Post by gloryintruth on Sept 26, 2007 7:35:25 GMT -5
I'm encouraged and heartened to see that a number of exes have taken James Durston to task for his outrageous comments, recognising that it is people like Durston who do the most damage to the exe point-of-view, to the cause of reform (which is clearly needed in some places), and to friendly relations between the Church and those no longer of the Church.
Durston, like Brad Lewis, is clearly a fringe fundamentalist who - in another age; a less technological age - would find few people willing to listen to his utterly ridicuous perspective. With the advent of the Internet, however, Brad Lewis, Durston et al are able to disseminate their writings on a public forum, quite literally around the globe. Consequently, the material they have produced between them needs to be seriously addressed to stem further damage.
I admit that this kind of behaviour frustrates me enormously. I have spent a not-inconsiderable amount of time debating with Muslims, Atheists, Agnostics and Neo-Pagans on the foundational truths of thesim, particularly Christian theism. Many of my fellow apologists likewise labour night and day in the service of the truth of Christianity to these benighted religions. One look at a Brad Lewis, or a James Durston however can irreparably damage a Muslim's thoughts about Christianity.
It behooves all of us - exe and Friends alike - to condemn and shun the wild-eyed, bizarre and silly rhetoric of such people. We must recognise (with a concern all of us surely ought to profess) that this pair (et al) are doing grave damage to the reputation of Christianity. They give fodder to the enemies of Christ.
Anyone who commends the writings of these two people, and are willing to identify themselves with their kind of thinking (as in the case of Jessi Hagen who has always been a supporter of Brad Lewis) are proving themselves to be utterly without integrity.
Durston's Points
Durston's points in red. My thoughts in blue.
These are the fifteen foundational truths of the Friends, Workers & Meetings that constitute a cult.
O.K. Let us all brace ourselves. I, of course, take umbrace with the term "cult" in the first place, and I think there are significant philosophical issues raised by using this term, but let us move forward into the morass.
Point 1: It is utterly false and Biblically unfounded to say, you have to be in their way to be saved.
Being in subjection to the true Church is a prerequisite for salvation. Any man out of communion with the Church is not part of the Body of Christ, and is cut off from the kingdom. The New Testament certainly teaches that salvation is synonomous with entry into the Church.
I would be glad to interact with someone who purports that the Bible does not have a significant doctrine of Church, or does not teach that belonging to the Church is vital to the Christian life. However, it is my view that anyone who argues against these propositions is engaging in wishful thinking, plain and simple.
Point 2: It is utterly false and Biblically unfounded to say, that you cannot fellowship in churchy looking buildings.
The Church has always taught that, as the early Christians met in homes in fellowship, this is the pattern to follow today. It depends on whether you wish to place the propsition in the negative or the positive. Either way, the Bible does not have early Christians constructing temples, "churchy" looking ones or otherwise.
Point 3: he Matthew 10 foundation is a transgression and is completely misunderstood and totally misrepresented.
Actually, I think the Church's exegesis of the passage is very good. At the very least, it is just about consistent with the commentary of any scholar. On the other hand, the application of the passage to the concept of ministry may be grounds for discussion. But it is certainly untrue to say that the passage is misunderstood or misrepresented. It is understood very well.
However, you have yet to tell us how you think the passage is misunderstood or misrepresented, so I may be a little premature in my comments.
Point 4: The Friends and Workers come from a shamed based background because as a result of “their way” the family life is dysfunctional.
This is like saying: "Roman Catholics come from a works-based background, and as a result their family lives are dysfunctional". It is true that there are dysfunctional families in the Fellowship, just as there are dysfunctional families in every church, every denomination, every continent, every religion.
You are maintaining here that a dysfunctional family is proof positive of a "shamed-based background". By such logic (I would call it distended logic) the same background must be shared by a significant proportion of Christianity.
Like Lewis, Durston confuses the native condition of humanity; the fallen nature of mankind; sin with theological error. The result is that the Church is made to be responsible for every evil that exists. But it is a view that is a house of cards. When it is demonstrated that the same qualities are to be found in any church, what conclusion is left to draw? Only by being inconsistent and unfair can these two hold their belief structure intact.
Point 5: Jesus helped and mixed with the murderers, prostitutes and other down and outs in the local communities. The Friends & Workers do not. They do not demonstrate love to people outside their group. They do not demonstrate love to people in their group for they know no love.
