| Back to The Blog | About | CRN.INFO Main | Contact |
|
S T A T E M E N T - O T 0 8 0 9
Chris Lyons - Is CRN.INFO Just Another Watchdog?
Brendt Waters who runs the "Musings from Two-Sheds Gomer" blog had some fitting advice that might as well have been a warning for his friend
Unfortunately, it would only be a year until Brendt Waters would join Chris Lyons and Tim Reed as a contributor on CRN.INFO. There have been other similar warnings however, from their own commenters. Like most blogs, the vast majority of the commenters are regulars who generally agree with most things the blog contributors have to say. On CRN.INFO however, there have been a number of commenters who have bravely spoken up, and seem to confirm the validity of Brendt's earlier advice, having identified the same behaviors at CRN.INFO as the blog claims to deplore. The following are just a few examples from their site. Because the comment-excerpts that I've compiled here are scattered throughout numerous posts, the average visitor to their site is likely to be unaware of the number of folks who have expressed these opinions over time: Comment from Calvin - Time: December 14, 2007, 12:23 am This is ridiculous. No matter how much of a liar Ingrid is (I have been to her site and seen some, well, unfortunate things) there is no reason to harass her or make an entire site simply devoted to doing exactly what she does. These sites cannot be characterized as Christian or being done in or with the love of Christ. One should seriously consider reevaluating the motive of this site and what, in fact, it is accomplishing. This site will do no more than raise unnecessary tensions within the church instead of using our differences with each other to further the kingdom of heaven. Know that you are, in blatant, probably unnecessary words, just as bad as her. +context+ Comment from S.J. Walker - Time: December 20, 2007, 10:49 am ... This site is dedicated to "refuting", "correcting", or whatever you may call it anything and just about everything that Ingrid says, and then also Ken Silva. This, you do with voracity often, by your admission, with similar tactics as you claim to deplore. ... +context+ Comment from Paul C - Time: October 18, 2007, 9:46 am ... A lot of times, having read both sides (this site and some of the ODMs) I see very little difference when it comes to personal attacks. That's just an observation. Should we celebrate that this site only reflects 50% of the vitriol of other sites? The point is that the distaste people have for certain individuals comes through just as strongly as the person they are commenting on a lot of the time. And though I do sometimes see that one or two of the ODMs go beyond decency at times, the vast majority of the articles are pretty accurate in their description of the downward trend of the church, in its attempts to market Jesus and make its religion as appealing to the world as possible. +context+ Comment from inquisitor - Time: November 17, 2007, 9:39 am Now no one named any of these [ODM] people as teaching damnable heresies. So why are you acting just like them and retuning friendly fire. I understand your anger about being fired upon by them, but why do you act just like them by firing back? ... Right now, it seems that some of you guys, (like my friend [Rick Frueh]) are the ones that are being hypocritical. This reminds me of when my older brother used to call me names. I would lash out and say something bad about him and then I'd get in to trouble. I'd say, "but mom, he started it" and she'd say, "just ignore him." Most of you here are doing just that. ... +context+ Comment from merry - Time: October 22, 2007, 2:02 pm ...While you are worrying about the ODM sites, you should be concerned that you will also answer for every idle word and believe me this blog is full of them. Again, rudeness isn't going to solve anything... +context+ Comment from jazzact13 - Time: December 1, 2007, 1:50 pm ...Considering how often sarcasm itself is employed on this blog, one would have to question why Piper would then be forbidden to use it. +context+ Comment from Paul C - Time: November 28, 2007, 4:56 pm ... having read this blog often in the last few months I think: a. you (meaning contributors and commenters) often jump on things that aren't really that offensive (unless you're guilty) and try to look at it from different angles to see how you can "deconstruct" it. b. the tone and arrogance (though there is an attempt at veiling) come through on this site maybe as much as those you are critiquing. +context+ Comment from Rev. James Rosselli on Tim Reed's blog - May 15th, 2007 I stumbled across your blog a while ago, and just revisited it.
It sounds sort of angry, and impatient with people who don't want to go along with its program, although what that program is, is unclear.
I read a lot about money and "my rights" and "my way" and arguments from the perspective of "What People Want." But where is Jesus in this? The Bible calls us to follow Christ, to become less so he can become more, to lift each other up and edify each other with goodly speech, with psalms and spiritual songs. It tells us to honor our elders in the Faith, not to make jokes about their perceived lack of bladder control.
Sucks? Jerkholes?
If this is the "church speaking," perhaps we should spend less time speaking, and a bit more time listening to God.
I understand you're trying to reach a certain culture. Its members, however, are still made in the Image of God, and carry Him around inside them in the Person of the Holy Spirit. They, and you, and I, are called to the same standard which has been present for two thousand years. "This is my way of doing things" defines nothing more in relation to this than that it may or may not be His Way of doing things.
Zeal is good. Fire is good. But things, as God tells us, need to be done decently and in order.
