Those flingin flangin emerging churches
Greg the explorer sent me a link to this article which seems concerned to put several nails in the coffin of the emerging church:
In the UK, a nudist beach mission has just finished in Wales. Graceway, a church in Auckland, New Zealand, encouraged its members to ‘pray with your hand around a cup of coffee’ as a way of experiencing the Spirit ‘as warmth in your spirituality’. In Canada, a church called Worship Free House doesn’t offer sermons – but does install art.
According to prominent evangelical church leaders, all are symptomatic of a dangerous protest against biblical orthodoxy. While The Da Vinci Code puts the gospel on trial, the emerging church questions established biblical teaching throughout church history by offering what they says is a more authentic expression of Christianity.
“Some believe [emerging churches] to be the greatest challenge to mainstream churches since the birth of the Charismatic movement,” says Andy Peck, assistant editor of the UK’s Christianity+Renewal magazine in a recent article. “As some churches struggle to grow they will welcome emerging church thinking with open arms. ”Labels are useless to describe this alternative Christian movement, which has exploded out of the UK and the US and is now expanding into Australia.
Proponents like to talk in terms of ‘connecting’, ‘sharing’, ‘re-imagining’. They say the movement is not one as such but rather a ‘conversation’ within Protestant Christianity. They say labels are unhelpful to their cause. It is perhaps easier to define what the emergent movement is not. “This is not biblical theology,” says Canon Jim Ramsay, Director of Sydney Diocese’s Evangelism Ministries. “It’s a shaking of Christian orthodoxy.”
Punch ‘em in the goolies!! Singled out for criticism (implied or otherwise) are people like Cheryl, Steve (or Graceway, anyway), Darren and of course big bad bustling Brian McLaren. Interestingly, the only person on that list who has never commented here is Brian McLaren. He should get his act together. Or alternatively, he should stay away so that he doesn’t contaminate us with his non-orthodox Christianity.
Of course they are particularly worried about a Wales naturist beach mission, described here in an article published on April Fools’ Day, complete with founders Adam and Eve and a Sir Pent who invites Eve to pass some fruit to Adam. Clearly the site which published the article, emergingchurch.info is evil, as it has the temerity to list signposts as a link!
June 28th, 2006 at 4:29 pm
Mate,
I’ve never known it to be raised until today. The only experience I have is this forum, and it hasn’t been a good one. I know that you described the comment about “1.5 hrs later & plenty of posts displayed timed after mine” as a “mistake” but, as the person who it was aimed at, it feels to me more like “a complete fabrication to bolster a spurious argument”. Sorry if that’s not the case - but you asked for my thoughts and so now I’m being honest.
I’d be keen to hear more of Lance’s experiences. I did a search throughout all past forum entries on “gay” and “homosex” (to pick up homosexual and homosexuality) and can’t find a single reference. Is he sure it was on the Stump boards?
Cheers,
FRASER
June 28th, 2006 at 4:32 pm
Probably should just clarify…
Reading back, when I said “can’t find a single reference” I should say that I meant “relevant reference”. There’ve only (for example) been 2 postings ever where “gay” wasn’t used in a derogatory fashion. One of those was about the greens during the political discussions in 2004, another was an aside made in reference to one of the sexuality talks. What I meant was - none of the references seemed to point me towards Lance’s issue.
Lance - if you could pass onto me any e-mail addresses you’ve used in the past, that could help me isolate your past posts.
Cheers,
FRASER
June 28th, 2006 at 4:36 pm
Alright lets get this out of the way, i didn’t say “plenty of posts displayed timed after mine” to be mischievous, i said it because it looked to me as if i had been kicked off as new user & replaced by someone else as the new user even though my post hadn’t been displayed. I’M SORRY.
Please don’t keep harping on about it like it’s a reason to discount anything else that’s been said by us. That technique will not work. I’ve apologised for the embellishment, let’s move on (i think that might be the third post you’ve mentioned it & it really isn’t central to the heart of the issues).
June 28th, 2006 at 4:53 pm
Well…gee ..it was many years ago I had the conversation with the Blackstumpers….it could have been your site..it could have been another one….I have no idea…..
But Thread 1 ..Post 1 at your current forum pretty much sums up the Black Stump mentality…and the Christian music culture mentality in general.
“Well - I’ll start by saying that last year was the best stump ever. But that is mainly because I fell in love with the awesome girlfriend I have now.
But in terms of music - it was a bit lame. A lot of people will argue this - go ahead, i’m writing this to get peoples oppinions and to get people thinking.
The quality of music at stump has been declining every year, and it got to the point last year that I had to spend the majority of my time in the Hip-Hop tent because the other venues just sucked. Anyone who knows me would say ‘HipHop Tent? what? but you play in a punk band, and you like punk, blah blah blah blah blah’
The Hip Hop Tent seemed to have a lot higher quality in performers last year - a lot of you kids won’t have realised this because you like emo/punk/ska etc. etc. and you think Hip hop is uncool.
