snackin’ with my nemesis

sometimes it sucks to humanize people. because when you do, they’re so much harder to:

    1. hate
    2. mistreat
    3. objectify
    4. dismiss
    5. treat as two-dimensional
    6. all of the above, darn it!

first it was that darn brett kunkle from stand to reason. he was easy to dislike when i just thought he was two-dimmensional blog guy. he was rather completely impossible to dislike once he drove down to san diego and we had lunch and shared life stories and all that stuff i say i believe in.

now, last week it was amy and roger from the a-team blog. harumph. my life was much more nicely segregated into ‘keep at arms distance’ and ‘hug’ categories until i had dinner with them.

tony jones had initiated dinner with the stand to reason peeps and the a-team peeps, during the national pastors convention last week, and invited me to join in the *fun*. it seems the whole lot of ’em (doug pagitt was there also, and a couple professors — roger blogged about it here — retired to a zondervan suite to have a quiet conversation about substantive theological stuff. but i had to leave before that, and joined them all for the two hours in a noisy restaurant. i would have enjoyed listening in on the meatier stuff, i’m sure. but the truth is: it was great to sit between brett and roger, and across from amy, and not be able to hide in the really-smart-guys-club at the end of the table (tony, doug, greg k from str, and a prof from talbot named scott, i think). it forced roger and i to talk. and it forced amy and i to lean in (to overrule the background noise) and talk. and we didn’t talk about what we disagree on. we didn’t talk about postmodernism or modernism of apologetics or brian mclaren. we talked about our lives, and why we do what we do. we laughed. we didn’t cry, but — heck — we might have if it weren’t for the really bad piano bar entertainer in the next room (shoot, he almost made us cry!).

roger and amy have both emailed me since — very nice emails, both tracing back to our ugly days in august. i’m sure i could find 100 things i disagree with them on. and i’m sure they could find 200 things they disagree with me on. but meeting people face-to-face forces us into one of those “well, look at that, we can find 1000 things we agree on” situations.

so, i’m going to the airport to await the arrival of deb from lighthouse trails research. she’s just got to be my next ex-nemesis, doesn’t she?

57 thoughts on “snackin’ with my nemesis”

  1. Marko,

    Good times, good times.

    Now if I could just stop having nightmares about the piano bar…”Everything I d-o-o-o-o-o, I do it for y-o-o-o-o-u…”

    I look forward to getting together again!

  2. What is this, some kind of game show where you take people off your list? Just kidding, this is good stuff. I actually hope things get patched up with Deb… probably not, but it would be cool!

  3. There will be no meeting at the airport. Any meeting I might have would be to warn the thousands of young people who are being deceived by Youth Specialties and Zondervan into thinking that the “new” emerging spirituality will lead them to God when in fact it will lead them into a belief system that says all paths lead to God.

    I noticed Sue Monk Kidd is being highlighted on your blog. In her book, The Dance of the Dissident Daughter, she says that God can be found in everything, even in human waste and says “to embrace Goddess is simply to discover the Divine in yourself.” She denounces the Word of God and says, “The ultimate authority of my life is not the Bible…. My ultimate authority is the divine voice in my own soul.” The common ground you speak of is also described by Monk Kidd: “Mystical awakening in all the great religious traditions, including Christianity, involves arriving at an experience of unity or nondualism [Satan’s effort to eradicate the gap between good and evil].” It is such a “common ground” that nutures delusion and takes the practitioner further and further away from Jesus Christ and His free gift of salvation through grace by faith. As long as Youth Specialties and Zondervan continue to promote this spirituality in a significant public arena, there will be no private meeting with Lighthouse Trails. What we do, we do in the light in front of all. Instead of a meeting at the airport, Mr. Ostreicher, may I strongly suggest that you spend that time in repentance.

  4. well, I guess that answers that, huh? Can’t win ’em all, I guess.

    On the bright side, she did let you know so that you didn’t spend all that time in airport…so you got that going for you.

  5. Mark,
    Please explain why you would leave your readers with the impression you were meeting with “Deb,”(Deborah)which was not a true statement?


  6. Cathy and Carla- Not to speak for Marko, but I think it was just a little sarcastic joke. At least that’s how I read it…but I’m not the smartest guy around.

  7. Sarcastic joke?…If people could be left thinking that Mark was meeting with someone when indeed he wasnt, I dont call that being sarcastic. I call that being less than honest at the expense of someone else. He owes all of us, including Deborah, an apology.


