The ODMS are Out Of Control

A concerned reader forwarded a link to me regarding a posting written by Chris Rosebrough. Rosebrough was mocking the seeker friendly churches use of “postcards” and came up with his own disgusting version to send out to folks who have left “seeker-friendly” churches due to the messages they were hearing. Take a look at the following link;




The picture Rosebrough used was inappropriate IMHO….it’s shocking in the way he exploits a man being physically starved to make his point but what really bothers me is the lack of reaction from the ODMS (Online Discernment Ministries). Had Mark Driscoll or Rick Warren posted a postcard like this the ODMS would be screaming bloody murder…..


Where is the condemnation from Ingrid Schlueter and Ken Silva? O, I forgot…..Rosebrough is one of the “discerning remnant” which means he’s held to a different standard then everyone else…something I’ve been seeing quite a bit in ODM land…..


In Rosebrough’s latest post he doesn’t even attempt to apologize but admits he didn’t go far enough! You can view this at the following link;


IMHO Rosebrough went too far with his attempt at satire. Its one thing to take a biblical stance against the seeker friendly movement but quite another to exploit a man being physically starved to prove some point. Can this really be considered “discernment”? I’ve said all this to say the following…..


The ODMS are out of control. I’ve received DOZENS of complaints during the last several months regarding these self appointed “watchmen” including two very well known pastors. People are sick and tired of these so-called “discernment ministries” and I can’t say I blame them. The complaints include;


  • Shoddy research
  • Zero accountability
  • Plagiarism
  • Falsifying credentials
  • Unapproachable
  • Scripture Twisting and random quotes taken completely out of context
  • Pre-texting
  • Personal obsessions with certain well know pastors they disagree with
  • Ex-communication of those who publicly disagree with methods or who are publicly critical
  • Spiritual terrorism



There are four of these “ministries” that seem to employ most if not all of the above techniques. I’m not going to name them yet but you probably have a pretty good idea who I’m talking about. These four “ministries” also have minions with little blogs of their own who help the “bigger” ones do their dirty work and I know who they are also….and you will meet them all in due time trust me.


This is going to be a real battle Brethren that’s not going to be easy….these people fight dirty and I’m ready for their little games. This blog has always stood for the truth and that’s my only motivation here. The truth….


Are you ready for the truth?  


Let the battle begin…..
















29 thoughts on “The ODMS are Out Of Control

  1. You expect them to criticize Rosebrough? Hardly. They promoted him:

    This is no surprise!! These are the same folks who — after ranting and raving about me simply writing an email of complaint to Ken Silva’s ISP (FALSELY claiming that I was violating 1 Cor. 6 by threatening Silva with a lawsuit – ROFL, right) — were patting Rosebrough on the back for gloating in public over his threatening me online with a lawsuit and legal action!!

    Say waaaaaaah????

    Then, oddly enough, after taking the higher road and just apologizing to Rosebrough for — according to him — completely misrepresenting him and committing libel by falsely accusing him online of saying that Warren teaches salvation by works of the law, he THEN goes and posts this at his blog: “Rick Warren’s Law Based ‘Gospel.'”

    Say waaaaaaah???? — That’s exactly what I had just stated!!

    It’s gotten really, really strange out there. And BTW, I’m not sure if anyone else noticed, but the traits YOU listed, not me, the traits YOU listed, are traits recognizable in cults.

    Yeah, I said the C-word. As I have posted elsewhere: “I’ve seen (with no small amount of jitters) the coalescing of a small by HIGHLY volatile sub-group of “Christians” that is very reminiscent of some cults I have dealt with over the years. It’s been very disturbing to watch.”

    Those are only some of the characteristics (i.e., your list) that are now being revealed in certain persons, “ministries,” and organizations. I have also noted the following online at another blog:

    This has all devolved into a online tragedy within the church for everyone to see — i.e., a mob-like mentality with cult overtones that sucks in unsuspecting believers who are sincerely concerned with truth, but who are getting false information, lies, slander, misinformation, disinformation, faulty research, twisted facts, and nothing less than hate-talk. (Note: In this comment, I am not directly or indirectly referring to, or naming, anyone specifically as a cult-leader, cultist, cult supporter — but I am making a general observation about an unidentified group of online readers/writers scattered throughout cyberspace).