The difference being that most prostitutes of ancient Palestine were engaged in the activity by necessity, and were locked in a cruel cycle of despair, because of the social marginalisation. They nonetheless had a very active awareness of their need for God.
Prostitutes these days engage in the activity due to drug dependancy, or to supplement an existing income. They are protected by laws and regulations. They are nowhere near as marginalised. And most of them are unchurched and have no apparent need of God.
By the way, when did Jesus mix with murderers?
Point 6: These people take great offence when challenged about their belief system or way of life because by default they live in a world of self-preservation and cannot bear to look in to themselves for they are all alone.
Now that Dr. Freud has spoken, let us move on. The above point is so absurd it needs to refutation.
Point 7: When we fellowship and get together over Bible discussions, unless it is edifying us how to live practically and relevantly it is of no value and the Friends and Workers are in full error of this.
Are you seriously suggesting that Friends and Workers are disinterested in non-edifying, non-practical Bible discussions? Is that not a positive point! And should this not be the mark of Christendom in general?
Point 8: The Friends and Workers harbour unforgiveness in their hearts and have great difficulty in identifying this and bringing it before the Cross.
A generalisation. An omniscient generalisation.
What possible basis do you have for this statement, James? What concievable proof or evidence do you have to conclude the universal Church under the same condemnation of being unforgiving? The fact is, you live under a metaphorical rock. You inhabit a tiny corner of the world, and have met a tiny proportion of the Friends and Workers. You have no evidence or factual basis upon which to make these sweeping claims about what is in the hearts of other men and women.
Point 9: The Friends and Workers think they are better than everyone else because they believe that they are in the one and only way as they look down on everyone else from their pedestal.
This is the rhetoric of teenagers. "That tart thinks she's better than everyone else so she can go and steal their boyfriends!"
Point 10: Sexual perversion, low performance, immorality and associated iniquities of the heart are common place and in extreme levels within the Friends and Workers.
One assumes you have done extensive research on the sexual lives of the Friends and Workers! On what evidence do you base this claim? I have noticed in the past your preoccupation with the sexuality of the Friends and Workers, and I found it as disturbing that any adult could be so fixated on this aspect within religion six months ago as I do now.
Your "evidence", as I recall, consisted entirely (that is, one-hundred percent) of hearsay, interpretation, rumour and innuendo. I guess when you live within an aura of paranoia and fear and persecution, it's only natural to start thinking this way. Perhaps we should call you The Bone Collector - the man whose mind is ever busy digging up the graveyard for his mental collection.
Point 11: The Friends and Workers are easy victims of blackmail because this religion is all about what it looks like.
You mean, you can dress like a tramp, swear like a sailor, drink like a fish, smoke like a chimney, be rude and vulgar, and engage in public sexual orgies, yet still be accepted within, say, an average Baptist Church, or Anglican congregation? Demoninational religion has no concern about what a person's life looks like?
Point 12: Very sadly when you get to the core of things the Friends and Workers are not interested in the actual revelation of the written Word. They don’t want to go there because they fear it will undermine or nullify their own beliefs.
Utterly ridiculous. Especially coming from a man whose numerous factual inaccuracies, errors and distortions of the truth are legendary. It is one thing to criticise people with the claim that universally - universally - they don't follow the Bible, yet it is quite another to do so when one's attitude and writings are a mixture of libel and unfounded filth.
I still haven't forgotten Durston's claim that the Workers bug people's homes with recording devices, and set up video cameras so as to see the Friends engage in perverted acts. I thought this was absolutely golden, in the sense of desperate rhetoric, because I don't think I have ever heard an argument so devoid of intellectual integrity; a claim so vacuous and transparently false that no serious person could continue to regard Durston as anything but a borderline Bedlam inmate.
Point 13: The Friends and Workers are the world’s greatest mockers! They look down on every one else and as they know nothing about the real world this fuels their superiority. If it does not fit their life they scorn often causing much hurt too many people.
When we acknowledge that we are in the true Church, it is only in a manner of interpretation that a man could conclude this means we think we are better than others.
Point 14: These are a people that lack integrity and honesty.
Says the man who thinks Workers all around the world have James Bond microphones in their suitcases, and Predator Drones flying over the Friend's houses investigating their sexual deeds.
Point 15: This is by far the gravest and most serious - idolatry. You either serve God or the father of lies – it is as simple as that!
H'mm... someone slept through Idolatry 101.
