errors of your way.
When you learn how to read and comprehend, maybe we can talk. Until then, I
have nothing further to say to you.

Jim W's understanding of fruit is a bit off from the biblical teachings.. yet in the core we agree... yet for some reason as the same with Tony Rose and Jim Bublitz Jim W. cannot see this or admit it... notice he seems to also equate his chastisement of me with the chastisement of God... as if he is God at that point here to correct me in the things we agree on... and I can't read and comprehend! LOL!

He truly furthers my conviction to stay away from divisive people like him... If this is conforming to the image of Chirst, God have mercy on us all! I think this further shows the condition of his heart and why people need to beware of Lordship Salvation and its fruit. You see even when he agrees with me, I am wrong... and am lesser than him.

Before someone criticizes me over this please realize that I was defending Biblical truth over "absolute truth" which definition would mean that Jesus and the Bible are "just an abstract thought". This is the position Jim W. was defending. I was standing on the Biblical definition which is that Truth is the Person of Jesus Christ and from Him all Truth comes... remember it was through Jesus Christ all things were created... and He was full of Grace and Truth. (John 1)

I only am showing this to show what kind of people these are and how they treat others in the Name of Jesus... and how sad it is.


Here is part one

And now the fruit of Lordship Salvation... by Jim W.

I received this comment from Jim W. who wanted to express the Love of Jesus and show me His great grace and mercy. I was overwhelmed by this as his expression to me of the loving kindness he displayed reminded me of how Jesus would be. I am truly thinking of changing to his way of thinking and converting to his type of religious Calvinism.

Here is his loving letter to me from this comment.

Jim W on July 24th, 2007

I see iggy is striking again and so far, no one is getting any further than they have any previous time.
iggy can twist any statement into a pretzel faster than a pretzel machine can.
“1. One accepting Jesus in a certain manner. meaning that they MUST accept Him as Lord… the bible teaches Jesus is to be our very Life… So I see that John right off the bat has added a “condition” to the grace that is freely given.”
John Mac doesn’t teach any works, iggy, no matter how much you’d like to believe it. Believing and accepting Jesus as Lord is part of our repentance. Understanding our fallen, sin nature is critical. If we do not grasp our utter inability to reach God on our own merit, we will never be accepted into God’s kingdom. recognizing that Jesus is Lord is part of this.
“2. John looks at man’s fruit as a way to see if one is “saved” or not… all men’s fruit is bad, we are all bad trees. God is the only Good Tree and we are called to bear HIS Fruit and not just polish our own. This leads to a performance and shame based faith that is not biblical”
We are not bad trees, iggy. Our fruit isn’t bad, either. Not once we are reborn into the family of Christ. We can still produce bad fruit by failing to do what God commands us to do, but if we are following God’s commands, we will produce good fruit. Examining a person’s fruit is exactly what is commanded in John’s epistles. No matter how much you would like to deny the rest of the Bible, it still applies to us.
To Tony and Quitin, have you read iggy’s blog about JM’s “Truth Wars”? This is a classic case of iggy-twisting if I ever saw one. He refers his comments to “Tall Skinny Kiwi” where there is a review of “Truth Wars”. In “Truth Wars”, JM refers to Jude where Jude compares false teaches to stained clothing. Kiwi infers this to mean that JM is comparing emergents to filthy clothes. iggy goes it even farther. He claims that JM is calling Jesus stained clothing. iggy takes it even further. I won’t even write what iggy says, but it calls Jesus stained underwear. Talk about twisting a comment to suit an agenda. And to even imply that someone who has lived a life devoted to God would refer to his (our) Lord as stained underwear is disgusting.
iggy, I’ve said it before, I guess I have to say it again: you’re a pathetic little man. You read with no comprehension and then insert your own thoughts into everyone’s writings. You truly need help. If nothing else, take a class on reading comprehension. That alone will help. Quit trying to read German mathmatians and esoteric philosophers. You cannot understand the things you read, so go back to basics.
BTW, nice equivocation on all your answers to Quitins questions. You answered everything while leaving yourself “outs” on everything. You can’t be pinned down to any position because of your postmodern mindset. You obviously have studied Tony Jones and Doug Pagitt.