    Sensationalism, insensitivity, distasteful imagery, offensive language, infantile mockery, personal threats, and juvenile name-calling have become their modus operandi — just read some of their comments. Again I say, it is a tragedy.

    This now has NOTHING — seriously, NOTHING — to do with Rick Warren or any other person any more. We are dealing with completely different issues here — some very dark and sinful issues. I think these issues might be what we actually need to start talking about.

    – Can we help these people?
    – If so, how can we help them?
    – What is the proper way of responding to such a situation?

    Pray, my brothers and sisters. Pray.

    We are looking at some very sick parts of the Body that need healing. But how, that is the question. There is some seriously dark and nasty stuff going on, which is only aggravated by their us v. them mentality that is also indicative of cult behavior. Such a mindset, of course, has led to all manner of negative actions in response/retribution against supposed “enemies” of truth or the faith — some violent. If anyone is interested, go to google and look up “Fair Game” + Scientology in the search engine, or just go to wiki and look up “Fair Game” w/ Scientology.

    R. Abanes

  2. Phil,
    Rosebrough actually has done what Jesus did.

    Jesus compared the spiritual poverty of the Pharisees and Sadducees to painted tombs with corpses. Chris only used a guy close to being a corpse. Paul referred to his fleshly qualifications as skubalon–that is excrement, offscourings and the like. Basically, it’s what was in the sewer of the day, which was usually dumped outside a town in a nasty dump. Poo, flies, urine, spoiling meat, the entrails of butchered chicken, goats, lambs, etc.

    And Malachi said that he wished for excrement to be smeared on the faces of the clergy of his day because they were in unrepentant sin.

    Shock value isn’t bad. It’s neutral and a common tool of the Scripture.

    Phil: Maybe Howard Stern can be an apologist like Chris…..

    So, Chris has done what the apostles, prophets, and Jesus did. Only he didn’t go as far as they did and he used a photo, which was not available then.

    And it’s hard to understand how a dead man whose photo is already in the public domain can be “exploited”. Have you written the History channel or the publishers of books that dipict wars and the Holocaust? They do the same thing. Perhaps his family would care, if they even know.

    When we wrote privately, we agreed there’d be a minefield or two dozen on this project………..BOOM!!!

    You have mentioned a numger of excesses and you are right on all but a few.

    I know for a fact that the plagarism is common to some. I privately gave you an instance. Please don’t accuse all of them. Accusing all of the sins of some is an excess, too.

    Phil: I’m not accusing “all” and my list are complaints from others

    Over all, I’m glad (just as I wrote privately to you) that you are exposing some of these excesses. Truth is always good. And I personally know that some of them WILL NOT TAKE CORRECTION.
    I’ve tried and tried and tried.

    Jesus told his disciples to guard against the “leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” The Pharisees were those that were conservative, but added rules that God didn’t write in the Bible. The Sadducees were the liberals like Abanes and his ilk who deny and willingly disobey much of the Bible. Both were unregenerated but religious. And both are more interested in growing their infuence than obeying God. That is why we see the excesses.

    Finally, I am going to point out one more little thing that you may wish to reconsider as you expose the excesses of some the ODM’s:

    You have criticized them for being “self appointed”. Who appointed you to do YOUR blog?

    Phil: I appointed myself….I saw excesses within the WoF and decided to write about them…..completely biblical BTW……there are a couple of “watchmen” out there begging for money and claiming to be “called” by God and guess what; I don’t believe them

    Think about it.

    In Christ,
    Phil Perkins. PS–There is a biblical answer to the “self-appointed” issue. I will wait and see if anyone knows what it is. I’m sure Naomi or Dorothy will know.

    Phil: Anyone want to take this…..since it’s obvious I don’t know|:-)

  3. Lol.

    Somehow limited here. Catch you guys later.

