As a regular listener to the Rush Limbaugh show, I find that liberalism is almost identical in the theological world as it is in the political. You have all the same elements; liberals, conservatives, "RINOS" (Republican in Name Only) compromisers and those who will say anything to be loved and accepted by whichever group seems to be carrying the tide.
In theological circles I have found that it is not so much what a person says, or even how they say it; but who they are. If your name has been vilified; then no matter what you say it will be rejected or ignored. Another person can say almost the EXACT same thing, with perhaps even a harsher tone and their words will be pondered or praised.
On Jan 21, 2011 a caller called into the Limbaugh show to complain that Limbaugh had a "hateful tone". Limbaugh kept requesting the caller be specific and give examples. (source) The caller failed to provide any examples or evidence.
In the same way, for YEARS I have been asking liberal theologs and their compromisers to BE SPECIFIC of why they think I am "hateful" or "bitter", or "attacking". Like the liberal on Limbaugh, these folks never give any specifics.
Especially in my "fight" against the heresy of hyperpreterism I have experienced the liberals and their compromiser friends who have treated me like the liberals treat Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, and others. The liberals vilify these folks before we even get to their arguments. In this same way the liberal theologs and their compromisers have attempted to vilify me. I get it. But what is MORE AMAZING, is that these same liberals and compromisers will often turn around and use my EXACT arguments, often with more harsh tones and yet somehow when they say it, it is okay.
What is discouraging is when otherwise well-meaning Christians follow along or wink at the kind of actions (not simply tone) of these liberals and their compromisers. I get that too. People have lives to live. They may not have the time to get into all the background so if one of their half-way respected mentors or favorite speakers says something, they just take it at face value.
I've had a VERY detailed public interaction with a seminary president no less (source) who people refuse to publicly question because of the "good things he's done". Really? so this guy can say what he wants and get a pass? I'm not trying to take from the "good things he's done" but he can STILL be wrong on some things....can't he?
Fortunately, my discouragement is lessened by the FACT that if a Christian sticks to the principle of truth and honor; despite how many lies and from whom those lies come, truth triumphs every time. So, while my comments may not be accepted when I SAY it; it is heartening that those SAME comments WILL be accepted when someone else says it. I don't really care who gets the credit. The effect is the same. The argument will win the day because it is true. If people will listen more to some hypocritical blowhard saying it, so be it. Let them.
3 comments:
Here is yet ANOTHER example:
Compare: unpreterist.blogspot.com/2010/12/is-justification-by-gracefaith-alone.html(which was actually written much earlier but was moved to this location when the host site closed down)
To: thereignofchrist.com/justification-in-church-history-by-kenneth-g-talbot
Ken Talbot has been a long-time compromiser with hyperpreterists, even having a well-known hyperpret leader help develop student materials for Talbot's "Christian" seminary. When approached on this, Talbot became defensive and retaliatory.
At any rate, Talbot has presented himself as the example of how to deal with hyperpreterism, and has ridiculed and ignored the methods and work of many who were doing the work long before Talbot was rustled out of his ivory tower. And here is YET ANOTHER example of Talbot coming to the game late. But anyhow, I am grateful to God that even Talbot's work done in hypocrisy will be useful. All glory to Christ for taking captive even these things.
Here is ANOTHER example. Dee Dee Warren recently wrote:
"I share a healthy abhorrence for heresy. Heresy is not to be coddled. It is to be ridiculed and exposed.
Remember, David Green himself confessed that we must view him as teaching damnable heresy. That’s not a very nice thing to do, and stay away from my kids when I have them. Do you care about your friends? Do you believe in Hell? If yes, then you see how deadly serious this all is. We are not debating about whether or not Gretchen should have run last season’s Project Runway. Or whether Adam Lambert was ripped off (he was!). This is the core of the Çhristian faith. Christians DIED FOR THEIR BELIEF in the resurrection. I will not spit on their graves by embracing the heresy with smiley face ethics of some of the cosmonauts.
House Divided my left foot. The only “house” in which hyperpreterism belongs is the outhouse. The House of God has been united on precisely what the heretics deny. This is beyond shaking the dust off of our feet, it is scraping the smelly dog crap off the bottom of my shoe." -- source
Yet if **I*** point out how Kenneth Talbot has been "coddling" hyperpreterism for over 10 years, I'm accused of "slander" and attacking an "elder". The FACTS are the FACTS -- Talbot had coddled Sam Frost under his watch for over 10 years, even allowing Frost to help develop study materials for use by students in Talbot's "Christian" seminary.
The hypocrisy from the "anti-prets" is amazing.
The examples just continue on and on how hypocritical the current crop of ex-hyperprets are. ex-hyperpret Sharon Nichols says:
"When I was full preterist, this was something that really began to bother me too Sam. What it caused me to eventually see in myself was a certain amount of arrogance. That "I" was part of a group who had "finally" figured it all out! Full preterism was going to be the next reformation! Wow... what a "power trip", ya know? Heady stuff!" -- source
Then ex-hyperpret Jason Bradfield says:
"I created and super admined one of the most active full pret communities online. In fact, once Planet Preterist started to die down a bit, i would argue that SGP was it. DID forked off of us and tried to copy us a bit, even using SGP membership to *steal sheep* (so to speak), but they were never able to keep up with the numbers and hourly contributions. It was nearing 400 members when i left." -- source
The point is, for YEARS I have been saying on of the main issues with hyperpreterists is that they suffer from Proverbs 26:12, that it takes an extreme amount of arrogance to remain in the movement. Yet when I said it, it was considered "attacking".
Further, I have pointed out several times how Bradfield's SGP website replaced PlanetPret, but when I said it I supposedly didn't know what I was talking about. Now Jason says it and all is well.
This hypocrisy is a major issue.
Post a Comment