“Me” criticizes David Mackin for publicly disagreeing with “pastors with cancer.”
Posted on May 27th, 2008 by David Mackin into the Uncategorized, The City Church, David Mackin Writes:, Prosperity Doctrine categoryMe wrote: "David, honestly, your statement about Mal. 3:8-12, whether or not it was written to believers implies that God somehow changed His idea of tithing and blessing between now and then. Simply untrue."
Me, As a counselor I thought that you would know that when a patient simply makes an assertion, it does not make it true. Your assertion "Simply untrue" is just such a statement. If you would take the time to research the tithe on this blog, you will find many reasons given against the Mandatory Tithe being required to receive God's blessings. In my view, we need you to leave assertionism behind and come forward with well-interpreted Scripture.
Me wrote:"There's also the fact that Pastor Frank Damazio has completed his PhD work at ORU, which holds the highest accreditation available to a school of theology in the states…"
Me, It is true that FD just received a degree from ORU. ORU's Office of Verifications just informed me that he earned a 3.95 GPA while doing this, too. Good job! At the same time, he did not earn a Ph.D. degree as you claimed; he earned a Doctor of Ministry degree, a degree which is far less academic and much more practical than the typical Ph.D. degree, as joebib has previously pointed out on this blog.
Me wrote: "As far as I know, you've no such credentials, and therefore wouldn't really be a credible source for such criticisms as you so flippantly distribute on this site."
Me, I do not make my posts "flippantly" on this blog. It is true, however, that I do not hold a degree beyond a Bachelors of Religion. At the same time, I do not base anyone's final credibility on the letters after their name. I base my assessment on what they say and the way that they document what they say. I have a friend, as just one example, who does not have a doctorate but is published in learned journals and who has read every article in The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible 4 vol. set, along with 1-2 solid commentaries on every book of the Bible, and much more. On the flip side, there are many atheists with advanced degrees who reject both God and Jesus Christ…
I would prefer you to dialogue with me about my content, sources and hermeneutics rather than dismissing so easily what I say because I don't have an advanced degree.
Me wrote: "After all, he's [David] spent so many hours of his life and time on this earth bashing…churches and pastors with cancer [Pastor Wendell Smith]."
Me, If I understand you correctly, you are saying that because Wendell Smith has cancer, than I should not criticize his teachings. Is this right? As a counselor, if you'll think about it, I think that you will recognize what you just said to me as a good example of pure guilt manipulation: don't criticize Wendell Smith because he has cancer. Do you actually encourage your patients to use guilt to manipulate others?
Where does the Bible say that because someone is sick that others should not disagree with their teachings? I don't know of any verse supporting that idea.
I have prayed, along with many others, that God would heal Wendell, but just because he may continue being sick, does not mean that God is giving him, or any other person with an unfortunate sickness, a license to teach whatever they want and to use the Bible or the gospel of Jesus Christ in whatever way they choose.
RSS feed for posts
May 27th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Great post as always David.
I think as christians it is our responsibility to question and if we see wrong being done we should speak out and be able to criticize the leaders of churches openly!
I think we should be able to freely question everything, and everyone always, and nothing should be “off limits” to questions. We should be able to question our leaders, the bible, the church, life, death etc without being chastised for it.
I would never accept “because that’s just the way it is” for an answer. (I don’t at work and I don’t when it comes to church) I don’t believe that just because someone has “the right credentials”, that they always have the right answer. You can respect them, but it is ok to question.
Questioning does not mean you are any less of a christian than the person who sits quietly in the pew and accepts all and everything that is said. Last time I looked, questioning or criticizing isn’t a sin.
The point and purpose of questioning is to grow in the Grace and Knowledge of Jesus Christ and I will continue to seek The Truth to the end.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I read the following a while back on a blog and kept it because it is how I felt about BT/CBC at a time in my life:
The church crushes my heart, extinguishes my passion … it wants my money to build bigger barns yet it denies me full access and disrespects my humanity, it prefers that I leave my brain at the door and simply accept its behavior and oftentimes confused teachings, it glorifies its pastors and leaders allowing far too much lack of accountability, it feeds my insecurities to hold me hostage to volunteerism, it always cries “more, more, more” and is never satisfied …
Who i don’t see in most churches is … Jesus …
you know, the guy we’ve read about in the gospels who had dirty feet from walking the hills of galilee or the dusty streets of jerusalem, the guy who calmed the storm and walked on water, who healed the sick, gave sight to the blind, forgave the sins of a woman caught in sin, ate with sinners because they knew they needed him, the guy who went out of his way for me.