I think the problem is that instead of getting real musicians in bands (this doesn’t include everyone) we are getting a lot of music fans trying to be like their heros. This means that we end up with too many ‘copy-cat’ style TREND BANDS - emo- but its worse when we get people forming bands based on ‘dead’ trends - ska- pop-punk.
C’mon - step outside the box a little - make something original
I’m thankful that the loser posers out there always wear tight black clothes and drape a long fringe down over half their face - coz it lets me know to STAY AWAY from the venue while they are playing - coz I aint gonna hear anything i’ve heard before………”
etc.
It’s the same brain-dead thinking that drives the worship in most suburban and megachurches….where church dickheads form into their own little sub-cultures ..discussing the intracacies of Bose vs. Yamaha…..and the ‘hey..down at Zenith..they’ve got 20% off drumsticks at their midnight sale’ crowd (Ok…time to own up peoples…who here has ever lined up for a midnight Koorong sale?) ..and then after they’ve got the girl and the guitar and the Worship Software to Powerpoint 4 (”Effortlessly take song lists and copyright information compiled in Worship Software 3 or 4—and in minutes, convert it into a dynamic, seamless PowerPoint slide presentations your entire church will enjoy . Choose from a wide assortment of fonts, colors and background styles or use your own customized design schemes.”)….then their life is complete.
I just hope you have doctors at the site to declare worship leaders clinically brain dead..and so the death certificate can be swiftly issued.
June 28th, 2006 at 4:56 pm
By the way….I’m not siding with the guy who wrote thread 1 post 1…….
Him..and the people he’s having a go at…are both dickheads….and sum up the culture that is the Christian worship sub-culture…as partially expressed by the Black Stump Airhead Festival.
June 28th, 2006 at 5:01 pm
“I just hope you have doctors at the site to declare worship leaders clinically brain dead..and so the death certificate can be swiftly issued.”
Lance, who has never made an offensive joke.
Do you think death is funny Lance? Tell that to all the people who have had relatives die! hahaha
June 28th, 2006 at 5:02 pm
Reve - carry on. It sounds to me from what Fraser has said that there has been some sort of glitch in the software and that you now have his assurance of assistance in posting your message. FWIW we have been accused of censorship before for the misdeeds of our overactive spam filter.
Seems that if you can take advantage of Fraser’s help and get your comment posted you might get some responses from those that do have the ability to speak substantively on behalf of BlackStump. If Fraser isn’t good to his word, then you might be in a position to say “AHA” and play the censorship card. Grins all round.
PS Disclaimer. I have never been to Black Stump, but when I was younger (10 years or more ago) a friend bought me a black stump t-shirt which I thought was very cool to wear to the Big Day Out a la grunge fashion in an appropriate expression of counter-cultural Christian culture. I may have a photo of it someplace.
June 28th, 2006 at 5:10 pm
Heh Heh,
Well ive actually been twice & enjoyed the atmosphere. I just don’t think i should have to pretend to be straight to enjoy it every year. And i’m wondering whether BS itself thinks i should have to pretend to be straight to enjoy it.
Might have to settle for the “unspoken” answer on that one…
Off home from work. Cya.
June 28th, 2006 at 5:11 pm
‘Do you think death is funny Lance?’
No, no…this is no joking matter.
This is real actual brain death.
Flat-lining.
Worship leaders have no detectable brain-wave patterns.
It’s very very sad.
June 28th, 2006 at 5:13 pm
” I just don’t think i should have to pretend to be straight to enjoy it every year.”
Well…that’s why I stopped going to church..because of the energy-sapping nature of having to pretend to be straight…AND no longer enjoying it….but rather enduring it.
Sounds like for many…Black Stump is going the same way….(apart from the ‘pretending to be straight’ bit).
June 28th, 2006 at 5:15 pm
“Worship leaders have no detectable brain-wave patterns”
Lance, who has never made an offensive joke.
June 28th, 2006 at 5:29 pm
It’s not possible to record conversations with church people…particularly pastors…to demonstrate how futile those conservations are.
But this comes close.
This is a now infamous recording of an AOL customer…not having much success in trying to have his account cancelled by a ‘customer service’ representative…who just cannot accept what the customer is saying.
http://media.putfile.com/AOL-Cancellation
June 28th, 2006 at 7:47 pm
Hey Reve,
Any luck yet?
I’ve just gone and started a new thread of my own as a test, and it all worked fine. That only rules out general across the board issues, though - there still could be something that’s very specific to the data that you’re entering.
Make sure that you come here or e-mail me (contact details are at http://www.blackstump.org.au/contactus.aspx) once you’ve posted it, so that I can have a check. I’ll be AFK a fair bit tonight, but will get to it when I can once I hear from you.
Cheers,
FRASER
June 28th, 2006 at 9:17 pm
What offerings will be collected at the Black Stump festival..and will these include ‘love offerings’ for festival speakers?
