*bowing*

Glad I could hep’ ya out there pardnah. peace.

great links josh thanks.

Josh,

For someone who claims so much disgust with the religious arrogant, I can’t help but notice the arrogance and pride echoing from nearly every post here on your blog, and in many of your comments on the podcast. It seems that if you truly cared about conversation and change, you would actually engage “fundamentalists” rather than dismiss them as ignorant with a smarmy comment.

If I came to your site with a clean slate, no theological predispositions, I would see nothing redeeming in your beliefs, and all of your ideological assertions about love, patience, and living like Christ would be negated by the plethora of posts and comments like the one directed at Ken Silva.

I realize that I don’t know you personally, and understand that I am only commenting on the side of you presented here on your site, but I would urge you to open your mind a bit, don’t be afraid of civilized conversation, and don’t be so quick to dismiss those that you disagree with.

Matt Mc

matt. thanks for the heads up. unfortunately the blog is a bit misleading.

the reality is that i’ve been engaging those different than me for quite a while now. while i was on staff at a conventional church. while i was in school. with people on this blog.

my problem is not with people who are different than me. but rather people who are closed off to conversation. i’m quite open. and willing to engage with multiple perspectives. however, with folks like ken silva, there’s not much conversation. everything gets reduced down to quoting a few scripture verses. that’s just as monopolizing on any conversation. also with any conversation . . . both participants need to be moderately versed in the larger and undergirding frameworks that make up each position.

as a former conservative fundamentalists, one who devoured commentaries by erikson, ryrie, and hodge . . . one who wrote papers putting these end time events - marriage supper, bowls, trumpets, plagues, 2nd coming, judgment seat - in chronological order . . . one who evangelized with tracts . . . i think i can speak well of both sides and have a good understanding of both perspectives.

however, most fundamentalists don’t even have a cursory knowledge of some of the larger scholarship in academia or theological perspectives. simply relying on a southern baptist commentary on heaven, hell, or salvation to name a few, doesn’t exactly make you a good conversation partner.

so i’m more than willing to discuss things with people who are different. but to do so requires that both parties be able to discuss intelligently the strengths and weaknesses of each perspective without relying on proof texting.

it also would help if they even knew what the word epistemology meant.

all that to say, at this point, after years of attempting to debate generously and scholarly with guys like ken and wes . . . i’ve sort of just given up and decided to just employ sarcastic humor to it. which is no more redunctionistic or shallow than what they base their arguments off of.

plus i’m just kind of tired of arguing. and would rather just laugh a little at the folly of it all.

Matt - how was Josh arrogant in this post?

And he wrote a post after the “infamous” post apologizing for it.

Did you miss that?

“with folks like ken silva, there’s not much conversation. everything gets reduced down to quoting a few scripture verses.”

That would appear a bit arrogant to me, and not too open either. This really the way you wanna play it Josh?

That would appear a bit arrogant to me, and not too open either.

Well… first, that was written after Matt made his comment.

Second, Josh’s comment seems kinda’ accurate to me.

Though, of course, it depends which Ken Silva you are being today.

ken. i stand by my point. if you want to offer any nuanced conversation about any of the above points, then i’m certainly fine with you offering them. but simply proof texting every verse you can find is all that you’ve done thus far in relation to the topics. and wes, more so than you.

so if you’d like me to appear less arrogant, then you might begin by contributing something besides some pieced together verses that you’ve strung together to solidify your positions.

something that is integrated, comprehensive, intelligent, academic, in addition to mere scripture would be more than fine with me.

but since neither of you have proven that you discuss anything outside of quoting verses, there is not much chance of an intelligent conversation.

at this point . . . especially as it relates to wes . . . i’m done talking. ken, feel free to continue playing devil’s advocate as long as you don’t take yourself too seriously.

this is what pisses me off about these types of engagements. you guys initiate it. you guys pester it. and when “we” decide not to go along with it anymore, you call us arrogant and say that we don’t want to have one of our “famed conversations”. mocking the conversational tone of the movement.

i’m done with it. i’ve been done with it. i dropped it and let it go. thus the apology. thus not bringing it up. then you guys just crop up in different posts bitching about the same things. so i’m kindly asking both of you to put on your big boy pants and leave me the hell alone until you’re prepared for intelligent conversation as opposed to proof texting.

if that makes me arrogant, then so be it. but i’ve got better things to do with my time than talk in circles with a bunch of bible thumpers.

Josh, you’re a jerk and I don’t like you. You hate Jesus and worship Satan, and this post proves it.

Rev. 21:8–that’s for you.

(Thanks for the plugins. Will they work for us poor, free-site, amateur bloggers?)

i don’t think they will. you have to have it situated on a domain.

i think. let me check.

Re. “these types of engagements. you guys initiate it. you guys pester it. and when ‘we’ decide not to go along with it anymore, you call us arrogant and say that we don’t want to have one of our ‘famed conversations’ . mocking the [historic orthodox Christian faith].”

I’m not speaking for Wes, I believe he would agree, “we” would say the above.

Now here’s why: “something that is integrated, comprehensive, intelligent, academic, in addition to mere scripture would be more than fine with me. ”

“but since neither of you have proven that you discuss anything outside of quoting verses, there is not much chance of an intelligent conversation.”

The Emergent Church has a LOT more faith in man’s wisdom than is warranted by Scripture. Very thin ice man when one says we should have “intelligent conversation…in addition to mere scripture.”

And since this is my last comment so as to honor you wish to be left alone; Josh, as a pastor I admonish you in the Lord that the time has arrived when those who claim they are Christians - that’s “Christ-followers” in new evangelicalese - begin to have intellegent conversation about what the Bible itself actually says:

11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man’s spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. 14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man’s judgment: 16 “For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ. (1 Corinthians 2:11-16)

See you on the “playing field” dude!

Sorry I bothered adding anything to this ridiculous commentary. For what it’s worth, I did not intend to be offensive by my comment, so I apologize if it came off that way. We should all be ashamed of ourselves for engaging in juvenile, asinine behavior that does nothing to advance the Kingdom (no matter how you interpret it).

i didn’t take it as offensive matt. just giving you a heads up on where i was coming from. sorry if you took it otherwise. peace.