  8. shirley, goodness and mercy. it was, as sean says, i wee joke. i thought it was obvious it was a joke. there was no meeting scheduled between me, or anyone employed by youth specialties, or anyone associated with youth specialties, any of our legal representatives, or any of the authors of books we’ve read who also wrote another book that has disagreeable content, and any person or persons from lighthouse trails research or any of their subsidiaries.

  9. Christians who talk with such venom on their breath make my heart heavy. It would be one thing if it were an issue of the errosion of fundamental docterines. It’s another all together over hard to nail down issues.

    And would Deborah Dombrowski please read Matthew chapter 18 on dealing with conflict with other brothers and sisters in Christ.Christians who talk with such venom on their breath make my heart heavy.

    And would Deborah Dombrowski please read Matthew chapter 18 on dealing with conflict with other brothers and sisters in Christ.

    Her refusal to speak with Marko face to face seems to show that she is not open to following the mandate of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

  10. um…that was strange. Problem with copy and paste I think. Sorry. I hope you get the just of what I was saying.

  11. I really think this is a powerful post that makes an important point.

    Marko, it takes humility to be willing to meet face-to-face with someone you disagree with, and humility to listen to them and to respect their story. The resulting awareness of their (and your) humanity is a powerful gift you were given.

    These meetings give me great hope for the church.

    And, in many ways, I think this is one of the reasons I can stand the idea of “having” to go to heaven with people I disagree with theologically. Because ultimately we are all redeemed and loved by the same Saviour, and Jesus is the biggest common denominator of all, and that pride that I am so fond of wearing when I think someone else is wrong will be meaningless in that time.

    Thanks for the hope and poignant stories of redemption, both for you, and for brett, amy and roger, and the others yet to come.

    And thanks for being willing to be humble. It speaks greatly of your leadership and your heart in following Jesus.

  12. But,Erik,…what was the motive behind Mark’s so-called “Wee joke”?… Why would a leader of Youth Specialties conduct himself in such a callous, careless manner? There is no excuse for giving readers an impression that what he said was true when it was not. Erik, Marko was the one who was being mean spirited.

  13. The issue between Deborah, her organization and Marko goes further back than this post (that is why I believe they both need to follow Matthew 18).

    I agree that it was a sarcastic comment that was misleading. However I do not believe it was Marko’s intention to be mean spirited nor to mislead his readers. If it was – it was wrong and out of place.

    I’m not 100% sure, but I would guess Marko would like to make amends with Deborah and other of his detractors. He wouldn’t want to do anything that would get in the way of that.

  14. i apologize.

    i apologize.

    i apologize.

    now, this post — ironically — was about the beauty of reconcilliation…

  15. If I could humbly suggest that everyone switch to thong undergarments, it might help from getting them all in a bunch over rediculous crap like this. It was a joke, a blatant and obvious joke. Get over it, and while we’re getting over things, please get over yourselves.

    Let’s inject a huge dose of humility here (like Mark has modeled by talking to people that he has previously been at odds with) and realize that we’re all sinners and beggars at the foot of God’s door…we all need reconciliation.

    Or we could always just continue to berate and generally beat the crap out of Mark.

  16. great…no “edit” option. Well, I meant everything except that last paragraph. That was a bit out of line…sorry Marko

  17. I guess I am a little surprised that anyone who knows you (even just through this blog) would think you were serious. Not that it couldn’t happen…but I knew you were joking.

  18. Though I would like that meeting to seriously happen and think Marko is extending the olive Branch. Deborah, such a meeting might be beneficial in your crusade to make a point of seeing Marko “Repent” rather than the rhetoric that often falls inbetween the cracks in the online posting kind.

  19. Sean,
    Thong underwear? What is in your heart to even make such a comment? A man of God seeking the holiness of God in his own life would never talk like you have….

    Also, the above, “I apologize, I apologize, I apologize” by Mark sounded like more sarcasm than an apology coming from a sincere heart.

    Deborah has raised some serious issues in her above posting. Is is true that Mark is endorsing this book? If so, does mark support what Sue Monk Kid has written?

  20. cathy, i did not endorse sue monk kidd’s ‘dance of the dissident daughter’, nor have i even read it. if you look at my post about her fictional book, ‘the mermaid chair’, i barely even endorse that, saying that i was very uncomfortable with much of it. but even if i DID endorse the work of fiction, i am completely at a loss as to the ongoing tactics of deborah to malign me by quoteing from an author, just because i said i read a different book by that author.

    my apology wasn’t sarcastic.

    can we just drop this, please?

    reconcilliation. this post was about the beauty of reconcilliation. let’s all talk about that, and the goodness of god, and god’s great desire that our lives be full of reconcilliation, not division.

