Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Anti-Insider and Anti-C5 Post and Video

Here is yet another post and a video from the blog Biblical Missiology that is extremely anti “insider” and anti C4/5.  Unfortunately, the video picks on a few extreme examples and misunderstands, misrepresents, and over-generalizes the C4/5 position. 

Biblical Missiology may have some serious concerns and valid points, but it doesn’t help create dialogue and understanding to label those who disagree with them “heretical.”  Imagine if all the Calvinists/Arminians, Presbyterians/Baptists, Cessationists/Charismatics called the other a “heretic!”

A couple questions:

  1. Do you think polarizing videos and posts like this from traditionalists help their cause, or hurt it?
  2. Can you provide any examples of someone who embraces the Insider or C5 position presenting the traditionalist position in such a mean-spirited fashion?  Why do you think that is?


Tim Herald said...

1. It is not helpful. This type of language only makes one look insecure and defensive.

2. Yes. But it is a different type of mean-spiritedness. I think that some of the CGC presenters are quite mean-spirited in their explanations of traditional methods. But it is not through outright condemnation... rather through condescension.

For the record, I consider CGC and the Biblical Missiology crew extremes in this whole discussion - both in the positions they hold and their attitudes toward others. There are much more balanced folks out there, but they are not nearly as loud as these two.


PierreRashad said...

I think it would be helpful to clarify the actual meaning of the term "heresy".
It's not just a bad word, and the fact that someone uses such a word does not necessarily mean they are "mean-spirited".

Heresy is defined as a "belief or opinion contrary to orthodox religious (esp. Christian) doctrine."

That video carefully documents direct quotes that suggest that Muhammad is a legitimate prophet of God, and that Jesus is not the Son of God. It doesn't take a theologian to know that those teachings stray from orthodox Christianity.

When Tim Snell uses the "h" word, he isn't calling names. He is saying that this teaching is unorthodox.

I don't think there's anything in that video that indicates that Tim Snell is mean-spirited. I see a pastor that is aware of teaching that is not in line with Christian orthodoxy.

Please brother Warrick, be careful not to judge Tim's heart (I don't mean to judge your intentions, but the word "mean-spirited" seems to indicate you are judging his spirit). Rather, I encourage you to judge his words with discernment. I would have liked to see your blog post address the content of what he said.
If "the video picks on a few extreme examples", then do you believe JIQ has gone too far? Do you disagree with these extremes? Are you willing to say so? Where do you stand?

I do hope that this larger discussion will ultimately bring unity and clarity among God's workers!