Tim Wirth of Concerned Nazarenes a Hair's Breadth from Emergent Nazarenes

If you have been following my last few posts you would know that their has been some progress in reconciling what has been an historically adversarial relationship between Concerned Nazarenes, represented by their founder Tim Wirth, as they asserted that many Pastors, professors and leaders in our denomination were heretics and not even Christians. However, In the comments of a recent post Tim concluded that my confession of the atonement, provided I believe it-which I most certainly do, means that he would now receive me as a brother in Christ.

Tim also said that he wants to work to focus more on what he considers “false teaching” rather than focus on people. In my last post I thanked Tim for his humility and honesty and though he did reply to it, I am not sure he realized that I would like for him to stick around so we can work some things out together. I don’t think he knows that I replied back and look forward to building on his positive step of his embracing me as being a fellow Christian.

Tim said that he felt that he was “estranged” from real brothers and sisters in Jesus because he feels they “promote and endorse false teachers.” In the last post and in the comment which I am not sure he read yet, I assured him that we don’t “promote” these teachers he is concerned with any more than he might “promote” John Macarthur or John Piper”. We promote Jesus Christ just as you do. (See my complete comment in context here and here)

Tim felt the need to share with me that he is not a Calvinist, and he believes that Jesus died for everyone, though he has said before that he respects and reads books by some Calvinist because he finds them biblical. I pointed out that as Nazarenes in the Wesleyan tradition we believe the Calvinistic idea that Jesus did not die for everyone is very dangerous and unbiblical as it undermines the great work of the atonement. Of course Calvinist’s through out history thought that Armenian/Wesleyan theology is what really undermines Christian orthodoxy and so these two groups called each other heretics and accused each other of preaching the “doctrine of demons” for centuries.

Looking back on it now we could easily see these two groups as actually “estranged” brothers in Jesus. Even though they each thought the others weren't real Christians, they both put their faith in Jesus Christ regardless of the differences they had in their theology describing how it all works. But at the time (and actually with some people it still may be true today) these two different theologies were viewed as completely different paths that sit opposed each other on two different sides of a vast un-crossable gulf. As I told Tim, this is why I appreciate Wesley because he chose a more generous perspective; one that chose to see what many believed to be completely incompatible to actually be just a “hair's breadth” apart. When Wesley focused on what he had in common with Calvinist the great differences between them began to look really small (of course not all Calvinists returned the favor).

I think Tim and I also have much more in common than the things we disagree over. I actually think the same is true for all the Nazarene leaders Tim has called heretics and non-Christians in the past (a past Tim began to put behind him when he received me as a brother- thank you Tim). Tim confessed to me that he believed that “all in all there is nothing in the Article's of Faith that (he) would part fellowship over with a fellow Christian.” And so then, as people who together affirm biblical Christianity in our understanding of Sin, Atonement, Repentance, and Justification, Regeneration, and Adoption through faith, we should NOT break fellowship with each other. There is no reason to be “estranged”.

I understand that we may still have strong disagreement about many things. (I do address these a little more in the comments of last post). I just don’t think we should let our disagreement about these things divide us when it took the blood of Jesus to unite us.

Also, in the comments of my last post which Tim has not yet responded to, I proposed three things that I would like to happen as I worked with Tim towards reconciliation:

1. I asked Tim to acknowledge all those in our denomination who have a confession of faith in Jesus Christ and embrace our shared standard of biblical orthodoxy as described in our Articles of Faith as his brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ. Posting this on his blogs , websites, and facebook group would go along way to work toward reconciliation. It would be great if he could mention people by name that he has named in the past as those he did not embrace as fellow Christians before and let people know that he now embraces them as brothers and sisters of Jesus.

2. I asked him to consider loosening up on the use of moderating (blocking) blog comments and to cease banning certain Nazarenes from facebook activity and allow fellow Christians and Nazarenes , even if they don't agree with him to participate in some of the dialogue in these places. I told him that I would work in return to encourage people not to abuse such a welcoming spirit by being adversarial against them or their concerns. I told him that I would jump to his defense about this and work to encourage others to be respectful of them in a shared effort to create a new tone. Bottom line is that we should not lock fellow family members of God out of public conversations or marginalize them. Now that Tim understands that we are really Christians I am sure he can understand that.

3. The last thing I suggested is that we do some good work together. Let’s mutually promote the things we all can be proud of as part of a shared tradition and denomination. In the wake of catastrophes like in Haiti I suggest a joint endorsement for support for Nazarene Compassionate Ministries and Nazarene Compassionate Ministries inc.

I also asked him to share his ideas about what we might be able to do together.

Now this is just a summery, for my complete reply see the comments HERE.

Tim,

You are welcome to reply here or HERE, but if you reply to this I ask that you check out my more thorough comments in the previous post first. Also, I am asking that we move toward reconciliation, not just a cease fire where we each go our own separate ways. So hang around, we have a lot to talk about.

Too many people are involved in this, it isn’t just you and I but everyone listening and engaging in these conversations all over the place. We need to lead and model reconciliation Tim and how Christians should love each other and interacted despite perhaps great disagreement. So please check back after you reply so we can continue to work through these things.

Thank you Tim

Your brother in Christ

James Diggs

Finding Common Ground: A Sincere Thank You to Tim Wirth of Concerned Nazarenes

We are often too reluctant to give credit to those we may have had conflict with when it is due. I don’t want to make that mistake. In the last week or so I have been aggressive on this blog in trying to find some common ground with the handful of leaders of Concerned Nazarenes. I believe that common ground for us is our biblical foundation as expressed in our shared Articles of Faith. I have asked guys like Tim Wirth and Manny Silvia to unify with us under our share beliefs as Nazarenes. Tim Wirth responded and we had some conversation in the comments HERE and the most recent one HERE.