    BTW Phil, it seems RA is gradually using your site as a RA Campaign against KS and ODMs IMHO. 😀

    Phil: I’ve been getting complaints about the ODMS long before I ever heard of RA….we just happen to agree on quite a bit about them…..and he’s not alone. I’ve been planning this for month’s now my friend:-)

  4. Phil,
    Aren’t you ODM-ing the ODM’s? If you can show from Scripture that they deserve it, go to town.

    And you do continue to speak of them collectively– just reread your answer to Naomi. You didn’t speak of the bad ODM’s. You just said “the ODMS”. That language includes all unless you qualify it in some way. Unless I’ve missed it (a distinct possibility) you’ve not done that. If you have I’ll stand corrected. When you started out doing this series you said you’d take on “the ODMS”, not the ODM’s that were doing wrong stuff. And you’ve done quite a bit of ODM stuff yourself, as you are doing here to “the ODMS”.

    Anyway, the Howard-Stern comment was not cogent. It doesn’t follow at all that shock value used in Scripture excuses vulgarity and sex talk. Think it through.

    However, the logic still holds that the shock value used by men of God doing the work of God approved by God, including God Himself when He walked this earth makes it clear that we ought not condemn that practice outright. An accurate description of hell is shocking. Telling someone they are a sinner facing the hatred of God is shocking, too.

    You haven’t dealt with that.

    Don’t get sore at me for pointing out what the Scripture says. I have been a friend behind the scenes to you, haven’t I? I’ve given you ideas for posts and tried to warn you privately about some of these pitfalls you’ve experienced lately. If you want your criticisms taken seriously by serious followers of Christ, be both scriptural and logical. I’m trying to help you do that.

    On your growing association with RA (seeming, that is) remember what the Scripture says about leaven and lumps.

    In Christ,
    Phil Perkins.

  5. Phil: On your growing association with RA (seeming, that is) remember what the Scripture says about leaven and lumps.

    RA: Ahhhhh, the old leaven attack. Predictable. And talk about not providing evidence of anything. Goodness. You accuse me of being leaven, nd probably don’t think I am even a Christian, based on…….hmmmm…wait a second……oh, yeah, I disagree with the ODMS about Rick Warren and other issues — and have been willing to say so online.

    And exactly where does it say in the Bible that such views = leaven? As I have posted elsewhere:
    the litmus test for Christianity and loving God has been perverted by these people away from what scripture says see John 3:16; Romans 10:9; 1 John 5:11-13). Now, all issues — ALL ISSUES — are settled via an analysis that begins and ends with: “Is this person for, or against, Rick Warren.”

    It has gotten so bad that even a individual’s spiritual maturity (if they are accepted as a Christian) is now being judged by whether they do, or do not, see Warren as a heretic/false teacher.

    This is neither godly or biblical. There is a whole list of cult-like tactics, in fact, that are now being used by the ODMs to deceive their followers the same way cult leaders deceive their trusting devotees.

    R. Abanes

  6. Phil:

    I agree that Chris Rosebrough’s effort was inappropriate. (I should point out that plenty of very good Christian bloggers feel otherwise, and very strongly so.) However, Rosebrough’s error in this matter was small, and it was in pursuit of a true and pressing point. In other words, Rosebrough regrettably used bad taste and insensitivity to address serious doctrinal error at best and man – centered Christianity that waters down the gospel (and not infrequently results in a different gospel) at worst.

    Basically, replace the picture of a starvation victim with a picture of a cartoon skeleton or a picture of one of those fake plastic skeletons from a junior high biology class, and it is fine. Rosebrough was going for shock value, but Christians are not bomb throwers, because that takes the emphasis off Jesus Christ and places it on the messenger. In that context alone, I agree with the Howard Stern reference, and I should point out that one of the reasons why I stopped putting Bill Keller devotionals on my blog was because of his love for the cheap carnival sideshow act to get attention, an “ends justifies the means” approach. The irony is that in doing this, Rosebrough engaged in the very same tactics that he accuses the seeker – sensitive church of!

