Amazon also has it. See details at Kress
Also available at Logos
Available on Kindle and in Logos
View readers' favorite Kindle excerpts
|
Remember that you are our guests. We will, at our discretion, delete comments that we find off-topic, derailing, un-civil, slanderous, trollish or troll-feeding, petulant, pestiferous, and/or otherwise obnoxious and non-constructive. If we warn you, stop it. After no more than three warnings, you will find yourself banned, and all your future comments will be immediately deleted.
See an error in the post? How clever of you! Email the author. If you comment a correction, expect the comment to disappear with the error.
If you are confused about how the specifics of these principles play out in practical terms, you'll find a longer list of rules HERE.
 |
| The opinions expressed in this blog do not necessarily represent the views of all contributors. Each individual is responsible for the facts and opinions contained in his posts. Generally, we agree. But not always. |
22 comments:
I'm mad at Friel for liking Phil best.
The last four or five blogposts are all great--but there's so much to read I haven't had time to keep up! Hope you slow down a bit so we can enjoy the feast of good reading.
The problem for me is that, all told, Dan likes Phil best, too, as does Darlene.
And I'm not tellin' who I like best. It would be self-incriminating. So let me hate Friel in peace.
These are really clever. Thanks Phil!
Ever considered doing a poster that says, "Metanarratives: No one, anywhere, in the entire universe, knows them for sure...we're guessing."?
It's always fun to point out how total relativism cuts itself down.
-David
The funniest part of these posters is that so many of them can be changed just a tiny bit and they are still just as funny and accurate -
For example -
Fundi-ism - Tell me what I want to hear or else shut up and go away
Frank:
I like Darlene better than all three of you, followed closely by Wrigley.
David: "The funniest part of these posters is that so many of them can be changed just a tiny bit and they are still just as funny and accurate. . . Fundi-ism - Tell me what I want to hear or else shut up and go away."
No, actually, the proper line for a true hard-core Fundy would be: "I'll tell you what to think, and you can either shut up and listen to me, or else I'll kick you out."
Now, I realize there are some who want to caricature our attitude as precisely that. I'll simply point out that there's no major Christian blog in the blogosphere that deals almost exclusively with doctrine and biblical issues (as opposed to political controversies) where you'll find as many dissenting views in the comment-threads. In more than two years since I started my first blog, we've told fewer than a dozen people to shut up and go away, and virtually all of those were people who deliberately violated the language rule or otherwise tried to be purposely offensive. (The only person who might credibly claim that I pulled the plug on him precipitously is Touchstone, and I'm prepared to defend my actions in that.)
We do tend to answer our objectors (and occasionally, someone <cough>Jeff Wright</cough> will portray that as an undue cruelty), but the liveliness of our threads (not to mention the persistence of certain carping critics who have never even been threatened with a ban) speaks for itself.
All the posters are touche, but my favorite is the divingboard one (emergents are all wet). It also brought to mind a German expression "ein Brett vor dem Kopf haben," which literally means "to have a board in front of your head," = "to be a blockhead." ;)
TK
lol - Phil, you are correct
(but I wasnt really talking about you)
"We do tend to answer our objectors (and occasionally, someone [cough]Jeff Wright [/cough] will portray that as an undue cruelty), but the liveliness of our threads (not to mention the persistence of certain carping critics who have never even been threatened with a ban) speaks for itself."
I'm flattered to be remembered but I said "pugnacious," not cruel. :) Using "cruelty" to describe a blog post would be a little out of place in light of the actual cruelty around the world today. Even I'm not that defensive. By all means, please answer your objectors. I wouldn't expect anything else from you guys or any other blogger. We'll just agree to disagree on how its best to do that. Peace.
"...who have never even been threatened with a ban..."
Yes, that is to be appreciated. Jumping the gun on bans is irritating.
Phil you just got to get these up in a hi-res version not only are they good for the emergent types out there but they also really fit certain situations that have been happening at work lately.
Who does your fantastic graphics? Phil, you're not an artist too, are you?
These are great also -
My gripe w/ Driscoll is all about the 3rd of these posters...
While I think the Driscoll types have seen the need for some cultural relevance in the modern church, they've gone about implementing it in a rebellious way.
Rather than seek to bolster their local church (and there are several good local churches in the Seattle area) with a deeper love for the local community (ala John Piper), Driscoll starts his own church unfettered by any conventions.
Does the guy have the right doctrine? Yeah.