In our last interaction, after I shared what I believed about the Atonement, Tim said this to me, “James that was a wonderful answer and I’m glad you believe it.” I also asked him if he affirmed our Articles of Faith and he finally gave me the most direct answer yet saying, “I have a problem with the statement on scripture number 4 because I believe it is non conclusive and leaves the door open. But all in all there is nothing in the article's of faith I would part fellowship over with a fellow Christian.”

I then asked him if the fact then that we agree on these things, meant that he would consider me as a brother in Christ?

Tim replied, “Yea James if you truly believe as you stated we are brothers in the Lord, like it or not : )”. I do believe these things, and I appreciated the friendly “like it or not” followed by the smiley face because I know that it must not have been easy for Tim to confess this after years of saying that he did not consider me a brother in the Lord or even a Christian. It takes real humility to change your mind about things and I think humility is a mark of being a disciple of Jesus, along with love.

Tim also said that, “I will try to address the false teaching more than the false teachers. It’s sometimes hard to separate the two. So forgive the passion sometimes it does put me into the flesh.” I appreciate this too. I confess that I also have gotten caught up in the heat of things at times as well, so of course I can forgive Tim as I pray he also forgives me.

I mostly appreciate that Tim said he will try to focus on “the teaching” he has trouble with and not people. This is great, especially because I believe that out of a sincere zeal for Jesus he has mistakenly targeted people in our Nazarene tradition in the past whom he actually might find that he agrees with if he talked to them more; just like he recently found that he actually agreed with me enough to recognize that we are both Christians. So I want to thank Tim for shifting the focus of his concern away from those he may actually find to be united in faith with and more on the issues he has legitimate and serious concern about.

So I understand that none of this means that Tim is abandoning his concerns. As he said to me while receiving me as a brother in Christ, “That being stated I am estranged from other family members who promote and endorse false teachers.”

Tim is still very concerned about Nazarene colleges and Nazarene Pastors like myself whom he believes are promoting false teaching as we “promote” various “emergent teachers”. After reminding me of these concerns he said, “I believe the time is short here so again I would beg you to just preach Christ from His Word in scripture alone. And I’m not saying be a Calvinist or anything like that. I reject Calvinism and TULIP (certain parts of it). I believe Jesus died for all men and women on the cross.” (This Wesleyan view is even more common ground between us).

In have replied to Tim’s honest and gracious comments with my own comment trying to meet Tim in his very real concerns while remembering our new found common ground; but he has not yet replied. You can read all this conversation as it is in the comments of this post HERE, but I decided that I should re-post my comment here in its own post for two reasons. First, because I want to give Tim Wirth public credit for making a move to receive me as a fellow Christian, a brother in Christ. Second, I want to make sure Tim sees my reply so that hopefully we can keep building on the common ground of the reconciliation we share in Jesus Christ.

Here is my reply to Tim Wirth, now posted as an open letter:

Tim,
Thank you very much for both your honesty and for having enough humility to change your mind about us not being brothers in Christ. My confession and faith in Christ and what he did for us on the cross is sincere. I know that as Christ was not ashamed to call us brothers through the saving and sanctifying work on the cross, we (no matter what our differences) should not be ashamed either to embrace each other the same way. I know that our differences could make it easy for us to be estranged family members, but I think suffering through our differences with God’s help is part of what it means for us to daily pick up our cross and follow Jesus.

I do understand that you have not changed your mind about your concerns about false teaching and I in no way want to extinguish your passion for Jesus and the gospel. With that said, I feel that your stated commitment to try and “address the false teaching more than the false teachers” is a good one, but also very challenging for you. I believe that a less adversarial role with many in Nazarene leadership could help you find the balance you are looking for. I don’t personally know everyone that you have had issues with, but I know many and have good reason to believe that these men and women also affirm our Articles of Faith which embraces the biblical teaching of things like Sin, Atonement, Repentance, and Justification, Regeneration, and Adoption through faith. I want to encourage you to make peace with these leaders as you continue to be passionate about Jesus and seek to daily live in the reality of the gospel through faith.

I agree with you that “the gospel is still as powerful as it was from day one”. I even agree with you that “it doesn’t have to be changed to change post moderns.” I have never promoted changing the gospel. The gospel does not change, it changes us. I know there are all kinds “new kinds” thrown around in the conversation; frankly I think much of it is to try and sound provocative to sell more books. I hate that. But the gospel has always been provocative on its own. In fact I think when people tinker with the gospel it is to try and make it less provocative. But preaching Christ crucified has always been a “stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles”. With all the many bogus claims of something “new” floating around by what some consider the emergent conversation, the only thing “new” going on in the emergent conversation which I affirm is that which the cross transforms in us as we stumble all over its foolishness. It isn’t the gospel that is changing - it is us; as it always is in every generation from pre-modern, to modern, to post modern.

Let me also say that I do not “promote” Brian McLaren or Rob Bell or anyone else, any more than you might “promote” John Macarthur or John Piper. I promote the gospel and Jesus Christ. Yes I have read and passed along many things I felt were good and that which I believed affirmed biblical Christianity from some of these authors, but doing this is not a blanket endorsement of everything they have to say. The same would be true for Macarthur, and Piper. Recommending either Piper or Bell also does not mean that I think any possible disagreement we might have with them is necessarily small. I believe some tenants of Calvinism are just as unbiblical and as dangerous (if not more so- particularly the false idea that Christ did not die for everyone) as promoting universalism where everyone is saved from hell without any need of repentance and transformation. This does not mean that I would not ever say a Christian shouldn’t read John Macarthur or John Piper or not welcome them in our church or universities. My recommendation might depend on how discerning the individual is I am recommending something to, or what educational benefit might be gained from hearing views that are not our own; even about what some may consider vital things (like who Christ died for).

I appreciate it that you object to certain parts of Calvinism and that you believe that Jesus died for all men and women on the cross. This also affirms a Wesleyan/Arminian view of free will that I can also appreciate. However, the great Charles Spurgeon might have thought you were a heretic for that believing what you do; he thought it undermined the preaching of nothing but Christ crucified. Spurgeon once said, “And what is the heresy of Arminianism but the addition of something to the work of the Redeemer? Every heresy, if brought to the touchstone, will discover itself here. I have my own private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else.”