  21. Mark,
    Someone in a leadership position needs to be very careful they are not recommending books written by authors who are propagating biblical error in the body of Christ. As you indicated, you did not feel comfortable with some of her writings. Therefore, instead of giving the impression that even her fictional book is ok to read, in accordance with Scripture, we should say, “Since this author has written material not based on sound biblical doctrine, I cannot recommend any of her books because I cannot run the risk of confusing others.” We need to consider the consequences of an undiscerning, immature believer who may pick up other books by this woman and become influenced by her false teachings.

    This posting is about reconcilliation….reconcilliation with the Word of God. In obedience to God’s word, I say, run from Sue Monk Kidd and her teachings. Please reconsider indirectly or directly recommending any books written by this author.

    We need to be known as a people who contend earnestly for the faith. God help us…


  22. Am I completely missing something here? I seem to remember a story about a Savior named Jesus who dined with tax collectors and set a woman free who should have been killed for her sin. I also seem to remember something about Jesus hanging on the cross and crying out “Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do.”. Have we NOT been called to follow Christ?

    Cathy, if Jesus took your advice and raised a negative fuss about these sinners and boycott everything that they did, do you think He would have gotten up on that cross and died for your sins?

  23. I can’t believe I just spent 10 minutes reading this thread, shame on me…(but, lo, let me comment–as to add another minute for someone else)…
    Going back to what Cathy said–do you not see your hypocrisy in what you are writing?… if this Sue Monk Kidd book is leading people astray and you suggest that Marko shouldn’t comment on any of her books because that is “endorsing it;” I must ask you–why are you reading and commenting on Are you not “endorsing” Marko by being on this site?

    I appreciate discernment, there are things that Mark or others say on this site that I really disagree with (and they would disagree with some of my thoughts as well, but that is part of the beauty of the site, it helps to engage my mind, it helps me to go find the Truth (through His Word and the Holy Spirit leading me). Shame on anyone who says we shouldn’t be well read–it’s called Apologetics! I have never heard Mark say–go read this instead of God’s Word…

    Keep on reading, and may we glean from one another and may we all be led to His Word and be more educated so that we can actually know how to reach the lost (rather than just trying to win the point with other Christians).


  24. Everyone please shut up you are hurting my head. Thank You. Ahh that’s better.

  25. Cathy, If you haven’t given up yet, than just know there are people out here with sound minds who totally agree with you. The problem is that some people turn every contraversial thing they say into “it was just a joke.” You and I and others know these things are not joking matters, but Marko falls back on “it was just a joke and let’s just al get along” line whenever necessary. You haven’t failed at making your points, they have just fallen on deaf ears. Or should I say death ears. They have been tickled to death, if you know what I mean! And that’s no joke. At sometime you just have to accept this and move on to more fertile ground. Karen

  26. P.S I guess Jesus sat around and laughed about “thong underware” with the sinners. Some of us missed that. I guess he liked to joke like that and wasn’t an ole’stick in the mud. Paul must have talked like that too, since he said imitate me as I imitate Jesus. Gee, I wonder why the bible says to think on things that are pure and holy and of good report? or why it says… Oh, You know what? Who cares what it says! Let’s just talk about God, be cool and get along. That’s pretty much what I get from Marko’s blog and it must be the Gospel, or maybe it is, I don’t know. Who cares. God is love! (just joking, duh, what’s up doc?) Cathy, Marko and his followers aren’t listening to what you say. It seems to strain their brains, unfortunately! Karen- That is so mean!

  27. once again marko, it’s time to turn the other cheek. god must be so proud of us all. we really show the world how to love each other.

  28. Karen,

    First of all, I have no idea what you are talking about in these two posts…”That’s pretty much what I get from Marko’s blog and it must be the Gospel, or maybe it is, I don’t know. Who cares. God is love! (just joking, duh, what’s up doc?)”, “Or should I say death ears. They have been tickled to death, if you know what I mean!”.