I might state here that Jim W. makes an interesting accusation. He states that I made up the thing about being a stain on the garment of Jesus? That was what JM stated! Also, note that I answered these "certain" questions... Here is what i stated and my answers that Jim W. claims I gave myself an "out"... Take notice at what I did say... "All of these questions would need to be fleshed out much more and that would take more time that i want to take here on this blog." I think that great theologians have worked on these questions for an entire life time and Jim W. expects me to give full and complete answers here and now... He places his

Your questions:
Let me first state that these are not easy questions to answer. You are wanting a specific answer and i will fail at giving you THAT answer. All of these questions would need to be fleshed out much more and that would take more time that i want to take here on this blog.

2. Give me the emergent position. Give it clear.
a) What is sin?
Unbelief which manifests itself as disobedience.

b) How do people discover Jesus Christ?

By the calling of God through the Holy Spirit though it can happen in many ways.

c) What role does the bible play?

Jesus own words are this: “You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.” So the scriptures role is to lead us to Jesus according to Jesus. In that it is the written revelation from God to man to help us learn by the guidance of the Holy Spirit of God through Jesus Christ.

c.1) Is the bible infallible?
In all that it speaks of yes.

c.2) Is the bible inerrant?
In all that it speaks of yes.

c.2) Is the bible true, for what it says, as it says it? Yes… which is what I have been trying to state to you throughout this whole thread.

Now, let me add this. I do not believe that there is any TRANSLATIONS of the bible that are infallible or inerrant… that does not mean I do not see that God’s written word is not either. I am willing to admit I struggle with inerrancy and infallibility as I see that the definition has changed from the time it was first used and how you are using them now. I am most certainly confident in the ability that God can overcome any shortcomings in bad translations. I am confident that God is true to His word. So i see even my struggle I am trusting God at His word and have placed my faith in Him. I trust Him completely.

AND THEY WONDER WHY I AM EMERGING!? Did you notice that James W. denies the words of Jesus who stated:

Matthew 7:17
Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.

Matthew 7:18
A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.

Matthew 12:33
"Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit.

Luke 6:43
[ A Tree and Its Fruit ] "No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit.

i will note that Jim misses this verse also:

Matthew 10:17 "As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. "Good teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?" 18"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good—except God alone."

We bear good fruit only because we are engrafted onto the Good Tree... we do not bear good fruit on our own. It is that we are engrafted on the Good Tree we bear His Good Fruit it is and never was and never will be ours until we are clothed in perfection and are changed from perishable to imperishable. We must be totally dependant on the works of Jesus for He is our Sabbath Rest. Jim negates this by adding "works" and justifies judging others fruit... and sorely misses the plank in his own eye. He has seemed to have forgotten that no one is worthy, no one is righteous... and that we are at the mercy of God Who has give us His great Grace... Jim has forgotten that "Mercy Triumphs over Judgment".

In one breath Jim W. stated "If we do not grasp our utter inability to reach God on our own merit, we will never be accepted into God’s kingdom." And then denied we are bad trees that need to totally depend on Jesus to bear any good fruit. He states that it is by us "obeying" God. Yet, he misses that 1 John states what this obedience is:

23. "And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us."

He then showed me his love for me... yet God seemed to bring this verse to mind. 1 John 4: 15 - 21.

"If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him and he in God. And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him. In this way, love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment, because in this world we are like him.
There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.
We love because he first loved us.
If anyone says, "I love God," yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen.
And he has given us this command: Whoever loves God must also love his brother."

They speak out both sides of their mouths... as I have stated before. I think these speaks volumes of the fruit of Lordship Salvation. Now excuse me I think I need a towel from all the frothing spittle baptism I just received.

I would rather be a "pathetic little man" than be one who has forgotten how great the grace of God is and that I owe all to God and should only give away God's forgiveness, mercy, grace, and love... and in that be justified as I do that for it is all by God's Holy Spirit... for the greatest gift is love. I know that I have to forgotten this great love at times... so I in no way condemn Jim White... but i hope he sees the error of his ways and turns to Jesus to bear God's fruit instead of trying to produce it on his own by attempting to please God by his own obedience.

Paul stated in Galatans 5:1 - 26

It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law.
You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope.
For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.
You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth?
That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you. "A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough."
I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion will pay the penalty, whoever he may be.
Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves! You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature ; rather, serve one another in love. The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other. So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature.
For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.
The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.