For some their specific view of the cross, like Spurgeon’s in this case, is THE one and only view of the cross; though he did leave a tiny room for it to be his “own private opinion”. Nevertheless, Calvinists and Arminians have accused one another of “preaching the doctrine of demons” for centuries. This is another reason I appreciate our Wesleyan heritage: because when others considered Calvinist and Arminian views to have so little in common that they stood opposed each other on opposite sides an un-crossable gulf, Wesley took the far more generous approach and considered these things to be no more than a “hair's breadth” apart. His relationship with the staunch Calvinist George Whitefield was a great example of how we can strongly disagree with one another about such seemingly large issues and still receive one another as brothers in the Lord. Their ongoing dialogue should inspire us and encourage us.

The fact that you and I have had back and forth adversarial “conversations” for a few years now and yet only now find out that we can actually agree concerning the basics of the atonement is troublesome. We seem to be missing each other, perhaps neither of us are listening as well as we should. I just think that our Nazarene tradition offers such a solid biblical foundation that we should be able to always remember it as our context when working through whatever disagreements we might have. I don’t think you should abandon your concerns or stop passionately sharing them with us, but I would love to combine those real concerns with other real concerns that perhaps we are being divided unnecessarily when you consider our shared biblical foundation as expressed in our Articles of Faith.

My hope Tim is that we could find a new way to interact, one that welcomes strong disagreement if we have it, but remembers that in the larger context we have so much in common. I say “so much” because of the cross and the faith we share in Jesus Christ who saved us. Your receiving me as a brother is because of the reconciling work of the cross, and my prayer is that we might together live into that reconciling work even more so to the glory of God. What a great testimony that would be!!

Pray about this Tim, and let’s talk more.

Your brother in Christ,

James

Feels like I brought a Conversation to a Fist Fight

We have had three recent posts surrounding the occasional reoccurring struggle to have authentic Christian conversations in the midst of a few who are seeking a noisy crusade to “purify” the church according to their own personal idea of heresy. They alone think they know what the bible really says as they take issue with countless Nazarene Pastors, Professors, and leaders who affirm the Articles of Faith of our tradition which reflects a shared understanding of biblical Christian Orthodoxy.

Now this is not an indictment on anyone with real concerns. It is however an appropriate criticism of those few who have put themselves out front of those concerns in a divisive way that lacks Christian love and integrity. It is primarily a handful of people who are attacking an entire denomination as they do their best to scare and misinform others.

Here are the latest posts:

New Statement by Board of General Superintendents
The BGS, through Naznet, has posted a new statement that may well be of interest in regards to the emergent church. This was received this from the GMC by request of Dr. Porter with the explicit statement: "Feel free to circulate these documents." I presume this was written in reply to questions and concerns around this topic. In a later email he wrote: "the BGS endorsed it as a good point of reference regarding this conversation". -Hans Deventer

Read it HERE

Article IV: an Olive Branch for Unity in the latest “Battle for the Bible”
This post invited the small group of individuals who are making the most noise in the name of concerned Nazarenes about their claim there is a tidal wave of heresy going on in the Nazarene Denomination to stop being divisive and unify under our shared Articles of Faith. Article IV concerning Scripture is of particular interest as it is misunderstood and misrepresented by those looking to move our tradition into extreme fundamentalism. This post takes a careful look at the Nazarene Article of Faith on the Holy Scripture and explores why it is biblical and how it is something we all as Nazarenes should be able to unify under.

Read the post and check out the comments following it as Tim Wirth- the founder of the “Concerned Nazarenes” websites rejects unity and rejects affirming the 16 Articles of Faith in the Church of the Nazarene as biblical.

Read it HERE

Concerned “Nazarenes”, Direct Answers, the Articles of Faith and Rob Bell’s Dust
This post examines a recent “Concerned ‘Nazarene’” post. Manny Silva of “Reformed Nazarene” and creator of the “Concerned Nazarene” facebook page wrote on his blog on March 7th a “Questionnaire For Church Leadership, Part 1”. In this post Manny wants answers for the reason that various Pastors and church institutions within the Church of the Nazarene would use authors such as Henri Nouwen, Richard Foster, and Rob Bell as any kind of recourse and why our colleges like Trevecca “some Nazarene churches” use “Prayer Labyrinths”.

In his post he goes through each one and explains what he thinks is wrong with them, giving examples like saying that Rob Bell says the bible teaches us to “believe in ourselves”-as if Bell was pushing some kind humanistic self help. What is most interesting though is how Manny ends his post as he asks leaders (Pastors, DS’s GS’s Professors ect.) to answer this question as if everyone has been dodging it. Manny concludes: “Is the silence saying something?”

Find out how the “concerned Nazarenes” are behind the “silence” they hear, and read a comment from a Nazarene Pastor that Manny would not allow in response on his blog because it actually answered his question about something Rob Bell taught. This comment not only pointed out how Manny was twisting Bell’s words, but how if we listen to what Bell actually said, this particular teaching of Bell’s actually speaks to something we believe as a Wesleyan-Holiness tradition is biblical.

Read more HERE

New Statement by Board of General Superintendents

The BGS, through Naznet, has posted a new statement that may well be of interest. Here is the text:

The emergent church - From the General Superintendents

We appreciate your concerns regarding the conversations surrounding “the emergent church.” The issues related to this topic are many. Some are helpful and positive; others are problematic and deeply troubling.

“The emergent church” is really somewhat of a misnomer. While there are many attributions which imply that there is a single focus or movement called “the emergent church,” in reality, the conversations range all over the map. Some people believe that there is a monolithic kind of conspiratorial entity that is seeking to undermine the church with heresy and immoral license.

On the other end of the spectrum, there are people who view the whole concept of an emerging church as a positive and hopeful expression of the church seeking to genuinely come to terms with ministry in a complex and rapidly-changing culture, while seeking to make Biblical truth relevant. These people depend heavily on the authority of the Word of God and the power of the Holy Spirit to radically change lives, communities, and nations. They are often radically engaged with the brokenness in society through active, compassionate ministries that work hard to bring renewal and conversion.