June 28th, 2006 at 9:28 pm
Hey Lance,
There is one offering taken each year. It goes to a single cause which is heavily outlined at the time (ie a spokesperson for the cause outlines the case). None of it goes to the speakers.
Why do you ask?
Cheers,
FRASER
June 28th, 2006 at 11:37 pm
At Signposts….we’ve been delving into the depths of the ‘food chain’….where high-profile Christian speakers (mainly of the prosperity doctrine churches variety) hop from speaking engagement to speaking engagement….pocketing up to $40,000 per ‘love offering’ along the way.
I was just interested to know if Black Stump was part of the ‘food chain’…
June 28th, 2006 at 11:49 pm
Lance and Reve - do you seriously think you win people over like that?
June 29th, 2006 at 2:02 am
I don’t think you can win people over.
If you make a point nicely…Christians ignore you.
If you make a point rudely..Christians ignore you.
I think it’s just about making a point along the way…and letting the bastards know that they haven’t got away with it.
Baker, Houston, Pringle and their supporters won’t change (Baker is preparing to do a major push for money…starting this week)…but at least it’s not going to be be made too easy for them.
The only way they’ll change..is if they retire…go to jail…or die….
June 29th, 2006 at 2:27 am
I have been there and I have done all that with the nice luncheons with pastors.
I’ve done the Miss Maud coffee scrolls and the Oxford St. Leederville toast and muffins sessions with pastors…
I’ve ridden in the pastoral executive vehicle while pastors have waxed lyrical about their desire to seek God’s face in all that the church does….as the pastor forgets to turn his indicator on while he thinks about his next appointment in 10 minutes..and the bullshit he’s going to tell his next sucker who wants the church auditorium moved a bit to the left.
I’ve done all that……it DOESN’T work….it’s NEVER worked and it NEVER WILL work.
Nice conversations with Christians and pastors in particular get nowhere!
Pastors and Christians will only listen to…
People who write books.
People who give them lots of money.
People who write books and give them lots of money.
People who entertain/infotain them.
People who make them look good.
But ordinary church plebs…who are not prepared to do any of the above to satiate the pastor’s or the church staff member’s..or the worship leaders’ ego…….pffftttt..
Come on…you all know that.
Your role is to make up the numbers…and fund their grand schemes…
That’s it.
June 29th, 2006 at 10:47 am
Still no post from Reve…
Mate when you’ve posted it, can you just e-mail me (use the webmaster e-mail listed on the contacts page of the Stump website). I will return to this site a few times throughout the day but… it’s been a long time now of continually coming back to look for a notification that hasn’t shown up yet! And I’m a busy, busy boy…
Cheers,
FRASER
June 29th, 2006 at 11:50 am
Hey guys,
As a sort of outside observer (obviously I can’t name myself as impartial), here are my 2c worth about what I’ve seen in this forum.
I should probably start by giving a little bit of background to myself. Contrary to what Reve says, I’m a lousy debater. When it comes to actual, formal debates, I do pretty well. But they’re impersonal, passionless affairs. When it comes to actually arguing for or against any topic in which I have a stake or (even moreso) in which I feel slighted or vulnerable, I turn to jelly. That’s probably why I do a lot of theatre: it’s the perfect vehicle for someone like me. I can create a different persona and be as vulnerable as I want as a vehicle to express myself.
My two most obvious traits when it comes to other people are an overriding optimism about other people’s intentions, but at the same time a pretty terrible mistrust of their abilities. What I mean by the latter is that I’m terrible at delegating because, deep down, I can’t shake the insane belief that I would do a better job. By the former, I mean that I universally believe (often despite all evidence) that people aren’t scumbugs - usually to the annoyance of people around me. It’s very common for me to be in a situation where I’m with Person A, and they’re complaining about Person B - who might be a person they know or even just a service person they dealt with today. I always instinctively will start defending Person B - which is usually to my detriment as it always annoys the hell out of Person A - who is the person I’m actually WITH at the time.
Anyway, I say the last point in a (possibly vain) attempt to overcome a pretty obvious prejudice that Reve and Lance have expressed about anyone from Black Stump. The assumption is, clearly, that because I’m from Black Stump I’m going to prejudge you and be out to get you. My response to that is “ummm… survey said: bup bow” (if you’ve never watched Family Feud, just pretend that that means “no”).
I admit, the fact that you’ve been dissing Black Stump makes me rush to its defense on two grounds: firstly because it’s in my nature to defend a person who’s being attacked, any secondly because I’m connected to it! On the other hand (and this is the key for me) I’ll challenge in advance any assumption that anything negative I say has homophobia as its root cause. One of my favourite expressions is “there’s a difference between being persecuted for being a Christian and being persecuted for being a dickhead” - the same is true for being gay
My feedback here is based solely on the content you’ve expressed in this forum. No other preconceptions have been brought into it (at least, I hope - I guess no one can truly claim that - but I’ve tried).