In closing I also quote Paul in Galatians 3:1-5

Galatians 3

You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?
Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort? Have you suffered so much for nothing--if it really was for nothing? Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?

I stand firmly in Christ who is the Author and Finisher of my faith and salvation.

Be Blessed,

Text here is part two

Talk about strange...

Here is a recent comment i almost did not let through. There are a lot of conspiracy nuts out there but this accusation against the emerging conversation takes the cake!
Be Blessed,

I'd wish people stopped using the word postmodern as an indicator of anything other than crypto Marxism. It lends credibility to a very pernicious branch of Leftism that is certainly no friend of Christianity and is out to destroy anything related to what I term The White Patriarch: the dominance of the archetypal white, powerful, rich, Christian, male culture. I hope you realize this is an effort to destroy Christianity from within.
God bless,

Monday, July 23, 2007

Banned for standing on Truth of Scripture.

First I was banned at oldtruth.com for pointing out that Jim Bublitz knew nothing of the emerging church and lies about it... (BTW I really don't care about being banned from there as there was some really mean people there).

Now I have been threatened from Tony Rose to be banned at His blog for stating that Jesus is not "just absolute truth" and standing on the Bible' teaching of Jesus being The Truth.

It seems that truth means nothing for all their talk.

A bit of an update here as Tony Rose came here to dialog over the topic of objective truth...
You can read his comments and my response here.

UPDATE: This was posted on Tony Rose' comments.

"Iggy I have no idea what you even mean by Jesus being “just an abstract thought.” I’ve never said that and don’t even know what you mean by it, or by claiming that I have said it.
Jesus is certainly not just an abstract thought, whatever you mean by that.

As I keep stating even though he agrees with me, I am still wrong.
Beware false teachers.


Great Quotes: Spurgeon

I found this great quote:

"All our transgressions are swept away at once, carried off as by a flood, and so completely removed from us that no guilty trace of them remains. They are all gone!

O ye believers, think of this, for the all is no little thing: sins against a holy God, sins against his loving Son, sins against gospel as well as against law, sins against man as well as against God, sins of the body as well as sins of the mind, sins as numerous as the sands on the sea shore, and as great as the sea itself: all, all are removed from us as far as the east is from the west. All this evil was rolled into one great mass, and laid upon Jesus, and having borne it all he has made an end of it for ever.

When the Lord forgave us he forgave us the whole debt. He did not take the bill and say, "I strike out this item and that," but the pen went through it all;—PAID." (C H Spurgeon, Sermon 1448 at Newington)

Thorugh this site...

Funny how things work.


How Right I Am!!!

I accidentally found a great video by Brian McLaren... Where? On CRN...

This post
confirms what I have been saying for some time, that the "Truth War" is not about "truth" but about different views of the Kingdom of God.

Yet, as I stated many times here and elsewhere, this is not a war about truth, but about whether Jesus Resurrection brought the Kingdom to earth as in the Lords Pray.

Funny thing, the "editor" seems to be against the Lord's Prayer. He seems to be pointing out that the Kingdom of God is not here... that Jesus death, burial and resurrection were a huge waste of time... and the only reason Jesus died was to get our butts out of hell into heaven.

A version of the Kingdom that Jesus came to bring it... failed so left and will come again as the wrathful and angry God they worship, unless the emergent take over the church and all is lost...


A version in which Jesus being the first born of the New Creation ushered in the Kingdom of God, on Earth as it is in Heaven. It is not in it's fullness but it will be soon.

I think the second one seems a bit more biblical... well at least from what the scripture states being true.

So one can believe the truth, enter into God's Kingdom through Jesus Christ... or believe a lie...

Maybe this is a truth war... and the truth is some hate the Kingdom of God so much that they willingly exchange the truth for a lie and worship their own creation of what the bible says.

Beware false teachers.

I think the reason they think Brian McLaren is so dangerous, is that he makes them face what the bible actually teaches.



Sunday, July 22, 2007

What's your theological worldview?

You scored as Emergent/Postmodern, You are Emergent/Postmodern in your theology. You feel alienated from older forms of church, you don't think they connect to modern culture very well. No one knows the whole truth about God, and we have much to learn from each other, and so learning takes place in dialogue. Evangelism should take place in relationships rather than through crusades and altar-calls. People are interested in spirituality and want to ask questions, so the church should help them to do this.