It’s that guy, that God in human flesh, that i can’t seem to find in our churches today … nevertheless, most members and leadership sit in the pews patting themselves on the backs over the little kingdoms they’ve built, leadership fighting to maintain control, power brokers deciding who is worthy enough, pure enough, spiritual enough, educated enough to be “on staff” or “in (voluntary) ministry” … where is Jesus?
Oh darn they asked him to leave because he wasn’t dressed right or smelled kind of terrible or didn’t have the right version of the bible … the girls he showed up looked kind of “loose” and “did you see that one woman hanging all over him, she was worshipping him, how embarrassing!”
” you mean that was Jesus … well, if i’d have known i would have given him my seat or maybe we could’ve had him deliver the message.”
If i could only find Jesus again in the church … then maybe i’d return to it.
But until then, I’ll walk the streets asking if someone has seen Him, I’ll use my gifts to communicate about the Jesus I know who is alive on the pages of any bible they can pick up in any bookstore or maybe even steal from a church pew, after all nobody was using it and I’m sure they won’t miss it.
And the next one who criticizes or arrogantly thinks/believes/implies that they are better because they are using their gifts “within the church for the glory of God” … just maybe i’ll ask them if they’ve met this friend of mine
May 27th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Great David, here we go again….
May 27th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Where can I find the review of Prosperity with a purpose on this site?
May 27th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
David,
You have now been verbally chastised for missing the non verbal message of every mega church sanctuary: 1. Sit down! (all the pews/seats) 2. Shut up! (there is only one microphone in here!) 3. Listen! (the speaker is on the elevated platform…you are at a lower level!) 4. Obey! (God’s annointed has spoken from the pulpit/Mt Sinai)
Of course, perhaps you missed all that by going to a house church.
May 28th, 2008 at 4:47 am
I can’t stand when people talk about credentials as if they mean something eternally. It is the most annoying thing in the world. the bible was written by a bunch of flippin bums. a bunch of dudes who didn’t know how to do anything but tie fishing knots. I wonder if their credentials were considered during the whole canonization process?
May 28th, 2008 at 9:51 am
kmarie, thanks for the compliment and for sharing your thoughts about the necessity of questioning for growth; also kudos for, "The church crushes my heart…" I filed it away, too. It is well worth remembering.
May 28th, 2008 at 10:09 am
Fred Flintstone: You should be able to find my review of Wendell Smith’s book, Prosperity with a Purpose by using the search field on this page and entering: Warning: Wendell Smith’s book! If you have trouble finding it, just let me know. I’ll be interested in your thoughts on my review.
May 28th, 2008 at 10:33 am
tithing and stewardship wrote: "…the bible was written by a bunch of flippin bums. a bunch of dudes who didn’t know how to do anything but tie fishing knots."
tithing and stewardship, If I'm not mistaken, I understand that you probably have in mind the verse in Acts 4:13, that says, "Now as they observed the confidence of Peter and John and understood that they were uneducated and untrained men, they were amazed, and began to recognize them as having been with Jesus." At the same time, I think that it's important to remember that Paul wrote most of the NT and he was educated as a Pharisee under Gamaliel. Luke, who wrote Luke/Acts, was a medical doctor which also required education. It can also be demonstrated throughout church history that God uses both the educated (Martin Luther, John Wesley, etc.) as well as the less or non-educated (Billy Sunday, Dwight Moody, Smith Wigglesworth, etc.) to do his work.
May 29th, 2008 at 8:30 am
I second that.
Seriously? What the fu@&?
As David pointed out, Paul was of the intellectual elite of his day. Furthermore, those “untrained” men were not stupid, nor did they look for reasons to STAY uneducated. The text simply tells us that they were “laymen.” Since Peter quotes from the book of Joel during his first Acts sermon, it seems apparent that he spent a lot of time studying and learning how to read Hebrew, otherwise he would not have been able to draw that text out.
Further, it is the 21st century, institutions of higher education are ubiquitous. Pastors have no excuse but to at least achieve an M.Div.
Good to hear the clarification about Franks “doctorate.” A D.Min is more like a project than a thesis, so it is definitely nowhere near the achievement of a Ph.D, which is much longer and more academically rigorous.
May 29th, 2008 at 8:35 am
CTP wrote:
“Seriously? What the fu@&?”
do you really cuss or is that just for shock value? just curious?
May 29th, 2008 at 8:59 am
Degrees don’t make the man or the theology. However, let’s not talk down a Dmin. In most cases, you have to have a master’s to enter the program. Then the program takes about 4 years. So, you it takes a 5-7 year commitment to get the thing knocked out. It is not something that you do because it is easy.
