Silva: No Correction Wanted

You may also like...

No Responses

  1. Believe says:

    Was gonna deconstruct Silva and Simpson’s proposition regarding Len Sweet, however, all one has to do is read Sweet’s recent Treatise, and the two (Silva and Simpson) stand naked in their accusations.

  2. Believe says:

    ….oh, and…FIRST!

  3. centorian says:

    I think this is an interesting statement.

    “The world is not moved by mildly interested, middle-of-the-road, play-it-safe, echo-chamber people”.

    Aside from this being a very generalized statement, I don’t know what Sweet is talking about or who he is referring to. I would interpret this as a statement that has multiple applications. But to ascribe this as evidence of heresy is certainly a stretch and does call into question one’s cognitive skills.

  4. Xenia says:

    This fellow actually believes 21st century American evangelicalism is “the historic, orthodox, Christian faith; “

  5. victorious says:

    Has Silva ever gotten out into the fields and risked his neck preaching the faith he claims to defend. And I do not mean his little pulpit surrounded by his choir and cheerleaders.

    Has he ever given his life for those who came to Christ while he risked his neck to help them grow holistically as a person while growing up in Christ?

    Has he ever expended energy in relationship and giving to someone who cannot repay while the teeter on the edge of repentance but falling into unbelief?

    It is amazing to me the arrogance that cowardice can muster up.

  6. victorious says:

    All Sweet is trying to do is to get parrots to think before they squawk again and again.

  7. victorious says:

    ““The world is not moved by mildly interested, middle-of-the-road, play-it-safe, echo-chamber people”.

    Translation by vic. You ain’t gonna rock the world for Christ while living in Laodicea.

  8. Michael says:

    Sweet’s comment was a tweet…a thought limited to 140 characters.

    What it did for me was to inspire me to keep going and to keep trying when mediocrity and being lukewarm seems a far more comfortable alternative.

  9. victorious says:

    ” And since when has moving the world been the mission of the Body of Christ?”

    Mr. Silva. Ever read about being salt and light in the Sermon on the Mount?

  10. Believe says:

    Sweet, “The world is not moved by mildly interested, middle-of-the-road, play-it-safe, echo-chamber people.”

    Michael, I’m glad you’ve introduced us to Len Sweet. Love this quote.

    Vic, love the interpretation!

  11. victorious says:

    Believe. 😉 What think ye of this? You are never gonna walk on water while soaking in the jacuzzi.

  12. Believe says:

    X, yes…Silva is pretty Tempus-Centric.

    “Mainstream evangelical”….what does that even mean? Is that somehow different than being a Christian? A fellow Believer?

    Silva basically commits a Self-Contradictory Fallacy in this statement:

    “If Sweet is a mainstream evangelical as some suggest, then we are left to wonder why.”

    That presupposes that one must be a “mainstream evangelical” to be a non-heretic.

    Ken Silva, please don’t let your pride ruin you. Turn your guns elsewhere. There are real problems in the Church that could use your attention. Like the vast amount of CORRUPTION that goes on unchecked.

    Len Sweet has answered you plainly. It is evident to many other Believers that you are in error with regards to Sweet. Please repent.

  13. Believe says:

    Vic, like that one, too! 🙂

  14. Michael says:


    This is indeed madness…and very destructive to the Body of Christ.

  15. Lucy Listens says:

    I just read an article by Tom Stipe called More Toxic Than Chernobyl, dealing with the horrible consequences of distributing hate in the body of Christ. When I checked in to PP and saw this thread, I thought his words were applicable, and that the timing was not coincidental…

    Stipe says “Then there are the self-appointed “Discernment Ministries.” Those online wanna-be “apologists” who produce more vitriol and poison than the Chernobyl disaster. While establishing dubious doctrinal criteria by which all are to be judged, these so-called discernment “ministries” condemn to hell some of America’s finest leaders and authors.

    They are dispensing a commodity that may as well be labeled POISON and exposure to toxic substances can be lethal.

    Stipe has even more to say about hate in the rest of the article…check it out at…

  16. Michael says:


    I just came from there and Tom Stipe just wrote me under the table.