Nazarene Theological Seminary (NTS) and some of our universities are engaged in the conversation in order to help correct some of the aberrations that are associated with some of the “emergent” churches.

There are widely-read authors who readily identify themselves as “emergent church leaders.” While some of them are orthodox in their theology and views of Scripture, others embrace positions which we would view as far away from what is orthodox and acceptable. Yet even those authors and pastors who are not orthodox in their views of Scripture and its authority have an awareness of the need to make the church more engaged in society so as to bring about a radical change and improvement.

We do not endorse those “emergent churches” or leaders who are not orthodox in their theology. The involvement of many of our young pastors and students in the conversation is an attempt to embrace the positive dimensions while clearly articulating an orthodox interpretation of Scripture and theology.

By most definitions of what is genuinely meant by “emergent,” John Wesley more than fits the description. He was radically engaged in the social needs around him while clearly calling men and women to a radical commitment to Christ and to the fullness of the Spirit in cleansing and heart purity. That is the objective toward which Nazarenes, engaged in the conversations regarding the emergent church, are committed. It is a vital conversation, but one that also carries with it the risk of being misunderstood or being classified with positions which are not healthy or appropriate.

We hope these thoughts are helpful to you. The issues are complex, and the rhetoric is sometimes shrill and angry. We are hopeful that we can be patient with what is a phase in a conversation that is already beginning to wind down in some areas even while it is just now being engaged in by others. Hopefully, we can move beyond the mischaracterizations and embrace what is legitimate while we readily and without hesitation reject the aberrations.

We pray for you as you work with your people through this issue. We are not at all embracing anything heretical, but we want to engage in conversations with our young Nazarenes who want a vibrant church that is committed to our theology and actively engaged in ministry to the lost and broken people around us.

Jesse C. Middendorf
General Superintendent
Church of the Nazarene

------------------------------------

Received this from the GMC by request of Dr. Porter with the explicit statement: "Feel free to circulate these documents." I presume this was written in reply to questions and concerns around this topic.

In a later email he wrote: "the BGS endorsed it as a good point of reference regarding this conversation".

Last edited by Hans Deventer; 9th March 2010 at 07:50 AM (07:50).

Concerned “Nazarenes”, Direct Answers, the Articles of Faith and Rob Bell’s Dust

Manny Silva of “Reformed Nazarene” and creator of the Concerned Nazarene facebook page wrote on his blog on March 7th a “Questionnaire For Church Leadership, Part 1”. In this post Manny wants answers for the reason that various Pastors and church institutions within the Church of the Nazarene would use authors such as Henri Nouwen, Richard Foster, and Rob Bell as any kind of recourse and why our colleges like Trevecca “some Nazarene churches” use “Prayer Labyrinths”.

In his article He goes through each one and explains what he thinks is wrong with them, giving examples like saying that Rob Bell says the Bible teaches us to “believe in ourselves”-as if Bell was pushing some kind humanistic self help. What is most interesting though is how Manny ends his post as he asks leaders (Pastors, DS’s GS’s Professors ect.) to answer this question as if everyone has been dodging it. Manny concludes:

“Is the silence saying something?”

Tim Wirth posts a comment:

“Well Manny you will either get silence or non answers. I’ve been asked a lot lately about the Nazarene manual. Do you think false teachers like Brian Mclaren and Rob Bell agree with the Nazarene Manual? I can assure you their teachings are in conflict with the teachings of both the Bible and the Nazarene Manual.”

What Tim Wirth is referring to is of course my question posed to him this weekend in the comment section of my last post.

So I replied in the comment section of Manny's blog. At first Manny did not approve my comment because he said, “James, I would prefer if you kept your answers on the subject of the questions I asked- can you zero in on the merits of the questions; even if just one or two?”

Seeing that my comment was not allowed and what Manny said, I wrote in the comment section, “Manny you banned my comment when it answers something Tim brought up (a comment you allowed).” This comment where I objected to not letting my previous comment through was never allowed but Manny changed his mind and allowed my original comment to post.

What’s funny is that Manny tries to make it seem like he approved the comment all along. Manny writes, “Okay, James, Obviously, I have approved the comment. But I think you are straying from the specific questions here- but I’ll give Tim the opportunity to respond to this one- I’ll try to weigh in on it later as well during lunch.”

So my comment to Tim on Reformed Nazarene:

“Tim, you are still being silent and giving me non answers about the question on my blog. Brian Mclaren and Rob Bell are not Nazarenes. If you want to argue that they are not Christians that’s fine, but some might disagree. You might also argue that a Catholic might not be a real Christian, and others might disagree. Or you might argue that we should not read books that come from any of those people or invite them to speak and dialogue with them. But others may disagree, so this is a good discussion.

I think others would argue that there is an educational element to dialoguing with those from other traditions. Even if we disagree with them about major things, but that does not mean that we should categorically dismiss them, especially in areas where they might agree with us. But, I think your argument that we should not do these things is a fair one. If that is all you were saying I would have no problem with it.

The problem is that you are calling Pastors, Professors and leaders in our denomination “heretics” for following “a different Jesus not from the Bible” when they affirm our Articles of Faith which describes what we believe is a biblical understanding of Jesus.

You told me on my blog that the Nazarene Manuel “does affirm certain parts of scripture”, as if it doesn’t affirm other parts. But this is not true; it is not what our manual says. How can you speak for what we believe as Nazarenes if you don’t understand what it says?

Our manual says that we believe in “plenary inspiration” which we affirm that ALL of scripture is inspired by God which perfectly reveals God’s will concerning everything necessary for salvation. My blog, which I don’t think you actually took the time to read, explains this further. And it also explains how this biblical view is the point of scripture and how you and I should be able to be united in this, and not divided, as Christians and Nazarenes.