The other piece is that the Dmin deals with practical application of scripture. PhD in theology or ministry is much more theoretical. For acting ministers, the Dmin is the better way to go. The PhD is more for those who want to teach in Seminary. Both have earned a doctorate. Most Dmin program have some sort of thesis that has to be researched and defended. The difference is that the Dmin flows into the work you are already doing. Unless, you have done a Phd, let’s not knock the work someone has put in.
I have looked into getting the Dmin but have not because it would be way too much work for me while working full time and raising a family. So, I respect it because I am personally not willing to put in the time and money to get it done.
May 29th, 2008 at 9:02 am
BTW, I was in a Phd program for a career that I decided not to pursue. So, I have been in the environment and have an on the ground feel for the work involved.
May 29th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Is cussing wrong?
May 29th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
I don’t know-it depends on what your definition of cussing is?
Do you think it is?
May 29th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
Okay CTP you don’t have to go and rip me a new one. Of course Paul and Luke were educated. of course i don’t expect people should try to stay that way.
All i’m saying is that in the path of the spiritually led, society’s s benchmarks are not a qualification for truth or sincerity. In the old testament, the scribes were the only ones who were considered to be qualified to even write/copy scripture. So, in the eyes of the scribes and possibly society at that time, neither Paul nor Luke had any business adding to the word of God. I agree with what you said david
May 30th, 2008 at 8:35 am
This thread is funny and interesting because on one hand they seem to hate
education and educated people. I remember sitting in a conference
there in Portland and thinking ‘wow our church hates education’–we were
attending with other MFI people.
I also have multiple degrees–not showing off -it was expected in my
non MFI family! So now there is an argument –like wow Frank has an on line degree from a University that is in so much trouble academically they almost lost any faint accreditation they had. There leader son Richard who is now living off campus-all but banished. The same ORU that is facing multiple lawsuits for wrongdoing especially related in financial problems to the tune of a 1 billion dollar fund to funnel money through.
So you are telling me I should be impressed He did an on line degree from that institution of higher learning that had to be rescued from the Green Family
who owns Hobby stores? Of course Richard & Lindsay were guest speakers here right before the scandal broke out. Maybe he got a great deal on it!
May 30th, 2008 at 8:39 am
Wasn’t it Wendell Smith who also got some sort of ‘honorary degree’ from
a private school and now is referring to himself as Dr. Wendell Smith on everything?
Come on guys -we do know the difference between real academic work
from a school of accredited higher learning and these ‘Lets Make A Deal’
Universities. Its called an Honorary Degree or a reason.
I’m sure Hugh Heffner has loads of Honorary Degrees too but we don’t call
him Dr. Heff
May 30th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Yes, he got an honorary doctorate from my alma mater, Northwest University. It was completely political, and very very sad. And yes, he does refer to himself as ‘doctor’… bs…
Cussing? Language is completely arbitrary in construction. It doesn’t matter if you say fu*& or frick, or fricken, or freaking-a… they are all spaceholders that correspond to a transcendental signified concept or idea. It just so happens that one of them is sensitive phonologically in our culture.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
CTP. Do you really talk this when in a normal conversation? I just could not see sitting down over a great cup of coffee in spokane (do they have good coffe there?) and have a conversation with you. I must be a freakin idiot(whoops cuss word)..because I can not understand half the stuff you say! hahaha!
May 30th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
That sounds about right. . . Dr. BS
May 30th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
People who only have honorary Phd’s who go around calling themselves Dr. so and so need to get a grip. For real.
May 30th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
I got no problem with it. It’s a grey area that each person has to set as a standard in their own life. If it’s causing no harm to anyone else and its a part of your vocabulary for whatever reason, then more power to ya.
May 30th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
I think there is enough scripture to say otherwise. Not that gray of an area.
May 30th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Yep. You should come hang out with some of my philosophy friends if you want to hear some interesting vocabulary usage.
Oh, and yes, there are good coffee shops in Spokane; not as good as Seattle though… or Portland.
May 30th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Bro I would be sitting there with the dear in the headlights look! But, I am sure I would learn something! hahahaha!
May 31st, 2008 at 9:05 am
I think everyone can learn something from someone else. The important thing is to not create exclusive circles of discourse, in other words, those who are aspiring to be academics (myself) and those who are not must remain in humble conversation. I may know a lot about abstract things, but I’m only 23; I definitely do not have the world figured out (:
The correlation between my above thoughts and the mission of this blog exists in light of the fact that many churches create these exclusive circles, and they set up dichotomies between the ‘anointed’ and ‘those who need their anointing.’ This hierarchy forced many of us to work prodigiously in order to get into the club.