If this is how the people you serve talk, and you would do the work of Christ, don't pander to the degradation they've brought in from a world that thinks we're all just modified monkeys, and speaks to us accordingly. Be an example of something higher. +context+ Comment from rose - Time: December 4, 2007, 11:43 pm ...I know from reading here only briefly, that anyone who disagrees is spoken of in a deriding manner with ridicule. So we post at our own risk, hey guys? Talk about attack [watch]dogs, you folks are the experts on here. I feel the love. +context+ Comment from DT - Time: November 26, 2007, 11:29 pm Tim Reed, ... Just because the folks on this site do not care for ODM's (specifically Ken) does not justify the bashing and name-calling that goes on here. I just do not see a spirit of "come and let us reason" here. It reminds me of piranha. ... [continued a few comments later:] [This site] makes it's own rules of Christian conduct but doubts and attacks the actions of others when they speak out. +context+ Comment from inquisitor - Time: November 27, 2007, 5:33 pm Hey everyone, let's complain about Ken... again.
Comment from John (pastorboy) - Time: January 3rd, 2008, 9:36 am Some of you guys are WORSE than the ODM’s you claim to hate. +context+
Comment from S.J. Walker - Time: Time: January 3, 2008, 10:50 am I see no indication of you fellows ever showing anything but contempt and mockery toward [ODM's]. It has also been turned toward me or anyone who is guilty by association. Behold the power of 'love'. So what if you say they mock you unjustly. Show them something DIFFERENT then. +context+
CRN.INFO Post from Joe Martino - Time: Time: January 9, 2008 Not a comment, but a post on CRN.INFO in which Joe Martino admits to watchdogging: "I've been watching some fascinating discussion on the internet". But who has Joe been watching? He answers: "... these Online Discernment Ministries (ODM)...". It's because of statements like these that cause many to define CRN.INFO as a "watchdog of the watchdogs". Joe Martino's further demonstrates the same kinds of behavior that he and the others deplore. For example Joe says: "This is why I bring up the ODM's because for sure they have created a rhetoric that is unhelpful." Yet his post is the very definition of "unhelpful rhetoric", and is full of broad-brushing, and exagerations about supposed ODMs who declare someone's apostasy just for disagreeing. As he's done so many times in the past, Joe hints at those who hold "reformed doctrine" as being a test of apostasy, but who is he talking about? Nobody I know says "John Wesley is in Hell" but this is one of Joe's frequent distortions of his oponents. Exagerations, broadbrushing, and distortions, get Joe and others angry when they feel that the ODM's do it, but here Joe is doing it himself. And in what is perhaps the main point that Joe intends for his post - he says: "Where in Scripture does it say that God needs our help convicting others?". By this he calls into question those watchdogs that point out error in others. But isn't that exactly what Joe is doing in this post? The reason for his post is to highlight a problem in an attempt to influence change. If Joe Martino feels that people should keep their objections to themselves however, and trust the Holy Spirit to convict those who are wrong, then why doesn't Joe practice what he preaches, and simply stay silent, and pray and trust instead of 'write posts'? Joe ends his post by saying "I can show you the verses where we are told the litmus test of our faith is how well we love other people. Even people who are wrong, and are caught up in sin." That begs the question, does that include CRN.INFO's "love" for "ODM watchdogs"? We don't see much love for the ODM's from Joe and his friends, just a lot of name-calling and axe-grinding. +context+
It's a free country / blogosphere, so Chris Lyons and Tim Reed can feel free to make CRN.INFO into whatever kind of website they want. But when their site morphs into the very same types of things that they speak-out against in their perception of ODMs, it's time for them to realize that they've become a watchdog of their own making. Related Links:
for an updated copy of this page, go to: www.OldTruth.com/Watchdog-Chris-Lyons.cfm This page was last modified on 1/9/08
Back to the
CRN.INFO section main page
|
One of the most surprising things about the postmodern CRN.INFO blog is the difficulty they have in seeing how similar they've become to much of what they feel is wrong with the ODM/watchdogs. The fact that they employ the same methods that they themselves criticize is denied, as is the notion that they too have become a watchdog (a watchdog of the watchdogs). But that reality is obvious if you accept the simple definition of a watchdog being: an entity that watches over other entities for the purpose of critique and/or warning others. Let's face it; even though the site spends the majority of it's time yelling at watchdogs, the watchdog label fits them just as well. That seems to be what people are saying anyway. Here's some feedback from their own readers:
Copyright 2008 (C) OldTruth.com
No Duplication permitted without permission by owner
Comment from DH - Time: December 26, 2007, 5:16 pm
I don't normally post here, though I love reading this blog and listening to the podcasts. I have to say, though, that the posts/casts here, while important responses to some very disturbing posts by others, can sometimes walk very, very close to that fine line themselves. ... But at times, some posts [here] skate very close to the edge and, I might say, sometimes do cross onto the thin ice. +context+
Comment from Bill H on Joe Martino's blog - December 04, 2007
It's ok to call a name caller names? It's ok to be intolerant to the intolerant? Take care or you'll be hoodwinked into emulating what you despise in the one you dispise. Been there, done that. [CRN.INFO's Phil Miller replies to Bill H:] This is always the defense of the Pharisee. They feel fine calling out other's sins, but try to insulate themselves from others doing it to them. Jesus had no problem calling these type of people out. (several comments later Bill responds "wonderful point..."). +context+