    That’s a great article.

  17. Believe says:

    Stipe nails it.

  18. Lucy Listens says:

    Michael, It is surprising that you two landed on the same topic, on the same day. I liked the Stipe article. It provides good scriptural background on why Christians should think twice before they become dispensers of “hate.”

  19. Michael says:


    The point Tom makes (and makes very well) about how the mark of our faith is love for the brethren is the issue that we have to address until these folks hear it.

  20. victorious says:

    Px2. Great job. Worthy of a Stipend. 😉

  21. Xenia says:

    Well, you all know what happens when you tell these folks that they are being hateful. They will say they are “telling the truth in love” and it’s out of love that they do what they do. If you say they are being hateful they are inwardly joyful because it means they are being persecuted for righteousness’ sake. They perceive themselves as martyrs and modern-day heroes of Christianity, contending (and being contentious) for the faith. None of the words of the NT about speaking gently applies to them because they are especially anointed by God to do this work.

  22. Michael says:


    Unfortunately, that was an excellent summation of the ODM mindset.

  23. Believe says:

    How do you “tell the truth in love?”

    I’ve tried and failed many times.

    Like when you know something is deeply wrong and needs to be fixed. When there is sin going on and it is ruining things (both families and churches)?

    Not talking interpretation of whether one’s doctrine is sound enough or not, I’m talking about clear-cut sin and corruption, even illegality.

    Isn’t there a time to “tell the truth in love”…and how does one do that responsibly?

  24. Michael says:


    It’s a heart attitude.

    Do we correct someone because we want to be right or because we love to help people receive sound doctrine?

    Do we correct because we want a pound of flesh or to protect people from someone…or someone from themselves?

    It’s all about the heart.

  25. victorious says:

    Xenia, they relish in their position even more and justify it because they think they have outed the double agents in the body of Christ.

  26. Xenia says:

    Recently, my son and his friend, both believers, were walking down main street one night with a non-believing young friend who they, in their bumbling, amiable way, were trying to get to come to church with them. Up rushes a “Street Minister” from my former CC, literally backing the unbeliever in a corner with “If you died tonight would you go to heaven?” Wouldn’t let up. Didn’t seem inclined to acknowledge my son and his friend who he knew to be believers (although he later bombarded them with the same tirade.) Is this telling the truth in love? Does this do more harm than good? No wonder people run the other way when a Christian tries to sell them the Gospel like it was Amway or a used car with a dubious history. The Gospel is GOOD NEWS! Good news. It’s good news. Why have people turned it into bad news that no one wants to hear.

    I love that Newsboy lyric: Shine! Let’em wonder what you got! <— That's how you can tell the truth in love.

  27. filbertz says:

    My secret decoder ring fell between the cushions of my sofa, so I’m unable to determine what in hades Silva is talking about.

  28. victorious says:

    It is really sad. They somehow slowly seduce beloved brothers and sisters in the body to operate by fear thinking they are purifying and defending the faith.

    I have seen unregenerate people sincerely feel sorry for me and think I was insane wishing they had a straight jacket for me.

    However that does not compare to those in the household of faith who think they have caught you in the arms of the great harlot when in reality you are in the fields of harvest trying to lead other laborers there also.

    In hindsight I can see that I was subject to an ODM/Revivalist joint ops mission.

  29. victorious says:

    It’s always fun to hear an Orthodox chant a little CCM. 🙂

  30. filbertz says:

    obviously odm’s are afraid of both silence and contemplation. It explains their voluminous writing and lack of thought. 😉

  31. JimB says:


    I realized when I read Silva’s recent article about Sweet which he wrote after Sweet’s response to the ODMs that Silva did not understand a word that Sweet had written. Further, Silva didn’t even attempt to understand Silva, or the post-modern mindset to which Sweet addresses in his writings and lectures. Silva’s approach to evangelism is so crude and simplistic that he wants to address every single person identically, regardless even of their nationality and culture. Paul wrote that he had become all things to all men so that he might win the most. Silva’s approach is to preach the same message and talk the same language to all men. Again, this is simply the most uneducated and crude approach to reaching people and building relationships one could have. Its equivalent to sending out missionaries around the world and trying to Americanize everyone everywhere as part of preaching the gospel, there is no more ineffective method you could utilize…

  32. JimB says:

    Typo alert, this line should read: “Further, Silva didn’t even attempt to understand Sweet…”

  33. Buster says:

    A reading from the gospel according to St. Silva:

    14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at computers, and upbraided them for their unbelief and reading of emergent blogs, because they believed not them which had defended the true and orthodox faith.

