NOTE TO ALL COMMENTATORS: If at all possible, please try to restrict comments to the content rather than defaming individuals. We all understand the connections, so there's no need to make them explicit.
Re: FORMAT - In order to simplify reading and writing here, I'll start a new comments section each week. Don't forget to list the original blog date that you're commenting about.
Thanks for your input.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
To the Host of this "blog,"
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the concept of this blog. Can I suggest that comments are moderated as discussion has given way to slander and defamation. The naming of names and personally directed insults have already undermined the credibility of this exercise. Discussion is healthy but the insults are a blight on our faith.
8th June: Nice to see Armybarmy open to challenge, perhaps comments will be enabled on the original site soon and make this one redundant? I'm very doubtful about the concept of a 'historic orthodox people of God' - this is a worrying combination of arrogance and historical ignorance.
ReplyDelete9/6/08 Read the weekly standard article from the link in today's blog. Made me want to read 'Blue like Jazz'. I'm not sure that was the intention.
ReplyDelete"What we have is Christianity being represented by what is perceived as arrogance, bullying, an inability to negotiate peace, an inability to listen,"... sound familiar?
10/6
ReplyDeletePutting Bonnte and Hogan in the same bag as Mother Theresa was a swift move... not wise. Hogan is a charlatan... he's not even known in Mexico where the 200 raisings from the dead are supposed to have occurred. If even one person was raised from the dead there, people would know. Yes, he's known in America and elsewhere - he's working the preaching circuits well. I cannot believe that people get fooled by such a man as this. There is nothing Christlike about him.
Check Hogan & Bonnte's bank balance... then look again at Mother Theresa. Big difference, I would suspect.
Where is the discernment here?
Harry.
10/6/09 - "...Hogan has raised more than 200 dead people back to life..." - even disregarding the point about whether he thinks it was 'Hogan' or God that raised the dead, these types of claims come up quite frequently on this and other related blogs. Yet whenever I have asked for the blog writers to provide some form of verification of the claims made, they can never do it. You can see case after case of Christian 'faith' healers making grandiose claims about the miracles that have supposedly happened during their services, yet when proof is sought, none can be provided.
ReplyDeleteIf genuine 'raisings from the dead' have occurred (and I'm not talking revived by medical means - I mean no heartbeat, no breathing, no brain activity - dead) in the numbers that are claimed, then there should be plently of independently medically verified cases of it. But I can't find any, and I'm yet to have anyone that I have challenged on this matter find any either.
Why the need for exaggeration and sometimes outright lies? Is the gospel message not enough, that so many feel the need to provide fanciful stories in order to supposedly boost the credibility of their ministries and/or their version of God? Ths is one of my biggest areas of concern in Salvo blog world, so I will happily argue and rant over this with anyone.
So the bible, it contains accounts (problematic word I know) of miracles. What do you guys do with that?
ReplyDeleteJeff
Jeff, you are talking about things that are supposed to have happened 2000 years ago - we obviously can't prove any of that. Today in the vast majority of cases we can easily prove whether something did or didn't occur, and that's what I'm looking for, some proof for the claims made. Do genuine miracles occur today? Personally I doubt it. Why did they occur in Jesus' time and not now? I don't know. All I know is there have been millions of claims of miraculous healing or 'dead raising' over the years, but almost none that couldn't be easily explained via natural and/or medical means.
ReplyDeleteMy biggest concern is that we shouldn't be having this discussion at all. And the irony is that the 'miracleworkers' appeared in a paragraph that was on UNITY...
ReplyDeleteUnity means being wise. Means discernment. It means putting our own slant to one side in order to concentrate on the common goal or purpose of the group. By including the controversial names - like Hogan/Bronnte - you are making a point - taking a shot... instead of just letting it rest.
So much that we argue about - even here - can become nothing more than a distraction which helps us avoid the really issues and depletes any energy for mission.
However, it becomes bone-wearying when wisdom is continuously and stubbornly ignored... and that's why we write.
Harry.
Jack, in a modernist sense nothing of religion can be proven. God included. Where does your beliefs begin and end - not be contentious, genuinely interested.
ReplyDeleteHarry, I didn't understand what you meant at all.