Our task is create liturgical space where that does not happen.
May 31st, 2008 at 10:24 am
“The correlation between my above thoughts and the mission of this blog exists in light of the fact that many churches create these exclusive circles, and they set up dichotomies between the ‘anointed’ and ‘those who need their anointing.’ This hierarchy forced many of us to work prodigiously in order to get into the club.
Our task is create liturgical space where that does not happen.”
here you go again forcing me to get my dictionary out!
I have to agree that there needs to be a change in the church. I believe the pastors/s should be there for the people not the other way around. I as a pastor should be greatly fullfilled as a pastor seeing the people that I pastor reaching their potential. In that my vision should be lived out..
May 31st, 2008 at 3:00 pm
CTP, I’m not sure I understand what you are proposing. In liturgical churches, there is a definite dichotomy of priest and laity. So much so that in many liturgical traditions a lay person is not allowed to conduct a communion service without extensive training and certification, although administering eucharist to shut-ins may be allowed with simple training.
The difference between liturgical communities and the looser neo-pentecostal types is that the liturgical communities require extensive schooling and accreditation for their ministers. You either have the degree or you don’t. You get the degree through rigorous studies rather than sycophantic behavior or political favors.
So back to your statement: I can see where “liturgical space” will cut down on the arbitrary promotions, but it will not eliminate the dichotomy.
May 31st, 2008 at 10:26 pm
I am pro-education. However, there is no real biblical mandate for Mdiv, Dmins or Phd’s. Compiling credits, writing a masters thesis and later a Phd thesis do not always result in better outcomes. Rigorous studies can easily become another hurdle to working towards grace,not works.
Also, traditions and systems also do not eliminate or particularly reduce sycophantic behavior or political favors. Qualifying for the job is one thing. Getting and keeping a position is a whole other thing all together.
I have no suggestions at the moment but the answer is deeper than any of that.
June 3rd, 2008 at 9:56 am
I did not mean liturgical churches at all… “liturgical space” is a much more catholic term, and not limited to one tradition, but it is rather metatraditional. And I will have to disagree about the “dichotomies” in liturgical churches. The same ones exist in non-liturgical traditions, and in more dangerous forms since leaders with no theological training have all the power.
Of course, you can have many degrees and still be a lousy leader or pastor. You can also be a bad doctor with many medical degrees, BUT the chances of that happening are lessened if the there is an educational standard in the medical community.
I wouldn’t let someone operate on me who did not have adequate medical training, so why should I let someone “operate” on me spiritually if that person avoided the challenge of education and instead went to a “bible college in the bedroom” (Judah Smith’s alma mater)?
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:50 am
CTP: How do you square that with the disciples? They were not formally trained by the standards of their day.
I have been in various types of environments. Education is what you make of it. Education does not stop one from being theologically off or tyrannical. IMO, the primary job of the pastor is to care for the flock and build community. No amount of school can teach those things. Schools also do not do a great job of teaching people how to communicate the truths that they learn.
What I am getting at is that education is important but heart and skill sets trump education.
June 3rd, 2008 at 11:07 am
CTP Wrote:
“if that person avoided the challenge of education and instead went to a “bible college in the bedroom” (Judah Smith’s alma mater)?”
I am sure there are many wonderful and biblically accurate pastors who never went to a former bible college and attended the same “alma mater.”
I am sure some like me; they were born again later in life and do not have the resources or time to go to a bible college. Personally I spend hours a day reading and meditating on the scriptures. As well as reading commentaries and other study type material. Someday I do desire to pursue a more formal education for my personal learning.
I know a number of bible college students who do not even crack open their bibles outside of studying in a class. I think balance is the key.
I think bible colleges prepare the mind but do not prepare the person for real hands on pastoral ministry. This of course has been what I have observed in many bible college students, since I have never attended a bible college. They may be able to understand proper biblical hermeneutics but have hard time with the daily dealings of ministry. Again I believe balance is the key.
June 3rd, 2008 at 12:19 pm
I think I have already adequately rebutted the ‘disciples’ argument a couple of times in earlier posts. They did not have formal education, but then again, no one did except for the elite. However, this did not inhibit their ability for learning, and Peter showed excellent knowledge of the book of Joel through his speech in Acts. Meaning, he studied.
There are so many seminaries today, and many have excellent funding for pastors. Or, as was already noted, many of you study independently, which I think is fine… with the proper resources. The problem is that the proper resources come through the academy. It doesn’t matter how much time you spend reading medical journals, because if they are outdated then that time is wasted.
So what should these pastors do? They must create theological accountability! When I was at City Church I heard a lot about character and behavioral accountability, and that is fine, except I did not hear anything about mental accountability. I would like to see ‘neo-pentecostal’ pastors emphasizing learning and study more.
Of course, school and the mind do not make a good pastor. There are many other imperatives, but I am suggesting that the area of lack in neo-pentecostal communities is the mind and a general consciousness of catholicity, church tradition, history, theology, and philosophy.
June 3rd, 2008 at 1:21 pm
OK. Here is my bias. The academy itself is not built for practical application of theology. The same is true for the academy in almost every other field of study. It becomes a club that spends most of its time splitting hairs. To the extent that each split requires its own terminology. If you miss a split or theory one can easily get a bit lost. So, once it hits a lay person it takes quite a bit of skill to make it practical. I once had a fascinating conversation about communion with an acquaintance who is the dean of a school of theology. He broke down the various theories about what happens during communion for about an hour. I thought it was great. If I had tried to preach that in church people would not have been interested.
Yes. Proper theology leads to a proper understanding of God which lends itself to proper practice. The question is how deep do you have to go to be qualified? I think CTP to easily dismisses the disciples argument. Or maybe he thinks that if Wendell, Frank or whomever studied more then they would have come to different conclusions. These guys don’t wake up one morning and come up with their doctrines after having bad pizza the night before. They have more resources at their disposal and more time to access them then Peter did while running a fishing ministry.
Another theology professor friend always says, “God did not leave us with an answer key for interpreting the Bible.” As long as there is not an answer key people will go into earnest and sincere study and come to various conclusions. Some of those conclusion will not always be “right”.
What do you have in mind in terms of mental or theological accountability?
I also find it humorous that CTP is the guy people end up saying, “Huh” after some of his posts. My issue is with getting the proper theology to the masses in a form they can accept.
CTP: We should meet at Pita Pit sometime or Starbucks on Hamilton.
June 3rd, 2008 at 1:57 pm
“I think I have already adequately rebutted the ‘disciples’ argument a couple of times in earlier posts. They did not have formal education, but then again, no one did except for the elite. However, this did not inhibit their ability for learning, and Peter showed excellent knowledge of the book of Joel through his speech in Acts. Meaning, he studied.”
Maybe some people today choose not to spend the VAST amount of money or go into huge debt to get the degree on the wall. Many of our higher learning establishements still cater to the elite or those with the finacial capabilites to do so. Outside of scholarships of course or funding like you stated as well.
If Peter was able to “show his excellent knowledge of the book of Joel” why can not people do the same today? If you argue “because we have the establishments to do so” thats a pretty weak argument.
“It doesn’t matter how much time you spend reading medical journals, because if they are outdated then that time is wasted.”
Very good point. I would agree with this. Do you really think that we need to be enrolled in a college to get the current materials?
June 4th, 2008 at 10:15 am
No… I do not think you need to be enrolled in a school to get the right materials, but it doesn’t really help to completely avoid the academy, which is what usually happens.
I think a lot of you here are trying to set up a dilemma with two options: (1) ineffective intellectualism through the academy, and (2) effective ministry through the church. I am not trying to pull everyone to number (1) at all. I think the two should be in dialogue, that is, each side should learn from each other.
By the way, in order for Peter to have learned the book of Joel, he would have had to study Hebrew, which is something that most pastors without education do not do. Of couse Paul was the major apostolic voice as well as the greatest evangelist, and the greatest theologian and writer… all at the same time… and with education!
You do not need to waste lots of money on school. Pastors can receive LARGE amounts of financial aid for free, even from poorly funded institutions like Northwest University.
Oh, and yes, Fred! I would love to meet up at the Pit (on main right?), it is right by my work… or The Rocket, I spend a lot of time there.
June 4th, 2008 at 10:25 am
CTP wrote:
“I think a lot of you here are trying to set up a dilemma with two options: (1) ineffective intellectualism through the academy, and (2) effective ministry through the church. I am not trying to pull everyone to number (1) at all. I think the two should be in dialogue, that is, each side should learn from each other.”
I agree with that. We all can learn from each other!
June 4th, 2008 at 11:30 am
Well said! In fact, I think we should all strive to mix knowledge of the Scripture (as Bereans) with practical ministry. I do believe that each is made more effective by the other.