    15 And he said to them, Go ye into all your books, and make heretics of all men.

    16 He that conforms and condemns the heretics shall be saved; but he that lies with emergents shall be damned.

    17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; in my name they they shall disrupt blogs, they shall take statements out of context.

    18 They shall hijack threads; and if they be banned, they shall return with new IDs; they shall overwhelm with many words, and sow discord.

  34. BrianD says:

    Buster! 🙂

  35. Michael says:

    We have a Buster sighting!

    Really good post too!

  36. Pineapple Head says:

    Donald Whitney??????? The guy is awesome. What a ridiculous charge: silence and solitude??????????

  37. Xenia says:

    Whitney is being condemned for “promoting silence and solitude”?? <<<

  38. Xenia says:

    Whoops, hit “send” too quick.

    I was just going to say that it would do these folks good to be quiet and listen to God.

  39. BrianD says:

    Donald Whitney is a favorite of the Reformed crowd…so this is how you, if you were an ODM, could tie Al Mohler, Ligon Duncan, Mark Dever, C.J. Mahaney, Southern Seminary and the other Reformed megastars to heresy. I mean, if you wanted to.

  40. brian says:

    I was watching a show about interventions toward people whom struggle with addictions. This show was on inhalants and the effect it has on children and young adults. It kills many children, its a cheap and dangerous high. I was thinking about this and other horrible secrets that kids often have to keep, and then we have people who seek to discern the bark at the base of the tree under the mushrooms but have no clue about the forest.

  41. Believe says:

    Buster, is that official ODM Canon?

    …From the recent ODM Council of Carnage. 🙂

  42. Believe says:

    Michael, your 3:55pm…thanks for that.

    Got to always check one’s heart in these matters (speaking to myself).

  43. Linnea says:

    Haven’t read the whole thread, but a cursory response is this:

    God gave consequences to Adam and Eve when they were tempted to and added to the Word.

    Paul, tempted to be a Judaizer, was not and stuck with the Word, no more, no less.

    We need to take heed and do the same…..what is the essence of faith? If we share it with someone, we are part of the same family.

    Listening to Rosenblatt’s “The Gospel for Those Broken by the Church” Saturday was a wake up call for me and a washing and a refreshment with the Word.

  44. Erunner says:

    There will be another buster sighting at this years E-Fest coming June 5th! 🙂 Shameless plug. :mrgreen:

  45. Michael says:


    We have to plead with these people to come reason together with us.

    If that fails…then we must mark them out.

  46. Believe says:

    Not sure I’m ready to sign off on Px2’s “mark them off as enemies” yet.

    We really don’t know their heart. They could be self-deceived and they do profess Jesus as Messiah.

    IMHO, we need to not ODM the ODMs.

    Show them. Show them Christ’s example. Don’t treat them as they would treat us.

    Gosh, I hate being convicted by my own words! But, it is a good pain. Crush me in repentance Lord.

  47. Michael says:

    This is a huge measure of Silva s integrity.

    Sweet made a clear statement…if Siva continues his slander he is not at all interested in truth.

  48. Believe says:

    Ken Silva, if you’re out there, please pray about all this.

    Why can’t you enter a dialogue? What do you have to lose?

    If you believe firmly in your convictions and you believe that God has put you in this position of discernment, then come here and interact.

    I really want to know what your beef is with a man like Sweet who professes Jesus as Messiah…meaning, I know your claims…but defend them in a discussion…not a monologue.

    I’ve read some of your blog and others who would be labeled ODM. I don’t claim to have read all of your work, but enough to have an intelligent discussion…and a back-and-forth could be helpful to foster more understanding…for you and for us.

    Open your site up for comments or come over here and have a family discussion.