Anyway, my main feedback to you guys is to encourage you - but to encourage you to do a better job. You’re clearly passionate about what you’re trying to achieve, and I applaud you for that. I really do encourage you to be more careful in how you go about it, lest you shoot yourself in the foot!
Two years ago I wrote a one man show called SCHRODINGER’S CAT. It’s a play that had a number of different layers to it, but one of the themes was a bit of a critique of the church. One of the strongest critiques is the fact that if you put a bunch of Christians in a room together for a discussion (for example, in a bible study) it’s pretty common to get statements that go along the lines of “well, Christians are like X, but non-Christians, they are like Y”. Insert something good for X and something bad for Y. No factual or experiential basis is required for Y. You can say pretty much any old thing - just make it up - and rather than getting challenged you’ll actually get grunts (or cheers) of approval. Basically, it’s a conversation not based on reality, but on pure prejudice. Everyone is happy to agree with any old rubbish about “non Christians”, not based on anything, but just because it meets their prejudices. It’s a pretty ugly sight for anyone who doesn’t share the same views.
Now, this behaviour is not limited to Christian groups. It actual happens commonly in any subculture who feels a grievance against either the community in general or another group. And… by crikey do Reve and Lance do it a lot! And, again, it’s a pretty ugly sight for anyone who doesn’t share the same views.
If I could look at some posts for a moment, this is basically a case of the above happening. There’s a bunch of unfounded prejudices at work here, and everyone cheering each other on, even though the comments made have come from nowhere. Now, I accept that the prejudices that you guys have against Black Stump are quite possibly well founded - you may have specific grievances based on some past experience. My problem is - I don’t know if that’s true or not! Because instead of actually talking about what you really know about, and what is true, and discussing and unpacking your actual experiences and actual grievances, you seem to have just gotten into this prejudice spiral and invented a straw man to set fire to.
If I may…
#42: Reve says:
“they probably won’t display it or reply”
Hey Reve, care to justify that comment? Is it based on anything? Have you ever had a post knocked back before, or is this just an attack plucked from thin air and based on prejudice?
#43: Reve says:
“Ha Ha! 1.5 hrs later & plenty of posts displayed timed after mine”
Okay, Reve’s already picked up that IMHO this is the scariest of the comments here. You see, if Reve spoke the truth and there were plenty of posts displayed timed after his, he’d have a real point (gosh I hope Reve is a guy, otherwise I’m displaying my own foolishness). If I approved several posts and ignored his, that would be a smoking gun. If, on the other hand, no other posts had been approved after his, then it might just mean that I hadn’t got to it yet - very common as Stump is an “in your spare time” exercise and it’s not uncommon for me to only get to moderate things in the evenings.
Now, when challenged about these “plenty of posts”, Reve conceded that it was a mistake. When challenged further, he retreated to describing it as an “embellishment”. I’m sorry mate, but an embellishment is when you say “I’ve told you 10″ times when I’ve only told you 5. The point is, “I’ve told you a lot of times”.
Saying that there are “plenty of posts” when there are, in fact, zero, is not an embellishment. It’s an outright falsehood. It’s a completely fabricated statement that was here used to make a point when, in fact, the exact opposite was true. This is disturbing for a number of reasons. All of the comments made about Black Stump which are - as far as I can see - based on prejudice - are, I’m happy to concede, SINCERE. When you said that Stump wouldn’t display your posting, I do think you really believed it.
But here you’ve posted something which you knew to be untrue in order to make yourself sound good. You betrayed the trust of people on this forum who were prepared to take you at face value. Of course, this is all my perception of events. I’ve asked Reve justify the comment several times, to give him the opportunity to explain how he might have misinterpreted something on the website as “plenty of posts”, and I accept that there was some confusion between him being the most recent person to register and someone else registering after him… but as yet don’t see how “plenty of posts” came about apart from being a known untruth.
Later in this same post…
#43b: Reve says
“Looks like Blackstump lacks the maturity or wisdom to cope with the types of questions i have. Like Hillsong & other organisations, all they can cope with is music - nothing real. I just laugh.”
Considering that this statement is based solely on an observation you’ve made that was utterly untrue and that you’ve conceded that at the very least you knew to be “an embellishment”, I find it disturbing that you’re laughing.
#44: Lance says
“It’s one of the reasons why I hate the whole Christian music/worship culture with a passion. Very very homophobic. I’ve had similar experience with Black Stump people. They’re only there to play their guitar…get a girlfriend and have fun….and they only think when forced to. The whole Jesus thing is irrelevant to them.”
Hurrah! At last we have something approaching a solid argument, because Lance has referred to actual experiences rather than just abstract supposition. Hey Lance - I really, really urge you to take this line in future. Tell us about your actual experiences. Trust me, people will want to listen.
#45a: Reve says
“You are so right, Lance…. 3 hours have passed now, no displayed post, no reply, not even an email to me to explain why or suggest a different forum to discuss it. They just simply don’t want to deal with it.”