Neo orthodox


Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan


Reformed Evangelical


Roman Catholic






Classical Liberal


Modern Liberal


What's your theological worldview?
created with QuizFarm.com

I took this test over a year ago... the results are interesting.

I am glad to see I am losing my fundamentalist viewpoint... maybe I can thank them for showing me the error of my ways! ; ) I do think that my "Charismatic/Pentecostal" score a bit low.

Be blessed,


Shameless plug: iggyROCKS!

My online radio station iggyROCKS! hit the 74 position on July 12th.

We have added some new shows, such as:

Silent Planet Radio.
iggyTalks on iggyROCKS!

We are also proud to announce we will be broadcasting the Emergent Village Podcast.

We are still rebroadcasting People to People as well as excited to let you know Nation of Rockwell has gone into syndication... Quenton has also found out he and his wife are expecting a child... so congrats to you both!

As well we are always adding new artist and remember some of the classics.

I want to thank the listener for making this station what it is. It was just a hobby that has turned into a ministry for up and coming artists and talent.


Saturday, July 21, 2007

My Baby Girl Turns Two!

It is hard to believe that my baby girl turns two today!
Happy Birthday Ciana!
Your daddy

Grace is not a "Bar of Soap"

I was looking as some stats and noticed where some "hits" on this blog came from.

And I came across someone using this picture to express what grace was all about.

Truly this person has no clue what the Grace of God is all about.

Grace is not a bar of soap to be taken out only when one sins. That is almost an insult to what Grace is. Grace is the substance in which all things are held together. Some call that common grace, yet there is nothing "common" about it.
God created all things through Jesus Christ. (1 Cor 8)

Since all things were created through Jesus, we must realize that all things were originally created in Grace and Truth as Jesus is full of Grace and Truth. (John 1:14)

So Grace is in its fullness literally Jesus Christ.

From this knowledge of Grace, we now see that God is drawing all things back to Himself in Jesus Christ. For the Bible teaches, "For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all." 1 Cor 15: 27-28)

Grace comes from and is Jesus Christ. It has from the original creation until even now in the New Creation that began when the stone was rolled away.

I searched for a picture that might actually represent what Grace is. I came up with a few... yet, I realized there is only One Picture that truly represents Grace in its fullness. That is the Picture of Jesus Christ. From His preincarnation in the Father... to when the Father began the Great Conversation when he Spoke, "Let there be..." and it was... through Christ Jesus.

To the many stories and antitype throughout the scirpture that are the shadows... to the reality of Jesus' birth, life, death on the Cross... to the Resurrection as His Kingdom was ushered in, to the Ascension and now as he sits in His Glory and we await His return to bring His Kingdom in its fullness.

The Picture of Jesus is the very Picture of Grace itself...

To say Grace is nothing but a bar of soap that we use to wash ourselves on occasion is truly shameful and honestly a sin.

We are washed by the Blood... shed by Jesus... as He being Grace showed us Grace in action.

I hope that no one reduces Jesus to a bar of soap... for He is Life itself and apart from Him there is no Life.


Friday, July 20, 2007

Walking Through Romans pt 12: Romans 8:18 - 39

Walking Through Romans pt 12: Romans 8:18 - 39

8:18 For I consider that our present sufferings cannot even be compared to the glory that will be revealed to us. 8:19 For the creation eagerly waits for the revelation of the sons of God. 8:20 For the creation was subjected to futility – not willingly but because of God who subjected it – in hope 8:21 that the creation itself will also be set free from the bondage of decay into the glorious freedom of God’s children. 8:22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers together until now. 8:23 Not only this, but we ourselves also, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we eagerly await our adoption, the redemption of our bodies. 8:24 For in hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope, because who hopes for what he sees? 8:25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with endurance.
8:26 In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness, for we do not know how we should pray, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with inexpressible groanings. 8:27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes on behalf of the saints according to God’s will. 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose, 8:29 because those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that his Son would be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 8:30 And those he predestined, he also called; and those he called, he also justified; and those he justified, he also glorified.
8:31 What then shall we say about these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 8:32 Indeed, he who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all – how will he not also, along with him, freely give us all things? 8:33 Who will bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. 8:34 Who is the one who will condemn? Christ is the one who died (and more than that, he was raised), who is at the right hand of God, and who also is interceding for us. 8:35 Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will trouble, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? 8:36 As it is written, “For your sake we encounter death all day long; we were considered as sheep to be slaughtered.” 8:37 No, in all these things we have complete victory through him who loved us! 8:38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor heavenly rulers, nor things that are present, nor things to come, nor powers, 8:39 nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in creation will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

I see that suffering is something that most Americans do not relate to. To many think that the cable TV going down or not having a hot shower in the morning… or running to late for work that you can’t stop for a latte is suffering.