    Persuade us. Don’t speak at us, speak with us.

  49. Bob Sweat says:


    I have been in and out all day, but what I’m reading from you hits the nail on the head!

  50. Believe says:

    Michael, yes, it will show intellectual dishonesty, a lack of integrity and poor character if Silva and others don’t acknowledge Sweet’s clearly articulated clarifications on the core essentials of the Faith…and his direct denial of being a New Age supporter.

    Even so, are you ready to say the ODMs are not brothers and sisters in Christ and to call them enemies?

  51. Bob Sweat says:


    I haven’t had time to post much lately, but I read PP everyday. I missed it when it was down, thank you for working hard to get things back up.

    Can you post an update as to who will be attending Efest? I haven’t seen Rolph’s name on the list, I hope he is coming.

  52. Michael says:

    If he does not repent and continues his assaults he is an enemy of grace…and the cross.

  53. Believe says:

    Michael said, “If he does not repent and continues his assaults he is an enemy of grace…and the cross.”

    So is a person who is confronted in sin, even a pastor, who does not repent and continues in the sin an enemy of grace and the cross?

  54. Babylon's Dread says:

    Looks like a “first” fest for anyone who pleases in the absence of old responses on the threads… nice..

    Anyway…. I am certainly glad to have the PP back.

    ODMs have the joy of being known for what they are against… I get it… I even like to play that side of things sometimes… but ODMs have made it their lifeblood.

  55. Babylon's Dread says:

    I have the new book by Viola and Sweet at my right hand… some ODMs should borrow it…

  56. Michael says:

    Believe ,

    I didn’t say that.

    When you attack others and refuse grace where it is appropriate, you send people away from the cross and create legalistic traps for brethren.

  57. Believe says:

    Michael, then say what you just said. The other comment gave a much different impression, at least to me.

    I believe I know your heart a little, and I don’t see how you would condemn even the ODMs as enemies of the cross…meaning opposed to Christ.

    I do agree with the legalism attribution and the refusing of grace and that it turns people away from the cross…but let’s be careful not to call them unbelievers or enemies.

    That goes against the work you are doing through the PP.

    Unity includes even those we don’t like very much. They are still family. Let’s try to bring them back home.

    Show them. Len Sweet’s response was a great example.

  58. Believe says:

    …doesn’t mean we don’t tell the truth about the ODMs and call them to task, but they are still believers who need to repent, not unbelievers who are enemies of Christ and damned to the Lake of Fire.

  59. Erunner says:

    Bob, We’ll have our last update this week. It looks live Dave will be missing this year unless something changes.

  60. Em says:

    most of what i see of the ODMs make me think of that person who charges in well intentioned (mostly) lacking competence and over confident saying, “here, let me fix this…” and you can’t stop them …
    what do we do in those situations – pick up the pieces?
    is Michael tasked with that job? do these threads and the wise words spoken serve that purpose? i hope so… the Church needs competence as well as humility

    as some others have said – praying for God’s mercy and guiding hand

  61. Dave Rolph says:


    Looks like I will need to go to Mexico that day to help with a Men’s Conference down there. I will miss you guys at Efest 2010.

  62. Jessica Menn says:

    ***“The world is not moved by mildly interested, middle-of-the-road, play-it-safe, echo-chamber people”.

    Would those “echo-chamber people” be those who adhere to the historic, orthodox, Christian faith; well, we’re left to wonder.***

    Silva seems to be implying that he is one of those people who adhere to the “historic, orthodox, Christian faith”, but I do wonder whether he knows anything about historic Christianity.

  63. Believe says:

    Px2, thanks for that clarification.

    Words can be misinterpreted very easily…”enemy of the cross” is a loaded statement and can take on different meanings to different people.

  64. “under-educated ODM sources,”

    Please note those observant words. They are what make the ODamners so dangerous. In a biblically uneducated world there are charismatic zealous people, in the name of God, drawing people away from the work of the HS and any critical thought. In a grand irony, they are in essence , doing the very same thing they accuse others of doing….taking advantage of and manipulating people

    I see Odamners not so much as protectors of biblical truth as much as preservers of a specific way of doing things and a specific school of thought. They are often times against anything that resembles critical thinking. They are the reciters of those 7 deadly words “We’ve never done it that way before”

    Now that’s not to say there are not area of doctrine under attack and we certainly need to be aware. But the bible has been under attack for 2,000 years and the HS has seen fit thru it all to preserve the truth

    BTW who is Ken Silva?