Well… I’m sort of prepared to accept this in terms of the fact that you’re not saying anything outrageous here - except to point out that 3 hours is far from uncommon for approving a post. Like I say, I do this in my spare time and often moderation happens of an evening. That isn’t what’s happened here, but do be careful of spotting and reacting to homophobia everywhere when there isn’t any. Otherwise you’ll start sounding like a certain Little Britain character…
#45b: Reve says
“Nothing more than a second or third generation bunch of pew-warmers…”
Whoa! Justify THAT comment. I’m afraid I became a Christian at 13, and I’ve been called many things but I challenge you to find a single person who even remotely knows me who’d describe me as a “pew-warmer”. “Geek”, “Freak” and “Guy who can’t say no to anything” - yes, I grant you. But pew warmer? You see, not only is that statement manifestly untrue, but I challenge you to explain why you said it! It’s just a bizarre argument plucked from thin air and based on prejudice, isn’t it? Please… tell me I’m wrong! If it’s based ANYTHING, please share it with us…
#45c: Reve says
“You’d never guess it but i did a beach outreach mission with one of their main organisers 10 years ago & he praised me for my street cred as a street missionary. Guess he’d see that as redundant now i turned out to be gay.”
Ahh - once again we have some GOOD stuff. You guys sound so much better when you cite actual experience rather than making crap up. Having said that, though, what do you base the last sentence on? Is it based on anything? Have you had any indication that the organiser would see that as redundant, or - again - is this just your prejudice? Why don’t you put it to the test? We don’t know who the organizer is, but you do. Why don’t you contact them and ask? Let us know what they say. Or let me know who the organizer is and I’ll follow it up for you. But it’s pretty cheap to attack someone on the basis of what you say they’d do, without actually any reason to make that assumption, isn’t it?
#46a: Lance says
“I tried a similar thing on a Black Stump forum a few years ago.
The replies had been posted before the webmaster had a chance to remove my post.
It was just the usual anti-gay rhetoric…. …’please keep the discussion pure’…blah..blah..blah…”
Okay, Lance appears to have conceded that this didn’t actually happen on the Black Stump forums. I’m happy to take this further if he wishes - I have an archive of all forums and if Lance were to give me his old e-mail addresses I’d be more than happy to dig out all postings he’s ever made, and every response given, and copy them to this group - complete with details of whether they were approved/pulled down or not.
#46b: Lance says
“Anyway…I’ve emailed the Black Stump website people…and pointed them to the Signposts discussion. Not that they have the balls to defend their position (or lack there-of)”
Hey Lance… I think you now know this last sentence to be untrue but… once again… What was it based on??? Why do you guys spout this rubbish? Have you ever asked a question to Black Stump before and had nothing but silence in return, or are you just making it up? If you’ve had nothing but silence in a previous e-mail, THAT’S the argument you should be making, not this invented claptrap.
#48: Lance says
“Although I think the secret in these things…is to send such an email to multiple people at once…..so none of them individually can ever say that they never saw the email..and ignore it.”
Hey Lance… once again, what do you base this on? Implicit here is that we will ignore e-mails from you. Have you sent e-mails in the past that were ignored? If so, do you care to share these experiences with us? If not, why do you make up this garbage?
The irony is that, I’m afraid in my experience, the opposite of your discovery is actually true. If you send an e-mail to multiple people in the Stump organisation, you increase the likelihood that each of them will say “someone else will deal with it”. That’s nothing to do with homophobia, it’s just to do with busy people. The best way to get an answer is to e-mail one person only.
#49: Reve says
“But i guess like any charity they rely on corporate sponsorship that may pull out if BS start getting more progressive than the oldies are comfortable with. Money talks even in the non-pentecostal world.”
Umm… well first of all, we’re not a charity. Not for profit organisation, yes, but charity?? And who are these corporate sponsors that we rely on? I’d be really keen to know! Lots of Watts, perhaps? Sorry mate, I don’t think that Lots of Watts are quite as terrified of your post as you may believe! We do have “sponsors” but they’re generally not “corporate” - they’re usually organisations that give us something at a reduced rate in return for sponsor status (eg Lots of Watts). Your talk of “corporate sponsorship” and “money” really is, once again, just plucked from thin air. Why do you do that?
#51: Reve says
“You can understand how, considering the above & the nature of the post that i had my concerns, yes?”
Mate, I’m afraid I don’t understand. Here’s my problem. You guys have not given a single reason why Black Stump should hate you as much as you claim. Not one. Zero.
You just all agree that it does and make up any old crap to justify your claim. You then cite this very rubbish which you have put forward as the reason that you’re mistrustful of Black Stump. That’s a bit rich, wouldn’t you say?
In short, you’re mistrustful of Black Stump because… you’re mistrustful of Black Stump. You may well have excellent reasons to be mistrustful. Some past experience that left you burnt, perhaps? But you won’t tell us! You just throw out any old rubbish that you happily make up, for consumption purely by people who share the same prejudices as you.