So the question I asked is this: Do you think the Church of the Nazarene as a whole affirms Jesus of the Bible? This question is related to our Articles of Faith, on whether you feel the doctrine we convey is biblical and presents the biblical Jesus?

You say I don’t follow the biblical Jesus, yet my affirmation of our Articles of Faith, which includes our statement on Scripture, reflects what we believe as the Church of the Nazarene is the Biblical Jesus. If you agree with these Nazarene Articles as biblical you CAN NOT SAY to me that I believe in a “different Jesus then the one from the Bible”.

So Tim (and Manny) it is up to you- You must decide for yourself if YOU are in or out. Stop right now calling Pastors, College Professors, and other leaders in our denomination unorthodox heretics when they affirm biblical orthodoxy as we understand them in our tradition. As a Nazarene you can not call people heretics when they affirm our shared Articles of Faith. If you think those you accuse are heretics, then you think our understanding of Christian orthodoxy which is described in our Articles of Faith is also unbiblical.

So please join us in affirming our Articles of Faith as they affirm the Biblical Jesus and stop trying to divide us from within.

PS- Manny- if you don’t allow comments from recognized church leaders, how can you say we are silent?”

Neither Tim nor Manny responded to this question in the comments. Manny has not responded anywhere and Tim gave (to borrow a term from him) a “non answer” in the comments of my last post here. You can check them out yourself.

So the comments go on with various supporters of Manny chiming in and no one daring to answer those questions, no one daring to zero in on the merits of the questions; even if just one or two?” Manny then later comments”:

“…. Is there no one out there who can answer my questions directly? There is too much deviation from them, and it seems that my guess is coming true: you cannot in any way justify with scripture, the support of any of these four situations. That is why I am not allowing all comments from you; this post was entered here for a reason, and if you can’t answer the questions specifically, then I’m not going to allow you to talk endlessly.”

“Is the silence saying something?”

What Manny presents is his list of “unanswerable” questions in an attempt to show that "no one can justify such obvious heresy with scripture or the teaching of the church of the Nazarene." His mentor Tim Wirth cheers him on saying he won’t get any answers because there are none. There are no Nazarene leaders from just the lowly Pastor all the way up to our General Superintendents who will answer what can not be answered-not anyone and not concerning any of it.

And so on his blog there is silence with no answers from ANY of these Nazarene Leaders.

“Is the silence saying something?”

Now this would be an interesting situation being presented- if it weren’t for the fact that the supposed "silence" in these matters is complete fabrication by them.

I know of many Nazarene Pastors and leaders who have answered these questions very directly. Dan Boone answered them for Manny on Manny's own blog. And I know of one Pastor who answered Manny's question on his own blog; though on this blog which Manny controls there is still only "silence".

You see, I posted a comment early this morning to answer one of Manny's unanswerable question. After all, he asked me "can you zero in on the merits of the questions; even if just one or two?” In the post itself he says he"invite(s) them all (all Nazarene Pastors) to share their knowledge of the scriptures in assisting us to get some solid, biblically sound answers to the questions below." Yet my comment (as a Pastor in the Church of the Nazarene) does not show up, because he wants people to think that no one can answer his question. and there is only "silence"

I posted my comment at 5:38am this morning (the comments are time stamped on the blog). And of course I waited to give Manny time to read the comments and approve them. I know he has a life and other things to do. I would have given him all day or as long as it took. But at 6:49am Manny approved another comment, one that agreed with him. He had read the comments and decided to leave mine in “awaiting moderation” limbo so he can say still say that his questions to every and any Nazarene leader are met only with" silence."

Now Manny may change his mind after I call him out on this and allow the comment or he may not. But here is what I said that Manny did not want you to see:

Manny, I think it is odd that you ask for “direct answers” to your questions. I don’t get much from you guys. Tim’s answer to my question when I asked him if the Nazarene Articles of Faith affirmed biblical Christianity was that “the manual is “subject to interpretation by the individual and therefore could be distorted.” If this isn’t sidestepping something out of fear of being nailed down I don’t know what is.

So its weird to me that I have to answer questions about statements others like Nouwen, Foster, and Bell, who aren’t even Nazarene are saying if what people write are so subject to interpretation that we have no ability to say if they are within biblical teaching or not.

Not only that, the Nazarene Articles of Faith are short direct statements with many scripture verses given, and as much language from those scriptures being used as possible. If the Concerned Nazarenes can’t say, even with a reasonable amount of interpretation, that these are biblical or not how can you demand that people answer for books and videos, which are not written so directly as Articles of Faith, are biblical or not?

“Manny, this is an honest and sincere question. It is very relevant to the conversation so please allow it to be posted.

Now in faith that you will post it, I am going to try and answer one of your questions as directly as I can. I am not saying you will agree with me, but I will honestly give it a shot.

Out of all the people and things you have mentioned in your article the only one I am most read up on to any decent degree is Rob Bell. I am not familiar with all his work, but a fair amount. I have only seen a few Nooma videos but I have seen the one you mention in your post about Peter walking on water.

From watching it I think that you have misunderstood and mischaracterize what Bell has said. When you say that ” he claims that Peter did not lose faith in Jesus, but lost faith in himself” you paint this as Bell giving a humanistic message that we need to “believe in ourselves”. This is not what Bell was saying.

The title was “Dust”, the idea being that we follow our “Rabbi” (who for us is the MASTER TEACHER Jesus) so closely from behind that we are covered in the dust which is drummed up from the ground as he walks.

Bell then gives us some historical background on how Rabbis choose their students, and how they only choose those whom they believe can follow them and are able to carry out their teaching. He tells us that if Peter and the rest are fishermen it means that they have been past over by every other teacher as being a possible worthy disciple (not worthy as deserving but in having the potential to follow in the teachers steps). So, when a Rabbi comes along and says follow me, it is a chance of a lifetime and so they do.

The context of Bell’s message was following our Rabbi which matches the context of the scripture he was speaking of as Peter was following his Teacher out on the water. The question is can Peter do what Jesus does? Can he do it the face of the waves and real trial? Can we?