    However, comparing Rosebrough, who represents Jesus Christ, to Stern, who represents Satan, is unfair and misleading in every other context. And so is forgetting that where Rosebrough only made an error in judgment (probably out of a lack of discretion caused by anger and frustration … I understand it which is why I limit my attention to the false preacher topic so that I won’t develop the “trench warfare bunker mentality”), the people that he, Ken Silva, Ingrid Schlueter, etc. are opposing very often preach a false gospel and give people a false Jesus Christ, or they have other serious problems like opening their pulpits to heretics and apostates (including some of the very ones that you oppose on your site) or openly promote syncretism.

    So two things to remember about these ODMs.

    1. They are human.
    2. They are right much more often than they are wrong.
    3. Their words and actions are to be preferred over virtually everyone that they expose.

  7. Hey Job,

    You said:
    So two things to remember about these ODMs.

    1. They are human.
    2. They are right much more often than they are wrong.
    3. Their words and actions are to be preferred over virtually everyone that they expose.

    Me Here:

    LOL – and these are the very defenses that Abanes issues about Warren. Interesting comparison.

    Thanks. I hope Abanes reads this and considers it in light of his Warren defense.

  8. So can anyone here provide SCRIPTURAL REASONS for condemning Chris?

    If not, we are dealing only with opinion, something Scripture warns about.

    Phil Perkins.

    Phil: I found the picture offensive…..and it is my opinion. Personally I like Chris and listen to him nearly every night. I just think he’s better then that…..again my opinion….

  9. So two things to remember about these ODMs.

    1. They are human.
    2. They are right much more often than they are wrong.
    3. Their words and actions are to be preferred over virtually everyone that they expose.

    Actually it’s THREE things…..and in response:

    1. Too bad they don’t allow this free pass to those they attack.
    2. Actually, I’ve not really done a side by side comparison of lies vs. truthful statements. Have you? And, tbh, being right about a bunch of little things, and then telling some huge whoppers that hurt, harm, divide, and destroy kind of, well, tips the sales in a rather negative direction. It’s like excusing a doctor who accidentally cuts off your right foot because he always diagnosed your cold correctly.
    3. LoL….sorry. No comment.

    Amazing how you are soooooo forgiving when it comes to ODMs — but someone like Warren blinks too many times during a sermon, or in an interview, and its interpreted as a coded message to the Vatican about where to start persecuting Christians during the Tribulation (and invariably, it is also noticed that he dared use a modern word not found in the Bible).

    R. Abanes

  10. Richard:

    Reading your exchange with Lionel Woods made me decide that there was no reason to wait on your response.

    OK. That is enough. The thread where Richard Abanes was caught in a lie on my blog and refused to admit it. Please pay attention to the comments below it.

    So “telling some huge whoppers that hurt, harm, divide, and destroy” is OK for you, but not for Warren? By the way, here AGAIN is one of the MANY links that catches Rick Warren in lies and flip flops.

    Richard, I don’t know for certain whether Ken Silva and Ingrid Schlueter are liars, but I know for certain that you and Rick Warren are, and that is in addition to knowing the New Age syncretism and religious pluralism (if not universalism) based on works that Warren promotes. (By the way, before you accuse below of being an ODM, all they did was reprint an article from the Washington Post.)

  11. Lie???? What lie — EXACTLY — did I post? LoL. The only lies in that thread are the lies about my stand on Mormonism, which is easily seen in my books and writings against Mormonism’s false doctrines. You want to quote a lie of mine in that thread? PLEASE PLEASE do so. I’d really love to see that one.


    >>>>>>> “Rick Warren Apologist Richard Abanes: Going soft on Mormonism, Is this the direction Rick Warren is Heading”

    A LIE – and you helped spread it.

    >>>>>>> “Why does Rick Warren give seminars with Mormons teaching them how to grow their churches?”

    A LIE – he doesn’t (see above and on your thread, my post #11)

    Despite my civil attempts to clear up your false accusations, you continued trying to push the conversation toward Rick Warren.

    I replied: “This is not a thread about Rick Warren. This is a thread about my supposed sympathy for Mormonism, and Mr. John Baker’s false assertion that my book “Inside Today’s Mormonism” is a blatant attempt to synthesis Mormonism and Christianity. That is a bold-faced lie.”

    You answered: “The title of the thread is “More Evidence That Rick Warren Is Working For One Global Religion”

    I responded: The title of the LINK is ‘Rick Warren Apologist Richard Abanes: Going soft on Mormonism, Is this the direction Rick Warren is Heading’ My supposed softening on Mormonism is the link given as supposed evidence of the primary heading of the thread. I am here to correct you for posting that link based on falsehood as evidence of anything.”

    Who was lying in that thread? You and the others who either: 1) kept INSISTING that I have gone “soft” on Mormonism; or 2) kept IGNORING the fact that the article you linked is a lie from beginning to end.

    R. Abanes

  12. For my billionth post about Warren and Mormons see my post –
    October 1, 2008 at 2:24 pm @ THEOLOGY TODAY in
    “Rick Warren: False Teacher or Heretic?”

    R. Abanes

  13. In the comment above, make that

    So “telling some huge whoppers that hurt, harm, divide, and destroy” is OK for you and Warren, but not for everyone else?

  14. Bro. Phil,

    I fully agree with the thought of what Mr. Rosebrough did, though I am not sure that I agree with the original postcard as I did before. That said, he has a point. Pastors who don’t preach God’s Word in a deep, meaty, meaningful way don’t deserve their office…

  15. If this isn’t a scriptural matter, then we shouldn’t be giving it so much attention else we will be giving room for a lot of sentiments. I believe we should always judge based on scriptures not what we think is right or wrong. Thanks.

  16. And I forgot to add. The true litmus test for any teaching/doctrine is Christ.

    How does the teaching portray Christ?
    Does it present Him as the true King He is?
    Does it give him all the glory?
    Does it elevate man above God?
    Does it give man undue attention?
    Does it water down the gospel in anyway?
    Does it seek to appeal to a particular kind of people?
    Is it generally accepted by unbelievers?
    Is it in accordance with the theme of the bible?

    There are a lot more questions dat can be asked. Just add Christ and you will find your answer.

  17. How does the teaching portray Christ?
    * He is the ONLY way, truth, and life (Jn 14:6), who was/is fully divine and fully human — the sinless, perfect, lamb of God who was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and by whose death on the cross, we were reconciled to God and by who’s resurrection broke the chains of death that bound us so that we, who by FAITH ALONE accept his death and resurrection and eternal lordship over our lives (Rom. 10:9), can receive by GRACE ALONE eternal life.
    Does it present Him as the true King He is?
    * Christ Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, who will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end. He is the Creator of all, and Lord of all.
    Does it give him all the glory?
    * Christ alone is worthy of our worship and holds all glory. He is God. The Father is God. The Holy Spirit is God. They are the one eternal God who has all glory, honor, and praise — Rev 4:8. No one shares his glory — Isaiah 42:8
    Does it elevate man above God?
    * All men and all women are sinners — born into sin as a result of Adam and Eve’s transgression. No man or woman is to be followed at the cost of elevating that person above God. Only God is sovereign. His Word is holy, true, and just
    Does it give man undue attention?
    * Not sure what this even means….What is “undue attention”? Where is that phrase found in the Bible? What does that even mean? Who defines “undue”? This is a totally subjective term. It’s like saying, “Does it use music unpleasant to God hears?” Last time I checked, God hadn’t listed his favorite styles of music or call any of them “unpleasant.” IN other words, whoever is making that kind of statement has in their OWN head, their OWN standard for measuring what is unpleasant — just as, I assume, you have in your own head a personal standard of what is “undue.”

    This is where we all MUST be careful to NOT equate our own personal feelings and standards with what is Biblical. It relates a lot of what I’ve see among ODMs. They take their own PERSONAL/SUBJECTIVE standards and try to put them on others.
    Does it water down the gospel in anyway?
    * Here’s the Gospel: “Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ DIED FOR OUR SINS according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was RAISED ON THE THIRD DAY according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:1-4).

    That’s the gospel that saves (Rom. 10:9). Don’t add to it.
    Does it seek to appeal to a particular kind of people?
    * The gospel, is the gospel, is the gospel, is the gospel (see above). How you preach or explain that gospel is as multiple as there are people and languages. Don’t confuse “the gospel” with the manner, style, flare, personality, illustrations used, temperament, vocabulary, or appearance of the one preaching the gospel.
    Is it generally accepted by unbelievers?
    * Gee, forgive me, but I thought that was the point. God forbid I should go to a park and preach to a crowd and have them all believe.

    You’re probably referring to the oft-mentioned idea that unbelievers simply MUST hate us Christians. They MUST hate us if we are “true” Christians and if we are preaching the “true” Gospel.

    But that notion is based on a perversion of the biblical text and a twisting of the lessons taught by Jesus. This mangled interpretation, commonly used by ODMs, is most often heralded by people who find it necessary to be obnoxious most of the time — including when they’re preaching the gospel. They’re not being biblical or Christian when they get people to hate them — they’re just being themselves.
    Is it in accordance with the theme of the bible?
    * …….which is?

    I would assume this theme you mention is that we are all sinners in need of forgiveness; that we are separated from God because of our iniquities, and that our sins can only be forgiven through acceptance of Christ’s death on the cross for our sins, which was the plan of God before the foundations of the world — i.e., to send his son to die for us, so that through his death and life, we also might have life with our Creator for all eternity.


    Please do point out my leaven, Phil.

  18. Brother Adu and Sister Naomi,
    You said, “Pastors who don’t preach God’s Word in a deep, meaty, meaningful way don’t deserve their office…”

    You are SOOOOO right. And SO biblical!!!

    Naomi, yes. And verse 5. Anyway, you care what the Bible says. Wish more did. And you’re right on the opinions issue, too. I didn’t mean to repeat what you’d already said.

    God bless,
    Phil Perkins.

  19. Phil P: deep, meaty, meaningful way

    RA: Yes. Indeed. Of course, the obvious questions are: 1) Who defines “deep, meaty, meaningful way”? and 2) What criteria is even used to define “deep, meaty, meaningful way”?

    The answers are predictable. Whatever YOU decide is “deep, meaty, meaningful way” is no doubt divinely revealed and is the ONLY definition that matters. And as for the criter1a used, it always ends up being YOUR own standards based on YOUR own inner, subjective likes and dislikes.

    It’s convenient, but certainly not biblical.

    And, btw, Phil, in my last post, I asked: “Please do point out my leaven, Phil.”

    Please answer…..

    R. A.

  20. Bro Phil,
    i think all ODMS need this discourse.Without much ado i quoted Matthew 7 :1-5 on one site and it wasnt answered.How do you as the controler of this ensure comments are objective and references are true.
    Furthermore,whats the place of Elders 1Tim 5:1,and 2Thess 3:14-15,as touch those who disregard apostolic instructions they are not to be treated as enemies but brothers.
    Again,ODMS should refrain from quoting ppls statements out of context,this should be the rule .
    Furthermore,Where do we differentiate sincerely wrong and wrong,we should not be quick to judge motives 1 Cor 4:3-5.
    All christians should be swift to hear and slow to speak James 1:19-20.
    Richards comment shouldnt be treated as dissenting from a common position but rather a call for sober reflection.

  21. Bro Phil
    I appreciate your posting my least it gives an assurance dat u are’nt listening to u &ur opinions.
    Phil: Can you clarify this please?

    Now,i read your article on’Dont Hate the Player’&i thot it needed no sequel .
    A quest bro…how do we draw a line btw hurtful words and rebuke.Where does praying for those in error come in.i dont think contending for the faith ,staying away frm folks,avoid them…e.t.c IS All,believers should be doing.I realise there are alot of error going on but i dont want to be sniffing at Wof’s,paula’s next error.

    Phil: Correcting ones doctrine is always dicey. I believe that we should stick to doctrine and not go into all the personal stuff….something I’ve been guilty of in the past and doing my best not to do with the Lords help…..

    Maybe not sniffing but what do we do when we discover the error….say nothing?

    There are a number of christians who may not be too perfect in doctrine,yet are on mission fields,muslim countries etc reaching the unreached.Balance is really needed in discerment.
    Peter erred and misled in Gal2,paul still in other epistles acknowledged his work.
    We should’nt fight beyond the rules of brother love.
    Odms are easy to join,just have info on certain preachers and how to tear apart.
    Again,many reformed teachers had their own failings and errors in their time,including controversies.i shouldnt mention names,as it wouldnt do the gospel any good.Yet,inspite we acknowledge their work &quote the positives.
    Bro,caution,fairness,equality,objectivity,refusing to get obsessed with”contending” yet its with individuals,not making persons issues,,will go alongway in clearing the terrain of mixing apple with oranges.
    Finally,am not in anyway advocating a ”unity ” some teach disregarding scripture,but the WHOLE counsel of the Word.

    Phil: There’s your answers….and I showed you far more grace then you will ever know…..

  22. Phil,

    As you may have noticed, I have refrained from commenting on this subject, not because I do not see that some of the issues you have raised need addressing, but because it is my personal opinion (note please) that you are not addressing it objectively.

    Phil: I’m trying to be objective Yomi….

    I also see that there are those who are now using you, your words and your blog as a cover to hide under or pursue their less than Biblical goals.

    The commenter named Femmy above mentioned asking certain questions and his comments being censored. He was referring to me. What he has conveniently not explained is what led to that. I ask nothing but that you follow the discussion at Delusions of Grandeur and see if this fellow is being honest.

    Phil: I had no idea but thanks for letting me know about this

    Apart from his being dishonest, he has consistently used this crusade of yours as a cover-up and a reference point. My responses to him on that are in the open for all to read.

    I love you as a brother, but regardless of your good intentions, the way this crusade is being prosecuted is producing more confusion than can be cleared. Note that I agree that there is a problem in certain quarters. I have seen it myself and wondered what is going on too. I hope to be able to help address it too as the Lord helps.

    But just to have my say on this subject, the matter of Chris’ cartoon is purely subjective. The message he passed across is sound. How can anyone sit as a judge over something as subjective as this cartoon? The cartoon is neither immoral nor illegal. It is purely a question of how each person perceives the artwork.

    Phil: I wasn’t judging Chris Yomi. His site wasn’t one of the four sites I alluded to regarding ODMS. I just think he used poor judgment and I used poor judgment by using this as a start off into a lengthy series on the ODMS……

    How is that an indictment of being out of control? Perhaps Chris has said and done wrong in other situations, in which case he ought to be taken up on those. But as for this cartoon, it is a question of personal perception.

    As a friend and brother to you, I have had my say on this subject and will leave it at that.

    Keep fighting the good fight, brother!

    Phil: Thanks Yomi….

  23. Phil,

    Thanks for your clarification. I appreciate the honesty in stating:

    I just think he used poor judgment and I used poor judgment by using this as a start off into a lengthy series on the ODMS……

    Thanks also for your disclaimer over at my blog. Much appreciated.

    I pray that the Lord will help us in seeing that the truth of His word is upheld in this dark and perverse generation.

    God bless.

  24. Personally, I don’t see a thing wrong with the depiction. Is it an inaccurate depiction of the spiritual state of those who are not fed God’s Word?? No.

    Is it a depiction contrary to revelation in the Bible about the state of those who are in a famine for the Word?? No.

    Does it overstate or understate the situation?? Understate.

    Reality and Truth aren’t always pretty. I imagine when Ezekiel was commanded to employ human dung to illustrate coming judgment it was fairly offensive to most people’s sensibilities as well.

    When Isaiah walked naked and barefoot for 3 years to illustrate Truth, I’m sure it was an absolute scandal.

    But both were actually understated in their illustration of the spiritual realities they conveyed. There’s a famine for the Word in the land…..let’s not cover the Truth of what that actually entails for those being starved. I’m sure the reality, if we could see it, would make this postcard look like a Valentine from Hallmark.

Comments are closed.