On top of all that, you’re yet to make the actual post that you boldly started this thread off by saying that you’d made. I accept that you believed to have done so in the first place but - seeing as you were giving me a countdown and calling me scared because I hadn’t approved it after 3 hours - why haven’t you tried again in the last 18 hours?
You guys start sounding convincing when you start referring to your ACTUAL EXPERIENCES. I really, really recommend that you use those as the basis of your arguments. Drop the posturing and prejudice about Black Stump that’s based on nothing but an overactive imagination - it does you no credit and actually makes you sound a little childish. In all of your assertions about Stump, I think the only thing you managed to get right is the name!
I’m more than happy to give you guys advice on how to further your cause. I can promise that big-noting yourselves in forums like these isn’t it. Stick to your personal experiences, and extrapolate from there. That posting you might still be planning to make on the Stump forums is fine, although my advice is that I’d drop the “Would the concern be that more conservative attendees might be offended?” line. It just reeks of a sort of “you don’t like me so I don’t know why I bother asking” tone that does you no credit. Maybe just ask something like “If not, can you give reasons why?” might sound a little less like “I’m standing by to be bravely victimised by your reply”.
When I started raising inaccuracies in his postings, Reve told me not to “hide behind them”. Guys - get a grip. Don’t spout garbage and then complain that people don’t take you seriously! Do you or do you not really want to change things? Or do you want to just sit on forums entertaining yourselves?
Lance’s recent comment “I don’t think you can win people over” probably makes a lot of sense of what I’ve read here. The reason that there is nothing but ineffectual whinging here is that you consigned yourself to that fate. If so - well that’s obviously pretty sad - but most importantly, Lance… if you’ve relegated yourself to merely standing back and complaining from the sidelines, no longer attempting to change anything but merely voicing your sense of hurt superiority, how does that make you any different from the pew warmers you so frequently rally against?
The simple fact is, I’m sure that you guys have a great case, and a lot of real experience and arguments. Please share them with this forum rather than uneducated rants. One of the most annoying traits of some Christians is the assumption that their cause is so right and so just that it justifies them behaving like a ****wit. If you’ve been burnt by Christians behaving like this, don’t fall into the same trap.
Feel free to discuss any of this. I hope and trust that you guys are better than the comments that you’ve made here - in fact, I’m sure you are… but sadly they’re all that I have to go on. I have restricted my feedback to comments you have made rather than anything I’ve made up about you. I encourage you to do likewise in your replies.
My views do not necessarily represent those of Black Stump, etc, etc.
June 29th, 2006 at 12:05 pm
So if Jason and DeMarco…..(two American gay Christian singers in a gay relationship) http://www.jasonanddemarco.com performed at Black Stump…and walked around arm-in-arm in the in-between times…….no-one there would have any problem with that?
And no-one at Black Stump would have any problem with an ‘out’ Christian gay man or woman teaching at the festival?
June 29th, 2006 at 2:22 pm
Dear BaronFraser (or whoever you really are),
I was impressed with the “novel” you left for us above. It was sharp, witty, cutting and impressively condescending. Your comment:
“Contrary to what Reve says, I’m a lousy debater,” was such a lie.
If you truly believe that, you need to seek some counseling on self love and affirmation. But I just tend to think that your modesty is ingenuous. God hates liars, by the way.
I applaud your ability to tear others apart. I would guess it has probably gotten you far in life. However, unfortunately, you are not unique or unlike any other “Christian” that I have known in my life. You are not “Christ-like.” Jesus wouldn’t have said the things that you did above. He didn’t have to, in order to defend Himself. But you did. Then again, you’re not God.
Jesus would have looked deeper into the hearts of Lance and Reve to uncover the YEARS of hurt, abuse, rejection, shame, de-humanization, etc, etc, etc…..which accounted for their reactions and comments to and about a world that doesn’t understand or accept them; understanding them (even in their error) and loving and accepting them exactly where they were. Jesus ministered mercy. Jesus ministered grace. You exacted judgment.
You appear to have an agenda to protect. Please share with us if I’m off the mark here. Shouldn’t your agenda be about ministering to the hearts of others, rather than public crucifixion? Yes, you have done a fine job nailing Lance and Reve to their deserved crosses. Do you now feel better about yourself? I don’t know you and I don’t know your heart, but the post you left up above certainly does not inspire me to want to know you. Whether you realize it or not, you portray yourself badly and appear to lack any empathy for others.
I certainly can’t condone or support any inaccurate comments or slanderous comments that may have been posted by Lance or Reve, but more importantly, you as a Christian cannot be held unaccountable for your poor, rude, un-godly, un-Christlike rebuke of them above. I cannot begin to express how dishonoring this behavior is to God, Christianity and the cause of Christ. Our charge is to “make disciples,” not drive people away. And by the way, from my experience with Lance and Reve, they certainly are believers. They belong to God (even though they may sound agnostic or atheistic at times). Life can be a bitch and you just go through some pretty weird phases. Point is, don’t dishonor God by shitting on your brothers, mate.