I've gone through this post to tone down some of my initial thoughts, because this mindless attack on me, my Church, and my beloved brethren and ministers is utterly baseless and without merit. The rest of Durston's post is not worth addressing.
Durston, like Brad Lewis, is clearly a fringe fundamentalist who - in another age; a less technological age - would find few people willing to listen to his utterly ridicuous perspective. With the advent of the Internet, however, Brad Lewis, Durston et al are able to disseminate their writings on a public forum, quite literally around the globe. Consequently, the material they have produced between them needs to be seriously addressed to stem further damage.
I admit that this kind of behaviour frustrates me enormously. I have spent a not-inconsiderable amount of time debating with Muslims, Atheists, Agnostics and Neo-Pagans on the foundational truths of thesim, particularly Christian theism. Many of my fellow apologists likewise labour night and day in the service of the truth of Christianity to these benighted religions. One look at a Brad Lewis, or a James Durston however can irreparably damage a Muslim's thoughts about Christianity.
It behooves all of us - exe and Friends alike - to condemn and shun the wild-eyed, bizarre and silly rhetoric of such people. We must recognise (with a concern all of us surely ought to profess) that this pair (et al) are doing grave damage to the reputation of Christianity. They give fodder to the enemies of Christ.
Anyone who commends the writings of these two people, and are willing to identify themselves with their kind of thinking (as in the case of Jessi Hagen who has always been a supporter of Brad Lewis) are proving themselves to be utterly without integrity.
Durston's Points
Durston's points in red. My thoughts in blue.
These are the fifteen foundational truths of the Friends, Workers & Meetings that constitute a cult.
O.K. Let us all brace ourselves. I, of course, take umbrace with the term "cult" in the first place, and I think there are significant philosophical issues raised by using this term, but let us move forward into the morass.
Point 1: It is utterly false and Biblically unfounded to say, you have to be in their way to be saved.
Being in subjection to the true Church is a prerequisite for salvation. Any man out of communion with the Church is not part of the Body of Christ, and is cut off from the kingdom. The New Testament certainly teaches that salvation is synonomous with entry into the Church.
I would be glad to interact with someone who purports that the Bible does not have a significant doctrine of Church, or does not teach that belonging to the Church is vital to the Christian life. However, it is my view that anyone who argues against these propositions is engaging in wishful thinking, plain and simple.
Point 2: It is utterly false and Biblically unfounded to say, that you cannot fellowship in churchy looking buildings.
The Church has always taught that, as the early Christians met in homes in fellowship, this is the pattern to follow today. It depends on whether you wish to place the propsition in the negative or the positive. Either way, the Bible does not have early Christians constructing temples, "churchy" looking ones or otherwise.
Point 3: he Matthew 10 foundation is a transgression and is completely misunderstood and totally misrepresented.
Actually, I think the Church's exegesis of the passage is very good. At the very least, it is just about consistent with the commentary of any scholar. On the other hand, the application of the passage to the concept of ministry may be grounds for discussion. But it is certainly untrue to say that the passage is misunderstood or misrepresented. It is understood very well.
However, you have yet to tell us how you think the passage is misunderstood or misrepresented, so I may be a little premature in my comments.
Point 4: The Friends and Workers come from a shamed based background because as a result of “their way” the family life is dysfunctional.
This is like saying: "Roman Catholics come from a works-based background, and as a result their family lives are dysfunctional". It is true that there are dysfunctional families in the Fellowship, just as there are dysfunctional families in every church, every denomination, every continent, every religion.
You are maintaining here that a dysfunctional family is proof positive of a "shamed-based background". By such logic (I would call it distended logic) the same background must be shared by a significant proportion of Christianity.
Like Lewis, Durston confuses the native condition of humanity; the fallen nature of mankind; sin with theological error. The result is that the Church is made to be responsible for every evil that exists. But it is a view that is a house of cards. When it is demonstrated that the same qualities are to be found in any church, what conclusion is left to draw? Only by being inconsistent and unfair can these two hold their belief structure intact.
Point 5: Jesus helped and mixed with the murderers, prostitutes and other down and outs in the local communities. The Friends & Workers do not. They do not demonstrate love to people outside their group. They do not demonstrate love to people in their group for they know no love.
The difference being that most prostitutes of ancient Palestine were engaged in the activity by necessity, and were locked in a cruel cycle of despair, because of the social marginalisation. They nonetheless had a very active awareness of their need for God.