  65. Believe says:

    Px2, I read and re-read your article on the subject. You make SO MANY good points.

    I was just stumbled a little by the “enemy of the cross” statements by you and Michael. Not to beat a dead horse…

    You wrote, “Many Christians can’t seem to see and appreciate the diversity that makes up God’s family. They are blind to the fact that we are all on the same side as brothers and sisters in Christ in the fight against evil. When did our brothers become our enemy anyway? And how many times can we offset all that Jesus said about unity by repeating over and over …“How can two walk together unless they agree?””

    We, as Christians, are all on the same side…even the ODMs.

    I just want to make sure, for myself at least, that we don’t ODM the ODMs.

    Can’t they be called to task and can’t the Body of Christ be warned about their toxicity in love..without them being called “enemies of the cross”…

    The ODMs will certainly interpret that statement as I first did…and will seize on it as a contradiction in your call to unity and love. Others will draw the same conclusion.

    Keep confronting their error every time. Deconstruct their “discernment” and show it to be wrong. Do it in an almost clinical way, sans vitriolic emotion and ‘war words’ like enemies.

    The probability is they are not really ‘enemies’…they are just very wrong and being tempted by “the” enemy….and not discerning enough (ironically) to see their own pride and error.

    Drawing battle lines and using battle-field language…is just what they want. They need a war. They need enemies within the Body of Christ.

    As their fire fizzles out…let’s not toss them more fuel.

    Just my opinion, FWIW.

  66. Michael says:

    “In a grand irony, they are in essence , doing the very same thing they accuse others of doing….taking advantage of and manipulating people”

    Great point, Steve!

    Silva is “Apprising Ministries”….

  67. Michael says:


    That was excellent…

  68. Em says:

    MB,”He quoted Stott who said, in answer to someone’s inquiry, “How can the whole world be saved?” Stott replied, “All it would take is Christians to love one another, and for the world to see it.”

    oh, shoot – first thing in the day i have to disagree with John Stott, of all people… we should love each other in many ways and at all times (don’t always) but doing so would not/will not save the whole world… it conquers a whole lot, but people aren’t going to go to hell because we didn’t love each other – there’s a verse about finding Him when you search for Him with all your heart – and there is such a thing as an evil heart that can’t be won to Christ IMO

  69. Dr Ron says:

    Frightening to see how quickly some want to disown the disciples of Christ.

    Can we imagine treating everyone as if they “were saved?”

  70. Em says:

    it was my great privilege and blessing to know a Roman Catholic priest, now with the Lord, who exemplified, it seems to me, the ideal attitude for a child of God toward the human race: gentle and compassionate with the race of man, yes. But he didn’t ‘wink’ at sin and was, in true humility, uncompromisingly stern with the saved. And you didn’t have to be RC to be one of the Redeemed… BTW
    don’t we find that, within the Body, the men (& women) that we trust and listen to are people who don’t yell and holler very much (at least not in public)? 😆


    I love CC and am grateful to be associateed with it. Since I am a first generation Jesus movement person, I feel the liberty to protect ans well as critique my own movement. But having said that, I am about to go out on a limb and make an observation about the organization I am affiliated with and love

    For fear of being labeled a calvinist, All the wisdom of a man like R.C Sproul or John Stott would never be asked to speak at a CC. For fear of being labeled Emergent or better, “Liberal” a man like Len Sweet will never speak in a CC. For fear of being labeled Charismatic or Pentecostal, a man who truly believes in healings or words of knowledge will never be asked to speak in CC.

    So what is it that often times drives a CC pastor (not every one mind you..) Fear! We are often times driven by fear instead of being led by the HS and that fear has it’s base, ironically, a lack of understanding of the scriptures…something CC had boasted about.