Situations like this just cause me to hang my head in sorrow and shout up to God, “WHY THE HELL DON’T THEY GET IT?” WHAT’S WRONG WITH THESE Fu@k!N PEOPLE WHO CALL THEMSELVES YOUR FOLLOWERS?!”
And by the way BaronFraser, I too am a Christian. I am your brother in Christ. I also happen to be gay. I am a homosexual man that loves Jesus in all the right ways.
Now I stretch out my arms and present my hands to you. I’m ready for my crucifixion. Try not to throw out your back as you drive in the nails.
Ron Viers
USA
June 29th, 2006 at 3:13 pm
Hey Ron,
Thanks for your post.
I think you’ve misinterpreted the “I’m a lousy debater” comment - I do very much stand by what I said, which is that “when it comes to actually arguing for or against any topic in which I have a stake or (even moreso) in which I feel slighted or vulnerable, I turn to jelly”.
Lance and Reve made up a lot of stuff about me and about an organization I volunteer for yesterday. If you take my response to be “poor, rude, un-godly and un-Christlike” then that confirms for me that I’m just not made for this sort of thing. This is not false modesty. I went to great lengths to wrap a lot of positive statements and pointing in the right direction around a defense against what was - I think we both agree - a pretty baseless and vitriolic attack.
Please read my post again. If you believe it to be nothing more than spite and vitriol, then accept my apologies and let me use that as the very proof that I am, indeed, a lousy debater who gets too worked up when under personal attack. I would hope though, that you see a lot of constructive stuff in there. At the heart of it, I’m saying “guys - you’ve attacked me, and I can defend against every point. Now… DON’T DO THAT! It doesn’t help your cause. Here are some good things in what you said that you should go with”
Sorry - there’s no agenda. These guys just had a completely unfounded attack on me and, frankly, it’s had me on edge and upset for the past 24 hours.
In terms of your opening and closing remarks, the “(or whoever you really are)”, and “I’m ready for my crucifixion. Try not to throw out your back as you drive in the nails.” why do you say that sort of stuff? You’ve complained about unfair and condesending remarks in my post… why put them in yours? I have not made a single negative comment anywhere here that wasn’t a defence against a slanderous comment made by somebody else.
Cheers,
FRASER
June 29th, 2006 at 3:22 pm
“These guys just had a completely unfounded attack on me and, frankly, it’s had me on edge and upset for the past 24 hours.”
Thanks for the honesty. It makes you a little more human and less intimidating. Now we are all on level ground.
Ron Viers
USA
June 29th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Hey Ron,
Gosh.
I’ve never been called intimidating before.
I don’t know whether to honoured or embarrassed.
Cheers,
FRASER
June 29th, 2006 at 3:49 pm
BaronFraser,
You should be embarrassed.
The last thing I would want anyone to think about Me is that I am intimidating. I want to be approachable. I want to learn how to open my heart up to others, the way Jesus did, so I can really make a difference in their lives. I long for the day when I will come across someone like that, who will love and appreciate me for who God has created me to be without any judgment or condemnation. Just love.
Do you comprehend the depth of God’s love and mercy for us all? We are all so screwed up and Fu@ked up, but He loves us all anyway. We are the workmanship of His hands. We are His Poiema, His poem.
My advice to you, BaronFraser, is to “chill out.” God has it all under control. He really is still the Lord of Lords and King of Kings. And to the best of my knowledge, He has it all under control.
I still beg to differ with you when it comes to your ability to debate. You’re actually very good. However, I would suggest that you consider more carefully before you post. Keep in mind that sickening WWJD - - what would Jesus do?
Ron Viers
USA
June 29th, 2006 at 4:03 pm
The question was neatly ducked.
“if Jason and DeMarco…..(two American gay Christian singers in a gay relationship) http://www.jasonanddemarco.com … performed at Black Stump…and walked around arm-in-arm in the in-between times…….no-one there would have any problem with that?
And no-one at Black Stump would have any problem with an ‘out’ Christian gay man or woman teaching at the festival?”
June 29th, 2006 at 4:56 pm
Wow! I have been following this thread as an interested observer for a couple of days now. I have been at times amused, disturbed, bewildered and challenged.
Here’s my stake(s): I’m a pretty conservative evangelical Christian with a sister who is both a follower of Jesus and a lesbian. I mentor a young guy who is both a follower of Jesus and a gay man. I am a follower of Jesus who is straight. I have numerous gay friends and numerous straight friends. I have some who are confused as to their sexuality.
I have preached at my sister’s Church (Metropolitan Church of the Good Shepherd) a few times and found it a place that looked a fair bit like the Kingdom of God to me: there were many there who could not find their place in the evangelical Church (tragically) because the evangelical Church (I can only speak for them cause they are my tradition) doesn’t seem to have been able to maintain a a consistent grace position whilst still holding a firm theological position (rightly or otherwise) in relation to homosexuality.
