One thing I have considered about King was that he appropriated the Christian religious community to reach a secular goal. He did this by appealing to the Christian sensibility of moral rightness inherent to desegregation. I think this is what Ryan is getting at below too, that out of our relationship with Christ we are driven to oppose evil.

Let me ask you something Manny. What if, in your rebuke, you are wrong? What if the people you rebuke are in fact in the center of the Spirit’s leading in ways far different from how he works with you? What if their sphere of influence is to different people using different techniques? What if God has blessed those you attack with ways of evangelism that are foreign to you? Can you see that your rebuke then would look a lot more like cannibalism? Can’t you see how your rebuke differs from that of O.B., a voice that welcomes us to pursue Christ with greater earnestness?

Let me tell you where you have blessed me. At various times you have warned that pursuing good deeds (social justice) is not enough in itself. Christ alone is the way to salvation. Because that truth is the core of who we are at The House, I agree with that statement; I have examined our approaches to missions and outreach, knowing that doing good is not a priority over spreading the good news of Christ. I would love to hear where you’ve actually heard something we’ve said and considered it as a blessing to yourself. If you say there is nowhere, then you clearly are not paying attention or exhibiting a willingness to listen. When we publish "Unnoticed Neighbors" this fall, do you believe I have any confidence that you would give us the benefit of the doubt that we are discussing issues of social justice with full knowledge that it’s not the whole story of salvation but is still an important part of the Gospel? Not a bit. But that book will help many young people find ways to put action to their faith.

I don’t believe we’re ever going to agree on a lot of stuff Manny. I believe I’ll see you in heaven one day and we won’t care about all of this. Until then we’ll work as God wills it within the sphere of those he brings into our influence, and trust that you are doing the same for those in your sphere.

You want to rebuke us, fine. We’re rebuked. Anything else? Both of us can be more effective for the kingdom reaching the lost than arguing with each other.

Ah yes, that name I remember!

Thanks Matt. What's your twitter name? I looked for you in our followers but couldn't figure out which one was you. Do we follow you?

Bummer. We talked about whether those passages might be perceived that way and discussed them with the authors. Guess we'll know better next time...

I used the word attacked because a number of people with the same opinion expressed by the author FELT attacked. I am sure none of us ever feels we are the ones attacking. You use the word "rebuked." Fine. I felt attacked.

Second, there was some good conversation in response to last week's blog. I especially appreciate the feedback of O.B. who took issue with the author, yet acted in a way that is becoming of a Christian. That is dialog that sounds reasonable and invites reflection.

Unfortunately I don't personally feel that most of the comments on last week's blog reflected anyone trying to create conversation. Most were simply people talking AT frequent readers of this blog, not TO them. A large portion of the comments on the blog didn't make me feel like any response I gave would be considered thoughtfully. I am willing to accept that those writers believe in the conviction of their words. But I'm not interested in trying to dialog with someone who doesn't reflect a listening heart.

I believe that most of the commenters to last week's blog have appropriated the political rhetoric we see in so many places in our culture. Villianize those you see as enemies, and use fear to manipulate people into agreeing with you. Unfortunately it's easy for someone to see themselves as your enemy when they seem to find their identity in who their enemies are. I know you'll take issue with this paragraph. It's not the language you would choose to use. But for many who read those comments, this is how they were perceived.

I am always open--in fact welcome--challenges and disagreements. But say what you want to say and move on. Trust God to move the spirits of those to whom you have spoken, and acknowledge that sometimes you are wrong, as we all are. It's not necessary to fill 3/4ths of a blog's comment space saying the same thing without reflecting that you have a heart for discussion instead of anger.

This infographic about the ocean creeps me out. There is so much unknowable stuff down there; makes me appreciate all God has created that we will never see.

Completely off topic here O.B., but I appreciate the tone and nature of your disagreement. It is through comments like yours that we create meaningful dialog rather than cannibalize one another.

Just a clarification--Is it just me, or do a lot of these comments make the assumption that The House caters to Nazarenes simply because that is who is our sponsoring entity? Weslyan--yes. Nazarene--not necessarily.

Yup. Juan kicked it. But In-N-Out...nothing like wild speculation, eh?