    I appreciate all that CC stand for but we may need to go back to the drawing boards and equip people in doctrine, the HS (who makes doctrine and the gospel alive) and learn, and engage and not be afraid to think, or fear new (biblical) thought. Unfortunately while it is true to a point, too many guys have mindlessly swallowed hook line and sinker the phrase “It it’s new; it’s not true”

    Many a CC pastor whose love of scripture and the Lord I appreciate and respect, cases been eclipsed by knowledge and as such are often times unable to enter any meaningful debates which in the end, sadly, makes us irrelevant

  72. Michael says:


    That’s the echo chamber phenomena that Sweet referenced…I more crudely described it as inbreeding.

    There are fences that need to stand and fences we need to tear down in all of our traditions…

  73. Believe says:

    MB said, “I hear what you’re saying, but I’m not so sure we ought to go around calling everyone “family” just because they claim to be. If hatred and bitterness are one’s predominant fruits, can that person really be called “family”?”

    MB and PP family, here’s the problem with this statement….

    You really can’t have it both ways. Either you let everyone in the Tent who professes and affirms the essentials of the Faith….or you don’t.

    Once you start judging people’s hearts and motives…and once you put yourself in the place of discerning one’s “fruit” as hatred and bitterness…you are acting no differently than what you are accusing the ODMs of doing.

    You are, in essence, calling them not part of the family…meaning not fellow believers…and from my time on here…I have been persuaded to broaden my Tent.

    I look at a guy like my step-dad…and I see bad fruit. I see him professing Christ, saying the words, but not living them out…and digging in further when confronted in obvious sin.

    I’ve made the judgment that his heart is wicked and he can’t be saved, because of his “fruit”…I’ve been corrected that I cannot know his heart and make that judgment.

    The reality is we all sin and are all sinners. Michael has said many times on here that God uses sinners, earthen vessels etc. and that we can’t live up to a certain standard of Holiness. There is no hierarchy of sin. We cannot judge a professing believer like Len Sweet and call him a heretic when he affirms the core essentials of the Faith. We cannot judge guys who are in sin and in the Pulpit and call them unbelievers, because we all sin.

    I bet if you asked Ken Silva to articulate his Faith, he’d affirm the core essentials as well.

    So, we’re left with making a judgment about one’s “fruit”? What does that mean?

    If my step-dad’s “fruit”…and the extreme corruption of high-level pastors he runs with doesn’t measure up as bad fruit…to the point of determining they are not believers…then how can you judge and say that Ken Silva’s heart is bad?

    Either hold some standards and stand on the authority of Scripture and make judgments…or don’t…let all who profess and affirm the essentials of the Faith into the Tent.

    I don’t see how you can have it both ways. Not picking a fight, just calling it like I see it…and I could certainly be wrong and could be persuaded of my error.

  74. Michael says:


    There has to be balance.

    The warning passages in Scripture about apostasy or losing ones salvation are there to act as signs guiding us down the narrow road.

    When the fruit of a ministry is bad…when the commandments to love the brethren are trashed…then it is incumbent on us to exhort those folks to check themselves according to the Scriptures.

    I have not declared Silva an unbeliever…but he and his fellow travelers are bringing division and schism to the Body.

    That has to be said and hopefully said in love with a hope for reconciliation.

  75. Em says:

    it seems to me that there is some confusion in the Church between ‘office’ and ‘ministry’
    we all have a ministry to promote and defend the Gospel of Christ, do we not?
    but we aren’t all fit for office – of that i’m sure… doesn’t the responsibility that goes with an ‘office’ require both the talent and the suitability? we seem to be ok culling ‘talent’ (kind of takes care of itself), but suitability? Qualifications? we just sorta say, “only God knows and promotes whom He will.” But is that Scriptural? – just askin

  76. Michael says:


    Good points…in the U.S. suitability is determined by popularity…

  77. Em says:

    Michael, re: #35
    that ought to tell us something, considering the state of affairs in the nation

  78. Michael says:


    Apostolic succession is a fantasy.

    I’m good with the training and vetting though. 😉

  79. centorian says:

    “apostolic succession”

    can’t tell if that was tongue in cheek or not. Paul did a pretty good job smashing the ideal on succession from anyone in the first few chapters of 1Corinthians.