Having said this, her Church had all the normal dysfunctions associated with life: lots of prejudices and people doing crazy things, unhealthy relationships and gossipping, etc etc. It looked like normal Church life to me (I have been in full time ministry for the past 15 years). There is no nirvana.
I am also a long term Stumper. I have watched Black Stump grow and change and develop and evolve into a festival that would describe itself as ‘inclusively evangelical’. Though I haven’t been to every festival everywhere it seems to me pretty unique and flexible. It certainly creates a space for dialogue within a respect framework.
I also know Fraser and can vouch for his integrity and genuine warmth as a person. I have seen firsthand his ability to separate issues from people.
I note that there are other relationships displayed within this thread that can comment on the heart of people making statements.
And I guess this is my point: forums are such ambiguous grounds - becuase we can’t hear or see (and usually don’t know) the others in the thread we have to read in their intent, tone and desire. Becuase we’re pretty much subjective creatures we tend to read in what we expect - this is patently (and very obviously in this thread) a dangerous position.
Add an explosive issue and occasional visceral images and the whole thing goes relationally pear shaped pretty quick.
I want to stick up for my mate Fraser - he’s a good guy who loves Jesus and loves people, and I want to stick up for the guys that I don’t know in terms of supporting your desire to follow Jesus.
Here’s the rub: I have let you know my relational connections. I hope you have seen my heart. Yet even still I can hold a theological position that is different to my sister and my mentoree. I feel no compulsion to change them. Neither do I feel it necessary to agree with everything they hold (in relation to sexuality or anything else for that matter) in order to love them. Indeed I would argue that my love for them (and theirs for me) would be diminished if we couldn’t hold things in tension.
In the end we say, “I love YOU.” I don;t love you becuase we think the same, act the same, look the same or smell the same. I love you becuase you are you, created in the image of God.
I can say (and do say) to my sister and my friend, “I, like you and you, like me are still a work in progress. There will be things about me that will frustrate you, even things that you find frustrating. Further there will be things that you see in me that you belive mar the picture of Jesus in me. But we choose to love each other.”
This is not just rhetoric, this is my life.
So I would say to both Reve and Lance - there are evangelical Christians out there who do not display any sense of homophobia whilst potentially still wrestling with the theology of sexuality. As best as you’re able keep looking for the good! We have enough issues facing us in our Churches without further accusation slinging.
I would also say, why don’t you come to Black Stump? I reckon you’d find just about every theological position represented through lots of different traditions. Some you’ll like, some you’ll dislike…and hopefully love will be apparent in all of them.
Whew. Bit preachy, huh?!
PS. You can make love donations to my retirement fund. All contributions will simply cost you money.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:57 pm
We’ve had a gay man here attend Black Stump who says that he’s had to pretend to be someone else….a feeling I can only too well identify with as a gay man and a former churchgoer.
I can see no reason why Black Stump would be any different to any other Christian gathering in Australia.
“I hope you have seen my heart. Yet even still I can hold a theological position that is different to my sister and my mentoree. I feel no compulsion to change them. Neither do I feel it necessary to agree with everything they hold (in relation to sexuality or anything else for that matter) in order to love them. Indeed I would argue that my love for them (and theirs for me) would be diminished if we couldn’t hold things in tension.”
But that doesn’t hold in a corporate sense.
I couldn’t go along to a Black Stump or a Hillsong conference or a St. Suburban morning service and have the congregation respect my beliefs…agree to disagree…hold our differing beliefs in tension…blah..blah ..blah.
My expected role is to be completely subservient to the beliefs of the corporate gathering ..as expressed by the senior pastor and his pastoral team.
The Anglican church is now seeing the results of a failed attempt to live in tension.
The outcome has been…..tension..and the inevitable split…because one side of the divide (the Jensenites) don’t believe in living in tension.
Returning to Black Stump….the likely scenario is….the organisers could make a brave decision to have some ‘gay presence’ ….
You wouldn’t see a backlash in the first year…..because Christians generally aren’t complainers…but they wouldn’t go back to Black Stump the following year….using excuses such as ‘Black Stump has lost its focus’….’Black Stump has sold out to political correctness’….’Black Stump is promoting ungodly lifestyles’……blah blah blah.
The Black Stump organisers are not dumb…they’re not going to bugger up their festival..for the sake of a few gays…who the church has done quite nicely without so far..thank you very much.
It might just be one key sponsor pulling out…but something..somewhere in the chain of support that is behind Black Stump…..just needs to be pulled out of the chain…and the festival crosses the line from being tenable…to untenable..and the organisers aren’t going to let that happen…..again ..for the sake of appeasing a few unhappy poofs.
Bully for you if you’ve learned how to live with the homo’s in your life…but you can’t replicate that tension on a corporate basis.