I don’t think what Bell says in this context takes away from the primary need for us to have faith in our Teacher Jesus. After all the Rabbi in the story is still the Rabbi, and in this case the Master Rabbi and God himself in the flesh.

In this context when Bell says that Peter lost faith in himself he was saying that Peter lost faith in what his Teacher said he would be able to do (the things the Rabbi can do) by following him.

Now this idea is biblical as Jesus believes that with his help his disciples can actually walk in his teachings. John 14:12 “I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.”

This biblical idea also affirms something we believe is consistent with our Wesleyan tradition. The idea that we can actually do what Jesus does to any degree in this lifetime is a far more optimistic one then what our Calvinist brothers would say in their pessimistic view that we are doomed to be victims of our sinful nature to the day we die.

The question being asked between our two camps is what are we able to do as we follow Jesus? One camp says that God thinks we are hopelessly lost in our sinful ways until after we die. Our camp says that God thinks that through him we can do as he does and even greater things as we continue to follow him through the Holy Spirit.

We as Nazarenes believe that God thinks and believes that we are able to follow him as we follow Jesus. We believe that when Jesus says be “perfect” that we actually can in a very real way – through him. Calvinist do not believe that about THEMSELVES because they do not believe God believes it about them even though they put their faith in Jesus.

The question Bell is asking is this- does the Rabbi believe we can actually follow him? Our Wesleyan and holiness tradition answers a bold - yes we can!

Now Rob Bell is not a Nazarene and I am not even sure what tradition he is influenced the most by. My affirmation of these particular ideas of his as both biblical and within our understanding of biblical teaching from a Wesleyan perspective is not a blanket endorsement of all his teaching.

It is no more a blanket endorsement of his teaching then a Nazarene quoting a Calvinist teacher like John Piper. We as Wesleyans would disagree with many of his points as being biblical as we understand it, but that does not mean he can’t get anything right and isn’t worthy of being listened to at all as we test everything. 1 John 4:1

Manny I took my time and tried to answer your question as thoughtfully as I could. I hope you will allow this comment to be posted.

Thank you
James”

I gave one example concerning his accusation where he misrepresents what Rob Bell taught and showed what he actually said and how that particular teaching actually affirms something we believe as Nazarenes. He chose not to hear it (or let anyone else here it) he chose the "silence". Many other Nazarene Pastors, and Leaders have answered these other questions too, but those that lead the Concerned Nazarens chose not to hear those either.

Tim Wirth, and Manny Silva run the websites called “Concerned Nazarenes” and “Reformed Nazarenes”. On these sights they say they demand an explanation. But they don’t really want to hear one, they are not interested in being teachable, they only want to call leaders in our tradition heretics.

In the meantime while they claim to be “Nazarenes” refuse to give the same kind of straight answers they say they demand of others. They refuse to affirm the Nazarene Articles of Faith as reflecting Biblical Christianity.

They do this because they know that if they affirm our Articles as biblical then they can not call those leaders they attack in our denomination heretics when they also affirm our Articles of Faith as biblical. If they do then they are condemning what our denomination teaches as heresy and can no longer pretend to embrace our Nazarene tradition as part of the Christian story.

So Manny and Tim demand answers, even direct ones- yet when they get them they choose the silence.

We ask them for answers, even direct ones- and they choose to be silent.

Manny asks,

“Is the silence saying something?”

"He who has ears, let him hear."

.

Article IV: an Olive Branch for Unity in the latest “Battle for the Bible”

There is a small group of individuals who are making a lot of noise lately concerning what they fear is a movement away from an authoritative view of scripture in our Nazarene tradition. In calling them “small” I am not saying that some broader concern doesn’t exist; there is some concern that extends beyond these few but mostly because of how and what they have communicated. I call them small because there are only a small handful of voices that our making the most resounding noise; the kind of noise that we are reminded to avoid in 1 Corinthians 13:1. Tim Wirth, Manny Silva and Joe Staniforth are the three loudest protesters that operate with the support of various so called “discernment ministries” from outside the Nazarene denomination as they make it their mission to attack everything these “discernment ministries” consider “heresy”.

What these individuals claim is that the church of the Nazarene has somehow moved away from a high view of scripture that embraces it as authoritative in our lives. Nothing is further from the truth, even among “emerging” Nazarenes. Let’s look at the fourth Article of faith in our manual.

IV. The Holy Scriptures

We believe in the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, by which we understand the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments, given by divine inspiration, inerrantly revealing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation, so that whatever is not contained therein is not to be enjoined as an article of faith.
(Luke 24:44-47; John 10:35; 1 Corinthians 15:3-4; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; 1 Peter 1:10-12; 2 Peter 1:20-21)

The phrase “inerrantly revealing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation” has been a source of contention by a few noisy individuals as they misunderstand what it is saying. They seemed to have interpreted this as people saying that parts of the bible are inspired and parts are not. Our Article of faith does NOT say that, and I don’t know any Nazarene clergy who would say that either. Before this phrase our Article says, “We believe in the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures”. Plenary means “full” or “complete”. In other words we believe that every bit of all “66 books of the Old and New Testaments” are all inspired by God. So let’s put the false idea away that any Nazarenes is promoting that parts of the Bible are inspired and other parts are not by referring to this phrase in our manual. This simply isn’t true, and isn’t what anyone is saying.

Now that we have clarified what this phrase doesn’t say, let’s look at what it does say. This phrase isn’t dealing with what scripture IS; the previous statement about believing in “plenary inspiration” speaks to what we believe the bible IS. So the phrase in question doesn’t say what scripture IS, it says what scripture DOES. The word “inerrantly” here is complimenting the verb “revealing” telling us that all scripture is perfectly sufficient as it makes known God’s will for us regarding everything we need to be saved. As Nazarenes we affirm that scripture is “perfect” in a truly Wesleyan understanding of God’s “perfecting” work as Creator in his creation (and new creation). Scripture is perfect in regards to what it is for and what it does. So what do we believe that scripture perfectly does? To paraphrase our Article of faith, Scripture, being completely and fully inspired by God, perfectly reveals all things concerning God’s will for us to be reconciled to his Kingdom through Jesus Christ. That’s the point isn’t it? Scripture is more than sufficient to point us to the Way concerning God’s desire for us to be reconciled together and to live into his saving work through Jesus Christ.