Yet, saying that there is a suffering deeper in the heart of man that many may cover with such things.
Paul’s sufferings were both physical and mental as he was often on the defense of his teachings, and even of his very life as some sought to bring him down in some way even at times subjecting him to stoning.

Some countries the physical sufferings we here cannot fathom… yet in all this, Paul states that “our present sufferings cannot even be compared to the glory that will be revealed to us.” This Glory is Jesus Christ Himself.

Because of man who gave over his dominion of the earth and creation as a whole to Satan, the creation cries out in its own suffering. We often do not think of the creation as suffering yet Paul states: “the whole creation groans and suffers together until now”

What more we too groan in these bodies of decay, and hope for the Resurrection where we will receive new imperishable bodies.

Many place their faith in the idea that we can understand through rationalizing and science proves God’s word. This places God’s word in subjection to the process of science. Science itself is not bad, yet if one uses it to prove God I see something wrong. It is like saying that man is capable of understanding God if he gathers enough info. It is saying that God is not beyond mans finite mind and mental capacities and placing ourselves as equal if not above God.

If one then believes the Bible then as he does research finds once again God’s word to be true, then science in subject to God’s word.

The contrast to all of this though is the understanding that it is Hope we are saved. It is the Hope that in placing our faith in the finished works of Christ Jesus we find salvation. We do not see this at present, or at best may get a fleeting glimpse that passes in a moment. Yet, we who place our hope in Jesus press forward in this hope with endurance until this hope is fulfilled.

Paul goes one that in the same way we press on in endurance by hope we also do not know how to even pray. As one who is so far from perfection we must depend on the Holy Spirit to interpret our own inward groanings. As the Holy Spirit does this He intercedes on our behalf. It seems God has thought of everything doesn’t it?

As we are in Christ Jesus, the Father works His will and purpose and works all things together for our good.

God knowing that there would be those who would be in Christ, also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. God also by making Jesus the firstborn of the New Creation, now has made a way that we also will be brothers and sisters born into this same New Creation we have in Christ Jesus.

Before we were predestined we were called. In that we either answer “No.” or “Yes”. We must come to the point were we have not where else to go as the disciples stated to Jesus (john 6:68).

I see that many miss this and struggle for years to realize this crucial point, that we are dead in our sins… and as we come to Christ, we place our sins in Christ and our dead in Christ, but alive by His resurrection and given New Life.

As we walk forward in perseverance, we walking in Hope… this Hope is Jesus Christ. (Titus 2:13) Yet also in this calling and do His will and good works, we find that we are justified. Justification is not a one shot deal at the Cross… as we are given Grace, Mercy and Love to give away, we also are given Justice to give away.

Our God is for us. Many suffer from bad teaching that tells them that “God hates sinners” and if a person is honest, they know they are sinners. If a person listens long enough to this sort of bad theology, they then begin to not live in victory, but focus on their own fruit. They do not realize that all men are bad trees and thus bear bad fruit. It is God alone who bears Good Fruit as He alone is the Good True. By listening to the lies, they become in bondage to a performance or shame based faith. They fall from grace to works and again if honest enough find they no matter how hard they try, they will always fall short.

That is why it is crucial to understand God’s Love. God is for us. If God justifies a man, who can say God is wrong? No one can condemn you because Jesus sits by the Father and intercede for you. I think Jesus trumps everyone else in this game.

It is this great love for us God has. Nothing can separate us from it. In Christ we are secure and immersed in the greatest love of all.

Never let anyone tell you that God hates you because you sin… It seems that God loves sinners most of all. For He loves them so much that He sent His Son to die in their place. All in hope that we come to trust God in His love for us and find true comfort from our sufferings and even more that we grow into the image of Jesus.