    No. I don’t know what you mean…

    Anyway, I’ll try to clarify my comment further for you. I never said that Jesus joined in on things that he disagreed with. The majority of Jesus’ character was filled with forgiveness and grace, rather than boycotts and put downs. It seems you and Cathy thrive on the latter. Did Jesus tell everyone to stay far away from the tax collector? No. He actually invited himself over for dinner and had a meeting with someone (the tax collector) that He disagreed with. You would also think that He should ridicule and put down the adulteress, but He didn’t. Don’t you also think that he should have despised (and brought condemnation on) the people that spit in His face, turned their backs on him and sentenced him to the cross? When Jesus was upset, it was usually directed at those that focused too much on the law and not enough on mercy and grace.

    “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

    I see no love coming from Cathy or Karen…

  29. You know what? You all-Marko, Claire, etc- just “kill” me. And you call it “love.” It is so sad that you can embrace so much “anti-christ junk” and not warn others about “truth” and then say to yourselves,”we are so persecuted because we are just so loving.” You are the blind leading the blind, as you turn your cheeks at every turn, to the point of dizziness! It seems no one can tell you guys anything! But, to Deborah from Lighthouse and Cathy, and others of like Spirit, “thanks for warning those of us who are willing to examine ourselves to see if we are in the faith and who also judge everything according to the Word of God.” Sadly, however,it seems there is a point of no return for many of the others. Whether a person approaches Marko and his friends this way, as I am doing now (which certainly is not the best way)or by reasoning with them using scripture, neither way seems to get any where! (I have in previous months tried appraoching them with scripture and failed) Trying to get through to them about reconsidering their beliefs and endorsements , seems to be of no avail. Again, It just “kills” me. It can be as agonizingly painful as watching the one you love, who is not yet saved, resist all your attempts to lead them into salvation. Again, it “kills” me. Don’t you wish the Holy Spirit could show them the meaning of 1Cor 5:18, ” Now some are puffed up…” and 1 Cor 5:6, “your glorying is not good….” My footnote in my New King James Study Bible says,” The Corinthians had a twisted view of grace that caused them to be proud of their tolerance of the sexual offender.( Claire’s quote: ” God must be so proud of us all. We really show the world how to love each other.” God is never proud of us when we tolerate what he is opposed to. He teaches us that a little leaven leavens the whole lump. The Corinthians were rebuked for this same attitude of Claire’s) The footnotes go on to say “They believed that because God’s grace is limitless, the freedom that every Christian enjoys is also limitless.” We are taught to avoid “being proud of our own tolerance of sin.” Paul rebuked believers for this very thing. But you can’t get this across to many today. That is why I keep saying, “let those who have ears to hear, hear!” Karen P.S. If a person does not agree with what the bible calls sin, they will tolerate many things in the name of Love and … there I go again! I have to stop myself-trying to reason with people who are just going to poo-poo this as mean and unchristian- so I will sign off and leave this to others who like beating against a brick wall. It really is sad and I don’t mean to come across as giving up all hope but this is the Apostasy and the falling away that the bible speaks of. It is very sad to have learned about it’s coming and to now live in that day. So many people are being led down a very wide road to destruction which joins up with all the incoming roads of the New Age to form one great big Path to Hell. It is shocking to see it happening and not be able to reason with those headed down that path. Thank God for prayer.Karen

  30. I will leave this little bit of information. My husband and I minister to unsaved bikers, drug addicts and disabled people, and those that are homeless. We try to show mercy, we try to love the unlovely, we eat with the sinner. We do however, teach them that, once they are saved, Christ’s desire is to lead them in a life of holiness, obedience and worship unto Him. We go into the highways and byways and “eat” with many who others would shy away from. We take time with them, roll up our sleves and help them in their daily lives. We not only teach the word to them, we try to help them in practical ways- like taking them to social services, the doctor, getting them glasses, new teeth. We try to be servants to them. We are not just spouting off scriptures. We try to live the bible the best we can and teach others a how to live according to the bible once they are saved. Karen

  31. Karen,

    I love your heart and appreciate your passion for truth and toward those you minister to.

    I ask you, though, to be careful in lumping the lot of those not persecuting Marko into the crowd toward the “road to destruction”. I’ve never stated whether I agree or disagree with the “misleading doctrine” that Cathy was speaking of. I’ve only stated to love the person. We ARE called to rise up against false doctrine and sin, however, in that, we are still called to love. If I was to dislike, put-down and be irritated with every person that had opposing views to mine, there wouldn’t be a soul on earth worthy of my love.