Prostitutes these days engage in the activity due to drug dependancy, or to supplement an existing income. They are protected by laws and regulations. They are nowhere near as marginalised. And most of them are unchurched and have no apparent need of God.
By the way, when did Jesus mix with murderers?
Point 6: These people take great offence when challenged about their belief system or way of life because by default they live in a world of self-preservation and cannot bear to look in to themselves for they are all alone.
Now that Dr. Freud has spoken, let us move on. The above point is so absurd it needs to refutation.
Point 7: When we fellowship and get together over Bible discussions, unless it is edifying us how to live practically and relevantly it is of no value and the Friends and Workers are in full error of this.
Are you seriously suggesting that Friends and Workers are disinterested in non-edifying, non-practical Bible discussions? Is that not a positive point! And should this not be the mark of Christendom in general?
Point 8: The Friends and Workers harbour unforgiveness in their hearts and have great difficulty in identifying this and bringing it before the Cross.
A generalisation. An omniscient generalisation.
What possible basis do you have for this statement, James? What concievable proof or evidence do you have to conclude the universal Church under the same condemnation of being unforgiving? The fact is, you live under a metaphorical rock. You inhabit a tiny corner of the world, and have met a tiny proportion of the Friends and Workers. You have no evidence or factual basis upon which to make these sweeping claims about what is in the hearts of other men and women.
Point 9: The Friends and Workers think they are better than everyone else because they believe that they are in the one and only way as they look down on everyone else from their pedestal.
This is the rhetoric of teenagers. "That tart thinks she's better than everyone else so she can go and steal their boyfriends!"
Point 10: Sexual perversion, low performance, immorality and associated iniquities of the heart are common place and in extreme levels within the Friends and Workers.
One assumes you have done extensive research on the sexual lives of the Friends and Workers! On what evidence do you base this claim? I have noticed in the past your preoccupation with the sexuality of the Friends and Workers, and I found it as disturbing that any adult could be so fixated on this aspect within religion six months ago as I do now.
Your "evidence", as I recall, consisted entirely (that is, one-hundred percent) of hearsay, interpretation, rumour and innuendo. I guess when you live within an aura of paranoia and fear and persecution, it's only natural to start thinking this way. Perhaps we should call you The Bone Collector - the man whose mind is ever busy digging up the graveyard for his mental collection.
Point 11: The Friends and Workers are easy victims of blackmail because this religion is all about what it looks like.
You mean, you can dress like a tramp, swear like a sailor, drink like a fish, smoke like a chimney, be rude and vulgar, and engage in public sexual orgies, yet still be accepted within, say, an average Baptist Church, or Anglican congregation? Demoninational religion has no concern about what a person's life looks like?
Point 12: Very sadly when you get to the core of things the Friends and Workers are not interested in the actual revelation of the written Word. They don’t want to go there because they fear it will undermine or nullify their own beliefs.
Utterly ridiculous. Especially coming from a man whose numerous factual inaccuracies, errors and distortions of the truth are legendary. It is one thing to criticise people with the claim that universally - universally - they don't follow the Bible, yet it is quite another to do so when one's attitude and writings are a mixture of libel and unfounded filth.
I still haven't forgotten Durston's claim that the Workers bug people's homes with recording devices, and set up video cameras so as to see the Friends engage in perverted acts. I thought this was absolutely golden, in the sense of desperate rhetoric, because I don't think I have ever heard an argument so devoid of intellectual integrity; a claim so vacuous and transparently false that no serious person could continue to regard Durston as anything but a borderline Bedlam inmate.
Point 13: The Friends and Workers are the world’s greatest mockers! They look down on every one else and as they know nothing about the real world this fuels their superiority. If it does not fit their life they scorn often causing much hurt too many people.
When we acknowledge that we are in the true Church, it is only in a manner of interpretation that a man could conclude this means we think we are better than others.
Point 14: These are a people that lack integrity and honesty.
Says the man who thinks Workers all around the world have James Bond microphones in their suitcases, and Predator Drones flying over the Friend's houses investigating their sexual deeds.
Point 15: This is by far the gravest and most serious - idolatry. You either serve God or the father of lies – it is as simple as that!
H'mm... someone slept through Idolatry 101.
I've gone through this post to tone down some of my initial thoughts, because this mindless attack on me, my Church, and my beloved brethren and ministers is utterly baseless and without merit. The rest of Durston's post is not worth addressing.