Thursday, July 19, 2007

John MacArthur and Kenneth Nally

Rev. MACARTHUR: "I don't think we went wrong at all. We have absolutely no regrets. My regret is that Ken Nally took his life."

BETTY ROLLIN: Kenneth Nally was 24 years old and living with his family in Southern California when he put a gun to his head and shot himself to death. Kenneth was a devout member of the Grace Community Church in suburban Los Angeles, and when he began to suffer from what turned out to be clinical depression, he sought help from one of the church counselors. Kenneth's parents to this day blame the church for their son's suicide. They say the counselor, who had no training in psychology and provided only Bible-based advice, seemed not to comprehend the seriousness of Kenneth's condition.

Here is the story of John MacArthurs "absolutely no regrets."
Here is the story of John MacArthurs "absolutely no regrets."

The only comment I will make is that this is the type of people that I run into from John MacArthur... they abuse others and "absolutely have no regrets". It seems that John is just fine having contributed to this persons death. Though he regrets Ken Nalley shot himself. (Talk about double speak!)

It was really sick as John started the spin on this case that God's Word was on trial... yet truly it was a case of bad judgment and careless words that caused a 24 year old boy to point a gun to his head and pull the trigger.

It was never God's Word on trial... It was a person who claims to love Jesus, but "has absolutely no regrets" in contributing to another persons death.

Beware of false teachers.


Wednesday, July 18, 2007

I am giving up writing my blog...

After reading Rick Ianniello's blog and some of his posts on John MacArthur... I realized he is much better and a clearer thinker than myself...

So I relinquish all my blogging to him...

Well at least for this post...

Check out his last installment as he takes a look at John MacArthur's latest articles...

Oh, and Rick is one of my favorite Calvinists....

Be blessed,

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Something pretty cool by Google

Something pretty cool.

Google Image Labler

It is fun... and you are helping Google improve the relevance of image search results.


Monday, July 16, 2007

Great Monday Morning Insight Article

This is a bit more on this so called "truth war"... I see it is really a modern day witch hunt. Which we have come to realize that mostly was not about actual witches but about "keeping the faith pure" as per one's preferences. It is also more about whether the Kingdom of God is as taught by these "crusaders" was "Here, the gone, the to come" or as Jesus described it, like a women who adds yeast to dough and the dough rises as the yeast spreads.
It is about whether the Kingdom came with Jesus and is still here and will come to it fullness at His return, or that it came with Jesus then left with Jesus, then will come again... This seems to deny that Jesus sent the Holy Spirit. Yet now in this attack over "truth" it seems that some stoop to lies and falsehoods and fanciful stories to preserve their so called "truth".

Todd Rhoads states:

"I rarely, rarely ever try to specifically talk about someone in a negative light, and I hope this isn’t negative against a person, but about their opinions. I received from a friend a mass letter going out to supporters of national radio preaching ministry. He sent it to me to read since the whole letter was about “the emerging church”.

I was really dismayed and saddened to read this letter he sent out. It was a fund raising letter for his radio ministry which I went on his radio ministry blog and found that my name was actually listed in his list of who he sees as emerging church leaders. So this became personal, since he mentions me on his radio blog and also raised my interest more in what he was saying in the letter.

Unfortunately, what I read in the letter was, in my opinion, hyper-exaggerations with nothing listed or a specific emerging church cited to back up his claims (at least in this letter). If I was a radio listener and didn’t know what the emerging church was about, after reading the letter I certainly would have my fear raised to find out how to avoid them as the letter says they are a “threat” and “the danger is real”. Many of the descriptions in the letter of “the emerging church” were ones that I commonly hear over and over again and most of them are much like a stereotyped cartoon caricature. Sadly, for the grandparents and parents and all those reading this letter, this stereotype is all they end up hearing which then forms their opinions. Let me show some examples of what he wrote in this letter:"

You will have to read the rest here.


Sunday, July 15, 2007

Slice of Laodicea is Rated...

Free Online Dating

This rating was determined based on the presence of the following words:

hell (3x)
dead (2x)
drugs (1x)

Soooooo, I just was thinking... what about blogs like SoL?

And just as I suspected... rated "PG"! So much for me being a dirty mouthed "emergent".