Despite the criticism from a few, who are able to make their small voice louder because of technology and the internet, our view of scripture as stated in our Nazarenes manual beautifully articulates not only what scripture is, but what it does as it perfectly reveals everything “necessary to our salvation”. I would hope that we all could agree that this is the essential point concerning scripture that we can be unified in. What better thing can we be unified in than in those things that move us toward God’s redemptive plan for the world? Unfortunately, there are a few to whom redemption and unity in Christ is not the point.

Regrettably some think the point of scripture is about having the “right” answers about various topics and to show how others are wrong about those topics. They use their “understanding” of scripture to draw lines between people based on who they think is right about a particular topic and who is wrong. This is not what scripture is for. Of course scripture is useful for “teaching”, “rebuking”, and “correcting”, but not for the purpose of having all the “right answers”, but for “training in righteousness”.

2 Timothy 3:15-17: “…from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

Paul tells Timothy that his knowledge of the scriptures made him “wise for SALVATION through faith in Christ Jesus” and that all scripture is useful in directing us in “righteousness” and “good works”. The point of scripture has to do with helping us live into God’s holiness and justice which God has worked, and is working, in us by our salvation through Jesus Christ.

Paul also warns Titus to be mindful about the point of it all concerning our salvation in Jesus Christ, so that in this we would devote ourselves to “doing what is good”.

Titus 3:4-8: “But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. This is a trustworthy saying. And I want you to stress these things, so that those who have trusted in God may be careful to devote themselves to doing what is good. These things are excellent and profitable for everyone.”

Scripture teaches that this salvation work God does for us, he also does in us, and not just for our reconciliation, but for the reconciliation of the whole world. Paul said in 2 Corinthians 5:19 that God has “committed to us the WORD of reconciliation”. So according to the scripture our salvation is not just profitable for us, but as we respond and are transformed by it to do good works, these things are “excellent and profitable for everyone.” This is what Nazarenes are unified in, the biblical message of holiness; that God’s saving works in us also sanctifies us, and then works through us for the benefit of everyone.

But Paul knew as he emphasized the point of salvation to Titus that some would try to make the point of scripture and the law about other things. He warns Titus in the very next verses...

Titus 3:9-10, “But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.”

All this talk about “heresy” by some is ironic when the biggest “heresy” Paul often fought against was that which threatened to divide the body of Christ over foolish things that missed the point. In fact the King James Bible translates “divisive person” in Titus 3:10 as “heretic”. We are told to warn such people, and warn them again, and if after all that trying they still refuse to find unity with us and they still seek to be divisive then to leave them to their own divisiveness and have nothing to do with them. In verse 11 Paul calls this person, among other things, “self-condemned” because they are separated by their own choice to be divided from the reconciling work within the body of Christ.

Unfortunately, it sometimes comes to “have nothing to do with them” as the only decision we can make for the sake of unity and peace. Jesus teaches in Matthew 10, Mark 6 and Luke 9 concerning those who will not receive us and our message of salvation and reconciliation to keep moving and in doing so “shake off the dust from our feet”. If they will not receive us and reconciled with us what else can we do? If someone refuses the kind of reconciliation God calls his people to have with him and others then going in peace may be the most “peace” we can have, and going our separate ways may be the most we can be “unified” about. But even this is done in hopes of reconciliation.

To be divided and going our separate ways is not God’s desire and will for people as they interact with each other. This division is not what God wants in our relationships even when we are told it may be best to move on without someone as a last resort. It is a lot like a divorce in a marriage. God may have allowed divorce in the law as a last resort because of the hardness of hearts of those involved (Mark 10:5), but this was not God’s plan that he created us for in the beginning. Jesus came to restore us to a new beginning, one where we are saved, restored and reconciled with God and others. To live divided from others when we can help it works counter to God’s saving work in the world.

In Romans 12:18 Paul tells us, “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone”. This is part of being “a living sacrifice” in view of God’s mercy that Paul mentions in the beginning of the chapter. How far should we go to live at peace with others? What does God consider “possible” as far as it depends on us? Paul tells us in the next verse, "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink” Echoing Jesus; Sermon of the Mount where he instructs us to seek the kingdom of God by “turning the other cheek” and “going the extra mile” Paul says, “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” That is how far we are to go to live in the kind of redemptive peace in the Kingdom of God in hopes of finding solidarity with even those who may be against us.

You see scripture teaches that Jesus lived this teaching out himself as it reflects the very nature of God. He lived out what he calls us to do when we are told, “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone”. This kind of peace isn’t passive or the kind that just avoids conflict, but one that confronts conflict and divisiveness in a peaceful way for the purpose of redemption, reconciliation, and salvation. The cross was about “over coming evil with good” for the sake of our redemption. As followers of Jesus we are called to pick up that cross and follow Jesus and walk as he did, for he is the Way the Truth and the Life- there is no other.

So the point of scripture is to point us to the redemption and reconciliation that we can have with God through Jesus Christ. Scripture is not the end of the line of discovering “truth”, but the means that perfectly and sufficiently points to Truth. Jesus told some of those who thought very highly of scripture, yet somehow also missed the point, “You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.” (John 5:39-40) “Life” as Jesus defines it by his teachings and actions is one of love, sacrifice, redemption, and reconciliation. God wants to make us ONE in Him and he was willing to suffer and even sacrifice his very life to achieve solidarity with even those who were violently against him. (Romans 5:6-8)

There is a lot of divisive talk from some in the name of protecting the “truth”, but Jesus is the Truth personified, the Word made flesh for the sake of seeking solidarity with mankind, not dividing it. The sinful world around us is about divisions, but Jesus said that in him we are not of this world. The kind of truth scripture points us to is the kind that sanctifies us and makes us holy participants with God’s reconciling work. The Truth is all about salvation and being made one with God and each other.