Jeff
Jeff, I am in a current belief state of trying to hang onto my Christianity, barely hanging on, and questioning eveything about what I have been taught and thought that I believed. My questioning of my faith really began in earnest a couple of years ago when I first came across a number of these Salvo blogs, Armybarmy included. In reading what my fellow Salvationists were writing online, which was (and still is) primarily hardcore fundamentalism mixed with a strong appetite for 'signs and wonders', I quickly came to the conclusion that if what these guys were representing was true Christianity, then I really wasn't, nor wanted to be, a 'true Christian'. So here I am, still trying to make sense of it all, often taking part in online discussions/arguments in order to see where it takes me and whether it helps or hinders my Christian walk.
ReplyDeleteJack, You will ever 'win' with these guys. They have made up their minds... and in the Army we have a wide variety of theological stances - and that's the way it should be. It's not one way or another but a whole spectrum of beliefs...
ReplyDeleteJeff, Sorry, I can be obscure at times but what part didn't you get? Please don't say the whole lot because it is not that unclear, surely, and that would be hurtful...
Harry.
Have you noticed:
ReplyDeleteDisclaimer: armybarmy does not necessarily endorse the positions discussed on these links.
It would seem Armybarmy wants his cake and to eat it as well, hence a disclaimer statement. Disclaimer texts are used all the time in various places and by various people and cover a multitude of things.
Armybarmy has what might be termed a "Christian Secular Culture Disclaimer." Not familiar with the Christian Secular Culture Disclaimer (CSCD)? Allow me to elaborate. A CSCD is what a Christian says when they want to recommend something they like that's not quite right but they don't want you to judge them. It's a complex sentence designed to make a case for why when you look at it in the right light, it is actually quite alright. Trouble is Armybarmy not only believes this stuff but seeks every-which-way he can to champion his heros and disseminate their heresy. Paladin
Regardless of the disclaimer notice once again Stephen shows his real theological colours. When it comes to Bonnke, Hodge Hinny Joyner etc they are people who claim to be spiritual leaders but have in fact violated peoples trust. They have been exposed for immorality and fallen below accepted standards of behavior. The disclaimer does not exonerate Stephen simply to say he don’t condone such behavior or beliefs. He seems to have forgotten that those he seeks to lead trust trust him to let them know whom to trust. He has failed them miserably in this regard. We are not exonerated simply by saying we don’t condone the wrong behavior or theology.
ReplyDeleteSigns and wonders can be are often are elevated over truth – false teachers often claim to perform signs and wonders to which they and their supporters point in defence of themselves and their ministries. False apostles/teachers can and do deceive people into accepting them and their ministry by false teaching (Mk.13:22. 2 Cor.11:1-15. 2 Thes.2:9-12. Rev.13:3-4).
The issue at Corinth and those who claimed to be, in Paul’s terms, “super apostles”, who claimed:
· power of the Spirit,
· to be enthusiastic about the gospel,
· present themselves as ‘servants ofChrist, ministers of righteousness (11:12-13. 22-23)
· but spoke glibly about Jesus,
· boasting speech (12:11)
· compare and commend themselves (10:12)
· eager to reap gain for their services (1 Cor. 9:12. 2 Cor.11:7)
· Paul speaks of suffering, afflictions and weakness. They speak of glory, power and success etc.
It seems ‘super apostle” was their own title – they also seem to have been flashy, had a powerful style of ministry – powerful words and deeds. It is all too easy to be led astray and be blinded by impressive displays of power, signs and wonders are insufficient to determine someone’s true nature. Just look deeper than what meets the eyes and feels good. Paul exposes these people – their integrity as well as their doctrine were a major issues. Yes, they were preaching a “gospel-Spirit-Jesus”, that had a lot in common with Paul’s gospel but with subtle differences. Differences that Paul recognized as being a perversion, a different gospel. Paul claims they were liars, deceitful workers, self-appointed apostles (2 Cor.11:13). Pretty powerful and serious charges. Miraculous events in and of themselves are not the final proof of authentic ministry. We simply cannot accept any group claiming to be Christian regardless of their doctrinal commitments, there are doctrinal aberrations we simply ought not condone, tacitly or explicitly, even under the auspices of “New Apostolic Renewal”. We are not to be pragmatists in which miraculous ends justify any means.The issue is not just about whether these preacher are sincere or occasionally teach some things that are true, or do unethical things. The issue is about their overall message, life and the consequences in the life of the church. While it is true that God uses sinful humans the idea that the church should glean truth and practices from those who regularly and knowingly propagate false doctrine and live unethical lives is outlandish. WJE
anyone here ever met Stephen Court?
ReplyDelete11/6 "We prepare ourselves in Your armour so that we can stand up to the devil." Here's something interesting, one of these is clearly intended to be a metaphor (the armour) but apparently the other (the devil) is a literal being. What's with the mix and match?
ReplyDeleteC'mon peeps - the disclaimer thing is standard on many sites where the links are not controlled content. Talk about your Mountain out of a molehill!
ReplyDeleteThe disclaimer just mean that he does necessarily endorse the contents of the other blogs that he links to, because he obviously has no control over what is said in those blogs. However whatever he posts in his own blog is his own opinion and therefore he endorses it. I see in today's post (12/6) he makes mention of the fact he doesn't vouch for the opinions on the linked sites - is this a coincidence, or has he been here and seen the comments regarding this matter?
ReplyDelete12/6 Hells bells!
ReplyDeleteRegarding the disclaimer. In the blogosphere you are known by your links and who links to you is what counts. Basically, when Stephen gives blog space by links or quotes or use of material from sites, it is an intentional endorsement. He is saying they are sanctioned authorities that are to be believed and trusted. He endorses people like Bonke and Hogan because their theology is an integral aspect of his own theology. Integrity, consistency, sincerity, honesty, transparency, authenticity and reliability are Christian virtues that are indispensable qualities in Christian leaders. If leadership is essentially a relationship of trust and credibility and congruity, it is missing in these guys that are being endorsed. To anonymous June 11, has anyone here met Stephen, simple answer, work with him. So now you know who I am. WJE
ReplyDeleteI admire your openness WJE. I hope you can continue to freely express your opinions both here and at the training college, without any negative repercussions.
ReplyDelete"We are not wrestling against a human enemy. We’re combating demonic principalities and powers and rulers of darkness, fighting the spiritual armies of evil in the second" heaven". So where did this come from and what's being said here? Those who develop an angelology that understands spiritual warfare as believers wrestling with demons have already give the enemy more ground than necessary. Paul’s metaphor in 1 Tim.4:1 does not picture a wrestling match with demons but a battlefield in the mind. Then again there is nothing glamorous in that, no does it raise you an income. Johno
ReplyDeleteThis site is a bitch fest travesty.
ReplyDelete12/6 On the subject of Hell, check out this book excerpt by Brian McLaren
ReplyDeletehttp://www.beliefnet.com/Entertainment/Books/2005/08/If-Christianity-Is-True-People-I-Love-Will-Burn-In-Hell.aspx?p=1
Anon, June 11 9:07,
ReplyDeleteThis makes me embarassed to be a Christian.
A NOTE FROM THE BLOG HOST:
ReplyDeleteI have been lenient so far about a few personal attacks because clearly there is some legitimate frustration that needs to be vented - even if it is temporarily done in an inappropriate way.
However, I do want to remind you that the purpose of this site is to comment on the CONTENT of the Armybarmy blog, not individuals. If you don't like what they say, by all means, explain why you think the ideas are irrational, unscriptural, unethical, incredible or simply irrelevant. If the site continues to be a 'bitch fest travesty', then I will have to contemplate shutting it down. I'd much prefer to have the opportunity for free exchange of ideas and open dialogue about what really is wrong or right here.
Thanks for your passion and interest, please just channel it more appropriately.
Sat 13/06
ReplyDeletere Retired Running Corps pro tem
Where we would be without this superb group of people? It is so true that many Corps advance in a rapid way when under the temporary leadership of the RO's. They visit to evangelize, yes. But they visit and show care, love and support... that sort of love is pretty hard to beat. I think Paul even said that. They don't see the person being visited as a target for evangelism - they go with genuine love... big, big difference. It think it wa David Watson who said DO YOU LOVE PEOPLE BECAUSE YOU WANT TO SEE THEM SAVED (PROJECT)OR DO YOU WANT TO SEE THEM SAVED BECAUSE YOU LOVE THEM (HAVE THE GENUINE COMPASSION - EYES OF CHRIST, ETC)...
Harry.