Some bad advice from Tony Miano

tony_miano

 

Note. Found this blog post from good friend Rhology posted on Tribalogue a few hours ago. and I thought it was excellent and well stated and wanted to post it here. There’s nothing with it that I disagree with, and I think these are very important things to be said [especially his refutation of Tony's position that women shouldn't OAP or share the gospel publicly. That needs to be opposed at every turn]  I should also note that I really like Tony and his ministry. I tried reaching out to him for a comment and some clarity but he did not respond. I also noticed that he has me blocked on Twitter, though I have no idea how or when that happened, as to the best of my knowledge I have not ever interacted with him other than tweet him a picture quote that I made for him, which he enjoyed and thanked me for.  It may be my affiliation with AHA, not sure, but regardless, he chose not to reply and so this will be posted without further comment from him. 

As far as the article itself, the only thing I would tweak is to affirm my belief that a Church can be generally solid even if it has a few problems, such as a distaste for OAP. It sort of depends on why they are against it, but I can have enough grace to say that a Church could be considered solid-ish and faithful and trustworthy even if it is behaving immaturely, ignorantly, sinfully or theologically reckless in a particular area. In this case that immaturity and lack of theological discernment and discomfort with OAP or other Christian activism, [Such as Abolitionist agitation] would personally give me reason to pause and would be sufficient cause for me to not attend said Church as my home Church and submitting to the elders, but I like to think that I can be happy for my Christian brothers and sisters that would attend, and think otherwise. 

 

***

 

Tony Miano, well-known street preacher, had this to say on Facebook recently:

4725185886289920

 

I gave it some thought, and I’d like to share a few.

Notice that Miano didn’t frame the issue in terms of whether the church thinks the individual reader ought to open-air preach (OAP). It is plausible a church might not want a particular individual to OAP. For example, if the aspiring preacher is not very good at explaining the Gospel, or he hasn’t mastered his temper yet and easily gets mad and challenges people to fistfights. But Miano is talking about OAP in general.

On the other hand, Miano seems to be referring to a situation where an aspiring OA preacher is not a member of a church because he can’t find one that supports OAP. It is a pitifully sad commentary on the state of Reformedigelical churches in the West that this is a plausible scenario. I would at least agree with Miano on this – if you’re not a member of a church, there had better be a really really good reason. Ie, you live in a location where despite faithful searching you have not been able to connect with anybody who actually loves Jesus.

On the other other hand (which I guess gets us back to the original hand), one might decide that until the Lord provides something better, he should probably just join the best church he can find and try to influence it toward following the Scripture. This may in some cases result in conflict between the person wanting to be faithful to Jesus and the leadership and/or the rest of the congregation who are all too happy doing their own thing, following their own autonomous desires and preferences, and ignoring major portions of the Scripture in so doing. What then?

Before we get into that, I’d like to ask this: What makes Miano so sure that a church that doesn’t support open-air preaching is indeed solid? Evangelism and the Great Commission are kind of a big deal when it comes to properly obeying Jesus, and if a church is not interested in obeying Jesus, that’s not a solid church. It doesn’t matter what they confess, what they say with their lips. The Scripture is full of rebukes of false professors who say one thing and do another. Like the Pharisees. Like the Jerusalemites who said “the temple of YHWH! The temple of YHWH! The temple of YHWH!” Like the false prophets who said “peace, peace” when there was no peace.

Perhaps the church thinks open-air preaching is mean and nasty in and of itself. I would suggest in that case the OA preacher invite people from the church to come out with him, to show them how it’s done and to demonstrate that, while of course someone can be mean and nasty in virtually any situation, OAP can be done in a way that is loving, kind, and understanding.

What if no one from the church is willing to go watch, and yet they continue to insist that OAP, a ministry that Jesus and Paul and Peter did a whole lot, is not good? Well, then, those people need to be called to repentance. Or I suppose you could leave and be a “nomad”, but then that would leave the people in the church in unchallenged deception, which is not loving. It is actually the opposite of love for those people.

On the other hand, what if a few people go out with the OA preacher and everything goes well, and yet they continue to oppose OAP in and of itself? Would not the conversation then have to shift to their biblical reasons to justify their opposition? It may be that the leadership of the church would in that case lord it over the OA preacher, citing some imaginary “authority” to tell him that OAP is not OK, with no other reason than that they say so. Such person(s) would be deep in sin and rebellion against the role they’re supposed to be playing in their local church. The OA preacher, being a part of that local church himself, would be obligated to get one or two other witnesses and rebuke that person, initiating church discipline for unrepentantly sinning against the OA preacher and against the rest of the congregation for refusing to teach the whole counsel of God.

1 Timothy 5:19-21 – Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses. Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be fearful of sinning. I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality.

Miano later says this:

The Lord may yet call you to open-air preach (if you are a man), and you will know that because your pastors/elders will affirm your call to preach the gospel in the open-air.

There’s a reason why he didn’t include any Bible citations along with this statement. Nothing in God’s Word would lead us to believe this is true. It also exhibits a puzzling naïveté. Does Miano really think that the most common reason why a pastor might oppose OAP would be that the OA preacher in question has a history of “rebelling” against the pastor’s “authority”? What does “pastoral authority” even mean, in a situation where the pastor is not following the Word of God?

Let’s continue with another statement from Miano:

Christian Brother: God has certainly called you to be a hand, or foot, or arm, or leg in His Body. But He may NOT have called you to open-air preach. The fact that you want to open-air preach doesn’t mean God has called you to open-air preach. You may not be finding a church that supports open-air preaching because that may not be the role the Lord has for you in His body.

Miano is equivocating on the uses of the word “calling” in this paragraph. The first occurrence is fine – it is indeed true that God has called every individual Christian to be some body part in His Body. Miano seems to be assuming that 1 Corinthians 12’s discussion of body parts refers to a given local church, which I would dispute, but let’s leave that aside for now. How do we know that God has called us to be a body part in the Body of Christ? The Scripture says so.

So how does Miano propose that an individual can know that he is “called” to do OAP? I have asked this question many times and never received an answer. It is a major weakness in his book “Should She Preach?“, which I documented in my review thereof. Which Scripture passage leads us to expect that God would continually send individual people specific callings to specific tasks or ministries, going forward throughout the ages during which the church would subsist? I have argued that no such Scripture exists. This is where the equivocation comes in – the first time Miano says “calling”, he is correctly referring to biblical command. The second and third times, he is trading on a mistaken tradition of man that is sadly common in Reformedigelicalism.

Miano is doubtless aware of the Modern-Day Downgrade at work in the Reformedigelical churches of the West. Part of the Downgrade is the trend toward that which is easy and adds to the comfort level of the partakers. As an experienced street preacher myself, I know well that OAP incurs a very high level of discomfort, and Miano of course knows this too. Since it is uncomfortable, people don’t want to do it, and this leads to their making excuses, twisting the Scripture so they can justify their apathy toward the lost. This is a far more plausible explanation for why someone might not be able to find a church that supports OAP.

So, get plugged into a local church; live in submission to the elders and in love with the rest of the congregation. Be willing to work the nursery, or scrub a toilet, or teach a Sunday school class (if you’re qualified). Be willing to serve for no other reason than it is a fulfillment of the two greatest commandments–to love God and to love people.

Of course, Christians should be members of a local church; I don’t dispute that. I would take issue with verbiage like “live in submission to the elders”, however. If the elders tell you not to do a biblical thing, or to do an unbiblical thing, it is no virtue to obey. It is actually sin to obey these lesser voices in that case. Sin because you ought to be doing the right thing, and also sin because you are acting in a cowardly way, following the “overlord”‘s orders rather than standing against evil and exposing it (Jeremiah 7, Ephesians 5:11) out of love for the deceived elder(s) as well as love for the congregation.

You can’t actually love your congregation if you are sinning by knowingly withholding from them that which they need, that which you know you ought to help them take hold of.

James 4:17 – Therefore, to one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, to him it is sin.

Taken in the context of the situation he is laying out, Miano is actually indirectly recommending a sinful course of action.

Also, because of the discomfort involved in OAP, there are precious few people willing to do it. Yet I challenge you to show me another ministry in which the Gospel can be spread so widely to so many people in such an efficient manner as OAP. I’m not criticizing other methods of evangelism. I’m saying that OAP has its place, and Jesus chose it for a reason.

Mark 1:14-15 – Now after John had been taken into custody, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”

Matthew 4:23 – Jesus was going throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness among the people.

Matthew 9:35 – Jesus was going through all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness.

Luke 20:1 – On one of the days while He was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes with the elders confronted Him…

If your church meets in a separate building, far be it from me to suggest you not scrub a toilet. If y’all meet in a house, scrub the toilet there. Go for it! Doing that sort of thing and OAP are hardly mutually exclusive. I mean, unless your nursery duties are late on Friday night or something, which is often a really good time of week to do OAP.

The problem here is not whether an OA preacher in a church should say, “OAP is all I do within my local church.” That would be foolish and wrong. But Miano is not only acting like it is better to do something that most anyone can and is probably willing to do (since scrubbing toilets is, let’s face it, not too hard) than to do something that is hard but that results in tons of people hearing the Gospel proclaimed with boldness and power, for no other reason than that the OA preacher’s church is in sin and thinks that OAP is bad.

It would be far better to say this: Be willing to OAP for no other reason than it is a fulfillment of the two greatest commandments–to love God and to love people. And it is love not only to the lost who hear it, but also to the church members who probably have an unbiblical worldview undergirding their unbiblical objection to OAP; the OA preacher has the chance to set them free from these wrong views. This is pleasing to God.

Two more notes:

The Lord may yet call you to open-air preach (if you are a man)

Please, again, see my review of Miano’s book on the issue of whether only men are justified in OAP.

once they see that the gospel of Jesus Christ is more important to you than hearing your own voice preaching it.

True, the OA preacher must guard against pride in his heart. But when fewer than thousands of Christians are doing OAP in one’s area and there is opportunity, it should be done in a biblical manner, no matter whether the elders of your church are sinfully suppressing it.

Speaking for myself, it matters not whether it’s my voice. I want many voices proclaiming the Good News of the risen Savior. And if there are none, I want at least one. If that’s me, so be it.

Philippians 1:15-18 – Some, to be sure, are preaching Christ even from envy and strife, but some also from good will; the latter do it out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel; the former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition rather than from pure motives, thinking to cause me distress in my imprisonment. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice.

Twitter Empathy and Hashtag Slacktivism

Originally posted on Pulpit & Pen:

More than one million people — including First Lady, Michelle Obama  — have tweeted the hashtag #BringBackOurGirls. But whether they’re helping the roughly 250 schoolgirls kidnapped in Nigeria or hopping on some kind of first-world digital bandwagon depends, frankly, on whom you ask.

These stinging words are from a May 8 article in the Washington Post. The words are harsh, but are they true? Could most public displays of empathy for the last (no doubt, important) cause be nothing but a peer-pressure induced digital bandwagon that accomplishes little more than providing a badge of empathy for those who don it? The Washington Post’s article providing Twitter screenshots from a Nigerian-American woman characterized these displays of support for the recently-kidnapped Nigerian school girls as “a recent wave of global sentimentality” that “simplifies nothing, solves nothing.”

This recent fad, the idea that awareness equals action, is defined in the Urban Dictionary

View original 777 more words

Fahrenheit Highway 411: Matthew LeHew, Shorter University, and Ergun Caner

Originally posted on Seth Dunn:

 “It was a pleasure to burn.”Guy Montag, from Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451

Matthew LeHew Calls Out Ergun Caner

Matthew LeHew

It’s simply important for all BPC stakeholders, especially the faculty and staff that make their living at the institution, to realize how serious the situation is[1] – Matthew LeHew

On or about the 10th of July, Matthew LeHew published an article on his personal website entitled “Ergun Caner is Wrong About Brewton-Parker’s Accreditation”.  LeHew was responding to a video (see below) in which Caner assesses the ramifications of the recent decision of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) to strip Brewton-Parker College of its accreditation (Caner is the President of that school).  In the video, Caner makes a number of claims with which LeHew takes exception, most notably the claim that “(Brewton Parker) won’t lose (its) accreditation, not for a moment.”

At first blush…

View original 4,629 more words

Sneak peek at audio from Reformation Montana 2014!

refmt-logo

 

Hey all. So bear in mind that these sessions are all being recorded and that hi -definition audio and video will soon be available.  But. For those that can’t wait, here is one of Vodie Baucham from Reformation Montana 2014. The sound is recorded off my phone, so quality is super awful, but you get what you pay for ;)

Vodie Baucham

P.S. This one was on the story of Joseph, and it seriously blew my mind. I had never heard this take on it and I am thoroughly convinced that he is right and it will forever change the way I view the story. Just killer stuff

A Small Sampling of the Wartburg Watch Combox Regarding Al Mohler

50005853

I like Al Mohler. I don’t know him personally, but I have read most of his books, have read many of his articles, have listened to him on The Briefing, and am aware of the high esteem that the vast majority of my Christian heroes regard him with, as well as the general evangelical populace. He is considered to be a smart, thoughtful, gracious man full of integrity, conviction and Godly character.

For this reason I thought he would make an excellent candidate to demonstrate the sheer depravity and vitriol that exists in the comment box at the Wartburg Watch- an self-styled online discernment ministry who emphasis is topics relating to the spiritual abuse of parishoners by Christian pastors, teachers, authors and bloggers. At the Wartburg Watch, the only place discernment is not applied is inwardly to themselves. While the two main writers of the blog are bad enough in their unrelenting slander and outright lies against anyone who does not adhere to their skewed understanding of biblical authority as it plays out in the Church and home, most of the more egregious back-biting and venom takes place in the combox, which is regulated and  moderated by the its creators who sit back and watch the fray.

This online cesspool is primarily [though not exclusively] populated by embittered,cackling sycophants who prowl around and lob sophistry bombs at anyone who slights them for real or perceived reasons. The place is essentially a free-for-all wasteland where personal attacks reign supreme and are seemingly actively encouraged , and where they’ll give long, rambling detailed psychoanalysis of anyone who they feel deserve it. Half the time its the most wildest, nonsensical excoriation of motives and intent heaped on with snarky and angry assertions.Honestly the closest thing to compare the combox commenters to are the deviants at the lowest recesses of 4chan. Its a sick, toxic environment, and its a shame because on the rare occasion they’ll bring up something worth talking about, but everything they say is so bent towards bitterness, vindictiveness and plain old nastiness, that it makes all their words covered with metaphorical poison.

To wit, here is a small sample I’ve taken from two or three threads about Dr Al Mohler within about 10 minutes of searching which show a varied collection of slander, insults and misrepresentation of his beliefs and character. It’s important to note that these are all relatively mild compared to some of the other Christian leaders they’ve attacked [Joshua Harris, CJ Mahaney, Mark Driscoll, John Piper, Tim Challies, Anyone at TGC, Phil Johnson, RC Sproul, Any Complementarian, Any Calvinist, etc] But they serve the point that if these things are said about Al Mohler, how much worse will they say about people they really don’t like.:

[He and his friends are] “A confederacy of dunces”

[Mohler] is a despicable human being that blaspheme the name of God.”

 “They’re pathetic”

“What a false gospel and world these men promote. They fit right in with Mormons and the Taliban”

“Mohler et al are abusers of the caliber of my father. I believe this because they are doing publicly what my father did privately: deliberately insistently demeaning people at the core of their beings—in their case, women”

“Mohler only wants to indoctrinate.”

“If Mohler and Patterson lived in the South in the mid-1800′s with this same hermeneutic, they would be slave owners.”

“He doesn’t possess the ability to communicate it in any meaningful way. Read his blog, and you will see a string of superlatives (his incessant use of the words “breathtaking” and “astonishing” are nauseating), with very little actual argument or critical thinking. And his books are not written to thinkers, or even those with a reading comprehension level above maybe 4th grade”

“Mohler pretty much depicts all single adult Christians as being ‘despicable’ in explaining why he thinks it’s okay to practice discrimination in churches not hiring singles, and in blaming singles for being single (he thinks everyone should marry by 21 or 22.)”

“AL MOHLER IS AN EVIL RULER”

“I do not think they are very bright. They have the same abilities as our infamous banksters: legalistically clever and savvy at turning situations to their favor. Certainly they have no wisdom, which is the best of intelligence.”

“They [Mohler et al] are false teachers”

[Mohler is the]archetype of antichrist

“I agree they are locked into teaching falsehoods and have shown no sign of openness to listening to what Christians are saying, or demonstrating any willingness to repent. Soft hearts? I’d say hardened hearts.”

“You would not know that from reading Mohler’s incredibly rude, condescending, insulting, unbiblical rhetoric against adult Christian singles.

“[Mohler et al] teach a reductionist, utilitarian view of women. They distill women (and men) down to objects that can only fill specific functions. They deny the fact that women (and men) are made in the image and likeness of God Himself. By denying this reality and truth (and yes, it’s Catholic but probably everybody here would agree to it’s truth), they deny or at least ignore Jesus’s own coming as flesh and blood which we just celebrating at Christmas (the Incarnation)”

“It just seems to me that Mohler continues to share a bed with Mahaney primarily because neither of them wants to share it with a woman.”

[Regarding Al Mohlers book] “All 25 chapters are titled with a non-biblical or twisted biblical belief Dr. Mohler has about leadership”

[Regarding Al Mohler] “That’s what I said. That’s what I call anyone who perverts the word of God to a gospel of oppression that justifies throwing people out of a job and into the street just because they lack a penis. They can twist the few verses there are out of context to try and put lipstick on their theological pig, but when Jesus says the two overriding commandments are to love God and love your neighbor and on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets, there is no way to justify such oppression of women because that is NOT love in any sense of the word.”

“Based on how thoroughly Mohler conducted his scorched earth purges of women and ‘liberals’, I’ll bet there’s a number of books on Stalin in that stack – and few, if any, on Christian love.”

“Mohler doesn’t want to be humble servants as Jesus taught them to be they want to be powerful dictators in the guise of servant leaders.”

Again, just a small sampling of comments that get liked, applauded, laughed at, encouraged, agreed with, promoted by the other commenters, and goaded on by the Prime Enablers Deb and Dee. For this small reason, as well as many more numerous ones which relate to public behavior and harassments [The recent public accusation that RC Sproul practices and endorses wife spanking, based on an alleged anonymous source, being one of the more egregious ones] the Wartburg has become the poster child of what happens when pride and bitterness completely consume a soul, and then that soul is allowed to blog about it. In a way the Wartburg Watch has gone from standing up for the abusee, to becoming the abuser with their unbridled hate and irrational attacks. It’s why they have, in my opinion, become known as the “Planned Parenthood” of the discernment world. Their website is own personal abortion mill and they are the doctors and nurses with syringe and scalpel in hand. Sure they may do some good in other areas, but they are almost exclusively known for their character assassinations and the murder of the reputations of Godly men and women.