John 17:17-23: “Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified. "My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”

This also reminds me of what Jesus said to his disciples a few chapters earlier, “By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." (John 13:35)

You are missing the point of biblical truth if in claiming to protect the “truth” you live divisively against the body. This is where we come back to those few who in the name of being “concerned” are being divisive. Of course they will argue that they are not divisive, but their actions say differently. They have created their own space where other Nazarenes or any Christians who do not agree with them are not welcome. They do this in the name of “encouraging” their own with whom they agree with. But the fact that they do not consider other Nazarenes “their own” is evidence of how they are dividing and drawing lines across our denomination concerning who should be “in” and who should be “out”. They are not interested in being reconciled with others as instructed by scripture, but rather they use scripture for something it is not meant for; to divide the church.

Yes the gospel can be a dividing sword, but as such it separates us from the world as far as its corrupt systems that divide according to their own desires and refuses reconciliation to God's Kingdom. This "sword" cuts through all other allegiances to various groups, including families, which are sometimes used to draw ungodly lines of who is "in" and who is "out"; this is counter to the call for us ALL to be reconciled together to God's Kingdom and the Way of the cross. So when we refuse to be reconciled to God's kingdom in favor of a way of the world that unifies some against others, we don’t stand with the word, but against it. (Matthew 10:34-38)

Recently, a Nazarene Pastor I know was kicked out of the “Concerned Nazarene" facebook group. This is a common practice. Tim Wirth said, this person was not “banned so much because of his comments but because we know he does not support our group.” Tim said he was dividing this person out, as he has done with many others (I am also banned), because “he does not support OUR group.” Which group? Nazarenes as a whole? No, a separate and exclusive group they call “Concerned Nazarenes”. They are not interested in dialogue or conversation with any Nazarene outside the group they created for themselves. You can’t chat with them on facebook, they control and deny comments on their blogs, and conversations by email are extremely limited as they often chose not to engage in what they call “debate”. For them there is no “debate” with the lines they have drawn concerning those they have decided are out.

So they go on, publicly and viciously attacking leaders and professors and institutions in our denomination attempting to draw new dividing lines that claim these leaders are excluded from being “real Christians” when our tradition makes no such division. They allow for no discussion or debate to work these differences out. They plainly say to Nazarenes they oppose and disagrees with that they are "heretics" and should be stopped. This is counter to the confession of our Nazarene community concerning many of these individuals they attack, for they target those who have been affirmed by our community as ordained Elders and encouraged to lead in a way that offers far more accountability than what is seen in the accusations of these divisive few.

If someone they attack wishes to tell their side of the story, or if some other Nazarene wishes to defend those they accuse, they are not interested in hearing it and they tell them to go some place else, write about it on their own blog. So, I write this on our blog, in hopes that the Concerned Nazarenes will read it here because they have provided me no place else to say what I have to say to them…

Let us unite under our shared Article of faith concerning scripture.

Dear Concerned Nazarenes,

After you banned yet another Nazarene from participating on your facebook page, a friend said in frustration on NazNet concerning you, “I feel justified in asking them to leave our group, that is, The Church of the Nazarene. They do not agree with the stated doctrine of the church concerning scripture. They should not be allowed membership. There are plenty of other churches with which they would agree. They need to leave.”

This was my reply:

Yea, I have seen Tim say on their facebook group and their blogs that there are other places to go if people want to express a different opinion as a way to justify kicking people out. So I can see why you would feel that way about them- I have often felt that way too.

On the other hand, their view of scripture does not actually run counter to ours as much as it runs beyond it. They do believe that scripture comes from plenary inspiration (meaning all of it is inspired) and it inerrantly reveals all things necessarily for salvation. They just believe that it also inerrantly reveals all things concerning history, science, and everything and anything else.

I think there is room under our tent for people who want to take it this far- the problem is that they need to respect the broader common shared confession of everyone else (which is our salvation- the point of scripture anyway).

There is no reason that we can not find unity under our Article of Faith concerning scripture and in the meantime receive and embrace our differing opinions in Christian love and Charity.

Our statement absolutely affirms scripture's complete inspiration and sufficiency for salvation; which includes reconciliation to God and each other. It is time to find ways to live in that reconciliation if we really believe scripture is sufficient in pointing us to the Way.

If we can't live into the reality of this shared message of God's salvation then I am not sure what the point is in arguing about anything else.

I don’t know how many times you have been asked to give up this divisiveness, but I ask you again in the spirit of Luke 13:8 hoping that given time we together can bear the fruit of reconciliation.

As I mentioned on NazNet and as I described it here, I am sure you can agree with our Article of Faith concerning the Holy Scriptures. Nothing in our big tent as Nazarenes prevents you from believing that scripture is “more” than what is stated. Though I would argue what more is there than the love and salvation of our God?

Philippians 3:8-11, “What is more, I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the LAW, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith. I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.”

Come inside the tent with us, there is room. Also, please do not try to cut our tent in half. If you want to make a case against “evolution”, or “prayer labyrinths”, “open theism” or whatever, than do it- but do it as brothers and sisters who share in the free gift of God’s saving work to which we all believe scripture perfectly testifies of.

Many of the things you disagree about, you can find others in our Nazarene tradition who may also disagree. So we are not asking you to give up your concerns about any of these things, just don’t participate in heresy (division) in the name of being against “heresy”. Let all who are concerned about the division these things are causing among us be “Concerned Nazarenes” together. Loose the chains and mechanisms that you are promoting and have already designed to keep certain Nazarenes separated from you and let’s work together as we follow THE Nazarene. Stop promoting a spirit within the Nazarene tradition of “us” verses “them”- let us be US together as we all embrace the reconciling work of God as perfectly revealed through scripture.