Tough one. I respect some of the points that Ken and Ingrid make, but I think that Ray is right to do this. I think it’s like Jesus going to Matthew’s party, or dining in the homes of Pharisees at the very least.

Not all of these WoF preachers peg my heresy-o-meter as much as others, either.

If Ray goes without pointing out the error THEN I have a problem with it. The Charismatic stuff is extremely scary. Eastern influence is coming at all flavors of Christendom. Seeker/ Emergents are open eared to contemplative prayer among other “spiritual discliplines “ from the desert fathers and mystics and the WOF/ Charismaniacs are delving into the Kundalini (Hindu serpent spirit) in their “revivals” from Toronto to Lakeland.

Ingrid and Ken make me sad to be a Christian.

...or at Emergent?

jud,

interestingly many of John MacArthur and most of followers are cessationists.... so this passage really means nothing as the gift of prophecy is not active now according to them.

I’m not sure how I fall out on this one, to be honest (yes, that’s a bit of a cop out, I understand).  That said, I fear that the parallels to Matthew’s party and Jesus “dining with sinners” are unfair.

I say that because sitting down for a conversation or a meal or even attending an event are very different propositions from being a marquee speaker for an event.

For example, I should have no issue visiting with a known murderer (just as example of something obviously wrong) to show Christ’s love, to serve and ultimately share the truth of the Gospel.  And I beleive I can do that without concern for any testimony taint.  After all, that is exactly following Christ’s example—not just in the parties He may have attended, but in His very incarnation (Phil. 2). 

However, accepting an invitation to speak at a pro-murder event would have to give the impression of some level of acceptance, approval or endorsement (however tacit).  At that level, I’m not simply expressing concern and love for fallen people, I’m actually taking an active role in “putting on” an event that—apart from my involvement (however justifiable) I would say shouldn’t exist.

Dining with sinners and partying with publicans is one thing; but headlining the International Conference on Cheating Widows and Enslaving the Poor is quite another.

iggy,

I think we need to put the title “prophet” in proper context. The prophetic gift MacArthur most certainly would endorse in the sense of one who has been given, by the Holy Spirit a passion for not only the Word of God but for it’s defense. An ability to sense what is and what is not of God (by the plumb line of divine scripture) and the courage to warn the Body of error. The “white blood cells “ of the body if you would. That is what Ingrid and Ken do. The Body needs all of it’s parts and today we tend to follow the trend of culture in making celebrities in the Church and elevating them above the rest and casting aside, even demonizing the “undesirable” parts.

When I said “prophetic” I’m assuming you meant in the apostate sense that is found in the Charismatic movement?

Is it just me or is it odd that Ingrid Schlueter and Ken Silva object to the true Gospel being preached to people who they believe have been taught a false Gospel? 

I thought that’s what Ingrid, Ken and their ilk wanted, for the “true” Gospel to be preached?  I mean, if these guys are really false prophets don’t their followers need to hear the real Gospel?

Yes, of course you don’t want to be seen as endorsing something or someone you believe to be false, but I would think Ray Comfort could manage to speak and present the Gospel message without endorsing the WOF message.  I’ve heard he’s a pretty good speaker.

Chris Elrod wrote on his blog about a “discernment ministry” blogger who wrote him a hateful e-mail after he and his wife lost their child, saying it was God’s punishment upon them for associating with certain Pastors the blogger doesn’t like. 

I said yesterday that claiming that someone is not really a Christian because you disagree with part of their theology was wrong.  Someone who would write an e-mail like that to someone who has just lost a child does not have Jesus in his/her heart and I might be tempted to question if they were truly a Christian.  I would definitely say the person is a twisted individual with a hardened heart who needs to repent.

I think those who’ve decided they are better able to discern what I should believe than I am should spend a little more time looking inward and a little less time looking thru other peoples garbage.

I say if Ray Comfort believes he can go and spread the Gospel without endorsing anything he disagrees with he should go.  And he can do it without having to publicly call out anyone as a heretic or apostate.

jud,

when Ken and Ingrid do preach the word of God I have not issue, but to mistake ones own preferences for God’s or to attack anyone without mercy or show them grace, I then see that as being more in line with the accuser of the brethren than in line with the Holy Spirit.

Unfortunately I have seen them attack more than preach. And you even acknowledge that at times their way is not as it should be.

iggy

Peter and Iggy,

I don’t see how she is “attacking” Ray Comfort in her recent topics. I agree that Mrs. Schleater at times goes over the top to make her points and I’m not as familiar with Mr Silva. Look, there is a balance I understand that. If the local church and the church at large would allow those with prophetic gifts to work within the body then you wouldn’t have people like this SCREAMING to have their voices heard. But wouldn’t that upset the church growth apple cart! The issue I believe is that of control, I have from a very close vantage points watch leaders in the church “design” a church around their particular strengths (Marcus Buckingham anyone?) and other parts of the body are neglected. You can build a community like this for a while with great success, but the walls will crumble because the foundation is the flesh.

I’m rambling, the point I’m trying to make is that people like Ingrid and Ken are a VITALE part of the Church body and it is a fundamental failure not to recognize this. Are they going to mess up?

Are you?

DanielR/iggy/Peter Hamm/others…

Just a curiosity question .... would you accept an invitation to speak at a conference sponsored by Ingrid, Ken and others of their ilk (theologically and attitudinally)? 

Why or why not?

Also , assuming “yes” ... would you accept unconditionally or would you require certain conditions to be met?

Matthew, speak or debate?  I would imagine a conference hosted by them would be about criticizing various and sundry ministries and/or pastors.  I would not be interested in defending everyone they are critical of, the list is just too long.

Speak about our need to be discerning without being hyper-critical and tearing down the Body of Christ? Sure.

Speak about the need for unity and reasonable tolerance within the Body of Christ? Sure.

jud writes [Are they going to mess up? Are you?] Yes to both, and what a good point. I haven’t seen Ken admit that he’s messed up before. I think I have seen Ingrid do this on a rare occasion.

Matthew writes [Just a curiosity question .... would you accept an invitation to speak at a conference sponsored by Ingrid, Ken and others of their ilk (theologically and attitudinally)?] Absolutely I would. But, interestingly enough, I’d have nothing to do with a WoF conference I think.