His actions, though, are rebellious and antinomian, and some VERY bad fruit may grow in that environment.
Yeah, Phil: I'm "noxious", not "cruel".
SHEESH!
BananaJackson, I daresay Pyro's discovered the delight to be found at Despair.com's DIY section: http://diy.despair.com/motivator.php
jbuck -
I really don't get what your point is.
It is rebellious to plant a new church?
It is rebellious to preach the gospel?
It is rebellious to reach out to the lost?
So.....Once a town has a single bible preaching church, thats it? Either you work within that church or your "rebellious?"
Snicker, chortle, guffaw. These are not just poking the hornet's nest with a stick. These are nuking the nest.
Thanks for starting my day with a big grin (and a bit of tittering)
"It is rebellious to plant a new church?"
No - course not. But is it rebellious to plant a church which is seeking some bridge with the Emergent Church movement, and which is a self-attested place to enjoy "good beer (in moderation), great sex (in marriage), and even tattoos (Jesus has one)."
Are any of these wrong? No (with the exception of the Emergent Church movement). Does this smack of an inyourface rebellious response to the orthodox evangelical church? Well...you tell me.
"It is rebellious to preach the gospel?"
Yes...OR...no. Sorry. I didn't say his doctrine was wrong. Read the post. What's wrong is his desire to distance himself from the evangelical church at large as a new and more "relevant" Christian worldview. The GOSPEL is enough to make us both different from the world and incredibly relevant to the world at the same time. No need for tattoos, profanity, or pushy worldliness.
"It is rebellious to reach out to the lost?"
Again, no. But see above. What does it MEAN to 'reach out to the lost'? Does that mean make yourself one of them and then spring the gospel on them, or does that mean submit yourself to your local body and then plant yourself where the gospel is most needed.
A close friend of ours (one Carl Hargrove of Master's Sem. fame) is currently pastoring a church in Watts (of crazy riots fame). Is he wearing FUBU clothes, drinking 40s and swearing? No. Is he reaching the lost? Yes - and I would say *more* effectively BECAUSE of the difference between himself and his family and the culture around him.
"So.....Once a town has a single bible preaching church, thats it? Either you work within that church or your "rebellious?""
Again, read the post. Clearly its fine to start another church. Driscoll started his expressly as a place to meet the culture where it was at without formal training of any kind. A FAR BETTER plan would have been to put himself under a local Bible believing church, been trained and THEN gone to seek the lost in Seattle.
If you'd like proof of this, see how much he's shifted in his stances even in the past 5 years. Without the grounding of good ecclesiology, he's been a bit of a shifting target.
All of this isn't to dog him personally - it's just not the wisest set of choices or stances. His theology is fine. His practice is not. And yes, if you don't think he's rebellious, you're wrong.
"Yeah, Phil: I'm "noxious", not "cruel".
SHEESH!"
This is drama. Just so I know, Frank, are you going to be complaining about this in the comments section of every post from here on out or just every post this week?
One of the two banners on the Pyromaniacs logo sites 1 Peter 3:15, "but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;"
You've made it clear in your other comments that you apparently believe that your comments about Dan and those who speak in tongues were made with gentleness and reverence or respect. You've made it clear that you must have a clear conscience, as the chapter goes on to say, and that I am the one who should be ashamed because of my slander and malicious speech against your good behavior in Christ.
You believe that your comments were made with gentleness and respect, I do not. Obviously, we are not going to convince one another otherwise. I've let it drop and have not said anything more to you about it. You continue to make little comments about it in other posts. These comments seem very passive-aggressive and do nothing to persuade me away from my opinion that you often make comments that are aimed at picking fights (pugnacious) contrary to 1 Timonthy 3:3 & Titus 1:7.
I, too, have struggled with, and continue to struggle with, combativeness (not that you agree that you are being pugnacious). Anyway, this the last time I will comment on our little situation stemming from part 3 of your post regarding Dan Edelen's comments. If you choose to continue to refer to it in post after post, that's up to you. Please go ahead and have the last word.
Peace.
Jeff:
I dunno -- are you ready to do more than tell me I'm a bad person and maybe participate in our mutual sanctification rather than hand out lectures and have hurt feelings when your lectures go over like lectures usually do?
Door's still open, dude.
Really enjoying the posters.. more! Perhaps you could do a series about the global church and its insular tendencies - its historic (and often comedic) inability to work together as a single body of Christ.
My favorite is the Mystery poster. Never mind that what we don't know is infinitely greater than what we do know.
Post a Comment