  80. Lutheran says:


    Historically, Lutherans don’t subscribe to apostolic succession.

    ‘For fear of being labeled a calvinist, All the wisdom of a man like R.C Sproul or John Stott would never be asked to speak at a CC. For fear of being labeled Emergent or better, “Liberal” a man like Len Sweet will never speak in a CC. For fear of being labeled Charismatic or Pentecostal, a man who truly believes in healings or words of knowledge will never be asked to speak in CC.’

    I find this very sad. Another reason CC will always be considered a sect. Fortunately, mos of evangelicalism has moved on.

  81. Lutheran says:

    I think M*B has it right. II Cor. 1-3 has little or nothing to do with AS. The apostles have pretty much always been credited with (depending on which part of the church you’re talking about) a special deposit.

  82. Em says:

    MB, peach fuzz is one thing, but avocado fuzz? praying for your tummy 😆

  83. Em says:

    no comment on the theory of apostolic succession (vs cession or c-section?)

    except i need a clear definition of same… anybody? please and thank youse

  84. Em says:

    forgot one (doorbell rang) “cessation”

    filbert wannabe

  85. centorian says:

    I don’t have the time to fully develop this, but I am aware of the context of 1Cor 1-3 that it does address a devisive church. But by extension it also negates any ideal of a formal sucession from one individual to another. Being “of” someone, is extrapolated out to establishing a hierarchy by claiming the authority and a line of sucession.

    The Corinthians were trying to trump each other by claiming their relationaship and adherance to a particular authority (personality), thereby establishing a power base of their own. This was a problem Paul was intending to ward off. As we see with early church history, they did not heed.

  86. Scott says:

    Just wanted to say you Guys and Gals are awesome. Don’t have much time anymore to interact here, however, I always appreciate being able to read through the dialog.

    Michael, you grown so much in the last couple of years, it’s amazing to witness.

    I echo the “inbred” observation reflective among many of the Folks pushing these out to get the boogey man agendas. That Ken Silva is too chicken s**t to come here and interact, is beyond me.

    I have more respect for Ted Haggard too be honest. At least he stepped up to the plate and took it like a man. Even Jackie Alnor has stepped into the PP ring many times, and she’s not even a man 🙂

  87. Michael says:


    Good to hear from you…I follow your travels on Facebook. 🙂

  88. Xenia says:

    no comment on the theory of apostolic succession <<<

    I believe in it.

  89. Scott says:

    Good to know, Michael. I often wonder if anyone gives a rip where I’ve been lately 🙂

    It’s definitely been an adventure. Some of the trainee’s are making me lose my hair though.

  90. Lutheran says:

    Actually, when the Episcopal church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA)
    had their merger (I know that’s not the right word, but…), AS was a major bone of contention.

    I don’t believe in it, but whether you do or not, I think it’s certainly NOT a major doctrine of the church, such as Christology.

    Or is it?

  91. Lutheran says:


    Good to hear from ya! You’ve been missed.

  92. Believe says:

    Scott said, “I echo the “inbred” observation reflective among many of the Folks pushing these out to get the boogey man agendas. That Ken Silva is too chicken s**t to come here and interact, is beyond me.

    I have more respect for Ted Haggard too be honest. At least he stepped up to the plate and took it like a man. Even Jackie Alnor has stepped into the PP ring many times, and she’s not even a man 🙂 ”

    Oh, my stomach hurts from laughing so hard. There is so much funny contained in those couple of paragraphs!

  93. Xenia says:

    The RCC’s have one line of Apostolic Succession, that which they say began with St. Peter, with Linus next and so on and so forth down to the current office-holder. The Orthodox have several lines coming down to the present time from the various Apostles. For example, the line of the Ecumenical* Patriarch in Constantinople (Istanbul) began with the Apostle Andrew and can be viewed here:

    The Patriarchate of Jerusalem was founded by St. James, the brother of the Lord.

    (* “Ecumenical” in this case means “universal,” not the meaning we ordinarily give it on the PP.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Discover more from Phoenix Preacher

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading