Comments on: Emergent Candy

By: associate reformed

associate reformed — Sat, 08 Jan 2011 02:38:24 +0000

The Christian Louboutin Shoes translation was the most hilarious thing I have read in ages.
The Jesus Buddha Cups piece was fine journalism as well.

By: Emergent Candy « Redeemed Hippies' Place

Emergent Candy « Redeemed Hippies' Place — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 13:51:55 +0000

[...] http://sacredsandwich.com/archives/5569 [...]

By: SamWise

SamWise — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 15:08:49 +0000

“Sometimes I feel likea nut…sometimes I don’t!”

By: SamWise

SamWise — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 14:17:00 +0000

It worse than you think…He has the ventroliquist Voice Version in his hand so he can have it say what he wants!

He can find Buddhism in the Old Testament (even before the Buddha lived) or “fear of the gods” in the Sermon on the Mount. This is because he uses the Barthian Existential Methodology of “finding the words of God” in the word of God.

How come I smell Post-Modern “Meta-Narrative” double-speak from Nabal Ben-Nimrod?

By: Steve

Steve — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 01:59:19 +0000

I thought that was Velvet Elvis in Rob’s hands.

By: bill

bill — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:54:27 +0000

Hey DeVos,
Yes Paul did use secular quotes but that is quite a bit different than mixing secularism/syncritism and divine truth and thereby becomming apostate. (Those quotes were from a play not a false religion.) Paul did not mix things up in that way and Rob Bell does. Oh, and by the way, not everything in Acts is normative, and in this particular instance there is nothing in the context of Acts 17:23-32 that makes it normative as it is just descriptive…and just be cause something made it in to our “holy normative scriptures” does not mean we are to mimic it. Murder, rape, and incest made it in there too. By your measure it would seem that you would call for those things to be normative as well, or atleast allowable. Afterall they made it in, right?
As to Rob bell pointing people to Christ and being a pastor…when he repudiates everything he teaches, reverses himself and starts preaching the depravity of man, his guilt under the law of God (and inability to do anything about it), the abiding wrath of God against sinners because of their wickedness, Gods righteous and necessairy judgenment of their sin, the reality and certianty of hell as the just punishment for that sin, and then he opens up the goodness of God that leads men to repentanceas and faith as the right response to the vicarious and penal atonement of Jesus Christ…then, and only then, will I consider him to be pointing people to Christ and a pastor…or even in the same universe as the Apostle Paul.

By: Charlie DeVos

Charlie DeVos — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 23:20:44 +0000

Athenians: “You got Jesus in our pagan religion!”
Apostle Paul: “Your pagan quotes got in my Bible!”

Everyone on this thread should take a look at Acts 17:22-32.

Paul was willing to use secular wisdom to point to a bigger truth (hence his two secular quotes in v. 28). And it worked. And those secular quotes made it into our holy, normative Scripture. Chew on that for a second.

I’m not arguing that the emergent church is perfect. I’m not saying Buddhism is right. I’m not saying Christianity should be dumbed down. But I am arguing that your comments are harmful. You should read your Bible before belittling someone’s method of pointing people to Christ, especially if the method you are criticizing is, in fact, Biblical.

It’s quite hypocritical that you’re so willing to criticize a pastor at Mars Hill, but not the apostle on Mars Hill that that pastor is copying.