    That Cathy would blatantly (and angrily) put down the desire that Marko had to meet with her and the fact that she is stating we should never endorse ANY book by any author who might have misguided beliefs in certain areas, is the boycotting I disagree with. As christians, loving someone is NOT necessarily stating that you endorse their lifestyle. You should know this by the amazing ministry you have. For some reason, we think that we should be compassionate and kind-hearted to those who are lost but that compassion is watered down or completely absent toward that person once they are saved, because “They should know better.”. The simple fact is whether we are saved or not, we are all human, we are all sinners, we all fail. That is where the beauty of Christ comes in. That is the beauty of his mercy and strength, he makes up for our inaccuracy and our failures.

    Cathy was putting PEOPLE down and ousting them instead of just rising up against the points she disagreed with.

    Marko, I’m sorry this area became a message board.

  32. karen,

    i was not pointing the finger at you or anyone who disagrees with marko. i used the words us and we. we are all the family of god. i mess up daily like everyone else. i am well aware of the big plank in my own eye.

  33. This is not about putting people down it is about upholding truth. That is where you all are not hearing what we are saying. We love the sinner and our brothers, but in these last days it is absolutely necessary that we call each other to accountability to the scriptures. The world loves! But they don’t love correction, rebuke, discipline, chastising, which are all apart of loving our brothers. But no one wants to accept such as being “loving.” Satan is deceiving many, many people and many of them are lovely, vibrant, thinking, young people. But God is trying to teach us that His “loving one another” is sometimes hard to take. It doesn’t mean that we are trying to be divisive or unloving. Quite the opposite. There is a fire raging in front of all of us and if we don’t warn people they will walk right into it. I will just ask you this one question. Who are you warning and of what are you warning them? We are not here on this earth jsut to be blessed and converse about who we think God is. We are here to prepare ourselves and others for eternity. If we don’t lead them right, they will miss heaven. I used to tell my New Age sister, “God loves us so much He has made a way for us NOT to have to travel all over the world and try a little of this religion, or this technique, and then try a little of this and go over here and add this to what we believe. That is what she does. No! He did not sprinkle truth down and tell us to go all over the world and gather it up so we could know who He is. That is not love but that is how she and others build their beliefs. Instead, the God who really loves us, sent His only Son to die for us and in one book, given to all generations, He gave us the revelation of who He is and how we can know Him. And that book will interpret itself. If a passage says one thing, it will confirm the interpretation, in other places. But that is too easy and too simplistic for most people. They want to make it hard and call His way “hard.” We love you guys enough to make you mad so you will hopefully get mad enough to check out what we are saying. Like I said, it kills me to watch people slide down the slithery road to distruction on this issue of Love. My sister is so sold out on the Love issue that she has even changed the tone of her voice to sound loving. It is not one single issue of love. Did you ever consider that the angels surround the throne crying “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord” Why do you think they are not crying “Love, love love is the Lord?’ God’s love is a part of His holiness. His judgements are apart of his holiness. Above all He is Holy! Love is not the single, greatest issue or characteristic of God. Yes, we need to be kind but we need to be holy also. We can’t just approach God any old way we want with any old technique that works. People were swallowed up into the ground for approaching God the wrong way. He is Holy. Every day we are given a chance to live holy. Every day what we do is worhip unto Him if it is holy. Coarse joking is not holy. WE are not suppose to joke about things that take peoples minds to places that are not holy. Just as an example, “Thongs” and talking about things like that are not holy. When we talk about thongs we may not think we are hurting anyone so we are really being unloving but talking about those things aren’t “holy.” We need to couple love with holiness. That is where so many miss it. We need to teach people what love is and we need to teach them how to live holy. Certain practices are an abomination to the Lord. That means they are unholy. They are not innocent or harmless. We see too many young people thinking that if they aren’t hurting anyone else, that that is all they need to do to please the Lord. Who do you want to correct you. No one? Love risks being called mean, divisive, etc because it does love. Jesus said he would bring a sword between sisters, brothers, mothers etc. Not because Love would divide them but because they would not all believe His words. His Word would divide them. You all are young and precious and worth me ruffeling your feathers a little. Remember, Love is a part of the greater Character of God which is His Holiness. God Bless you, Karen

  34. Correction -I meant to say ” When we talk about thongs we may not think we are hurting anyone so we are really NOT being “unloving”. However the truth is those things are not holy, which is important to think about too.-Karen

  35. Just glancing back to Marko’s last comment. Do I detect a little unloving scarcasim there? That’s ok. YOu see those of you who are stuck on love need to realize that there is much more to this walk. I did just stop by and I think you think I stayed too long, but like I said, Love “provokes” people to proper behavior. For your happiness, Marko, I’ll take a little vacation away from here. God bless, Karen

  36. Again, Karen, you are lumping a bunch of people in a category where they don’t belong. If you are going to point the finger at someone and bring up an argument, make sure your argument is being addressed to the correct person. I never mentioned agreeing with anything having to do with thongs.

    Just because I speak on Love, it doesn’t mean I am NOT speaking on biblical truth. I am focusing on one aspect of God and Christ and you are assuming that I have negated the other characteristics of his being. You are looking at my point with your eyes closed.

    You stated this:
    “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord” Why do you think they are not crying “Love, love love is the Lord?’ God’s love is a part of His holiness. His judgements are apart of his holiness. Above all He is Holy!”

    Again, just because I focus on us being loving, it does not mean that I claim we should reject holiness or a pursuit of righteousness.

    Again, the “greatest” commandment was summed up by Jesus, Himself, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”.

    Does it mean we are called to be unrighteous and unholy because Jesus is talking specifically here about us loving God and our neighbor? No. It means He focused His ministry on these two points. That is what I’m fighting for.

    You asked me (all of us? only me? I don’t know but I’ll give my answer) this “I will just ask you this one question. Who are you warning and of what are you warning them?”

    I am “warning”/focusing on youth and young adults. I have been involved in youth ministry, college ministries and homeless ministries over the course of several years. I am warning them to not judge the church based on those who uphold the law so boldly that they forget to see the people they are stepping on in the process. I am fighting to show those that hate “the church” that it isn’t only comprised of hypocrites, aggravated mobs and self-righteous. I am fighting to show people, who have been poisoned by the politics of it all, to seek out truth in the Word, through the life of Christ and through the Holy Spirit instead of seeking out truth through the inadequacy and inaccuracy of humans. I am fighting to show them love and acceptance as they are children of God rather than rejects cause by their sin. God is Holy, however, the fact that He is Holy does not mean I have a reason to be unloving. I am fighting for people to see God as he is…Love.

    I appreciate you “ruffling my feathers”, however, you are allowing other people’s opinions and comments to be merged into my opinion. If you read my comments again, you will see that you and I are in agreement. I am focusing on one quality of God and you are assuming that I have forgotten or overlooked his other qualities.

    My “issue” has always (throughout this entire thread) been with Deborah’s anger in her original comment and Cathy’s call to boycott an author. What I am calling for instead is to love those that you have a disagreement with. Boycott the material you have an issue with…not the person.

  37. Jen, you have misunderstood that I was responding to your commnents. I was not referring specifically to the things that you wrote. I was referring to the overall tone of “Everything” that was written. As a matter of fact I had not even remembered your name or specifically seperated anything you said from all that was said. You and others didn’t seem to have a problem with anything anyone else said except for what me, Cathy and Deborah; so I was addressing the whole kittenkabootle of you. I will comment now on the fact that you seem so sure that Deborah is unloving, yet I see her as very loving. Maybe it is you who is all wound up with anger and unacceptance. It is obvious that Marko was being scarcastic or at least not saying things in such a way that I would not think he was being scarcastic; and yet he does not seem to see any need to apologize. I thought love would do that, but I guess you all are the experts. Tell me about Love now. Reminds me of how Deborah feels about what she believes. Let’s see is this called righteous anger? Got to get on a fast plane out of here. Enjoy being in agreement with yourselves. Karen P.S If someone is giving my kids drugs, I Will boycott that person and not just the subject of dealing drugs. Some of the things that “seem” right are down right poisonous. You seem to be implying that I am “a legalist”, self-righteous, hypocrit, etc.” Funny that I warn people of those very things too. This is not about legalism and self-rightness. It is about upholding the truth of the bible. Get mad all you want but some of the beliefs and people and books that have been promoted through Marko’s ministy are not biblical. -Karen- If you are not sure what I am talking about go read some of the things that people disagree with him over. And remember, you are still suppose to Love them. Can you convince me that you love Deborah. You seem to be convinced that she does not love others. I am not conviced that you love her. Karen

  38. karen — the only time i was sarcastic in this entire exchange was in my original post, in my comment that i was headed to the airport to meet deborah. and for that, i very clearly and unsarcastically apologized (in one of the comments). please do not assume any of my other comments have been sarcastic. my affirmation of your ministry, for example, was completely heart-felt and sincere.

  39. Then, I didn’t get it and possibly you need to work on your “Love” methods because that is not the way it came across to me. My entire point is that you all approach everthing on how YOU feel. If you Feel loving than ,by george, you must be loving. If you feel God than, by george, it must be God! Labrinth walks, contemplative prayers, calling Christianity an Eastern religion,and on and on all seems or feels so good to you so it must be God! You felt sincere and I told you it seemed unloving. Again, no need to apologize. I thought if someone was offended with me, even if I had not intentionally offeneded them, if I loved them I would say I was sorry. What is the big deal about that? Isn’t that love? or are there some exceptions to always smothering people with what they want to hear. I know in my heart your “intentions” are good, but I don’t believe you think that you can be deceived by the spirit that Jesus talks about at the end of the age that if possible could deceive even the elect. I think you are confident that if things seem right to you, they are. I cannot assume anyone is totally trustworthy unless they base what they believe on scripture rather than traditions and other things. Karen

  40. “As a matter of fact I had not even remembered your name or specifically seperated anything you said from all that was said.”

    That’s a misleading and confusing position to place yourself in, Karen.

    You are lumping us all together again by this comment “I thought love would do that, but I guess you all are the experts.”. There are tons of people that have left comments on here (including Marko) that have not stated they “back” my opinion. Be careful, Karen, with creating generalizations and stereotypes.

    “You seem to be implying that I am “a legalist”, self-righteous, hypocrit, etc.””

    I never implied those things about you. You asked what I warn people of. My response was an answer to your question, not an attack against you.

    “If you are not sure what I am talking about go read some of the things that people disagree with him over. And remember, you are still suppose to Love them.”

    Reminding me with “you are still suppose to love them” shows me that you seem to think I will have a hard time loving someone, once I see their faults. Karen, you have no idea the things/sin people have done/committed against me…I have chose to love them instead of focus on their faults. If Christ can do it on the cross, I can do it while I’m alive on earth.

    If someone was giving my children drugs, yes, I would try and keep my children away from that person. However, I wouldn’t talk trash about that person and hate them for trying to do so. As a volunteer youth worker, I’ve had kids in youth groups offer me drugs before. Did I turn my back on them and start spreading vicious attacks against them? No. I can still warn people of “poison” or unbiblical teaching and false doctrine without teaching to slander one’s character and boycott everything they stand for (whether it’s true and good or not).

    You say this: “and yet he does not seem to see any need to apologize. I thought love would do that, but I guess you all are the experts.”

    However, the truth is this…These are Marko’s words taken from his comments above:

    “i apologize.

    i apologize.

    i apologize.

    now, this post — ironically — was about the beauty of reconcilliation…”

    “my apology wasn’t sarcastic”

    “that’s wonderful, karen — wonderful ministry. thanks for stopping by.”

    It seems, no matter what is stated, you will see your way and your way alone. The words are right in front of you, Karen, you are refusing to accept them.

    You ask me to “convince” you that I love Deborah. This is what I can tell you, although I don’t know you or Deborah, I do love you two. However, given the example above, I truly believe that I can’t “convince” you of anything, especially when the words from a person’s mouth are dropping directly on your ear and you refuse to hear it.

    By the way, you wrote this: “You and others didn’t seem to have a problem with anything anyone else said except for what me, Cathy and Deborah”.

    I only had problems with the attacks on character and people.

  41. Whew…this thread is so big it needs it’s own zip code.

    Just wanted to take a second to point a big fat finger at myself for the “thong talk”. Please don’t blame Marko, Jen or anyone else for that. It was me. My bad. Sorry about that.

    But honestly, why is a thong unholy? I mean, I’m just wondering how undergarments and clothing in general have changed since the time of Christ…and just wondering theologically what makes a thong unholy, but briefs or boxers (I presume)righteous? Is there scripture to support it? I mean, I understand dressing modestly, but we’re talking undergarments…not that I wear thongs or anything, just wondering. If there is a scriptural basis for thongs being unholy, feel free to shoot me an email or something, but please don’t take up any more of Marko’s bandwidth by posting it here. I was just curious is all…I’ve never heard of a doctrinal stance on undergarments. Thanks!

  42. I believe you can read about that sort of thing in Leviticus 15…

    …and then there’s what Aaron was told to wear when he went into the Holy of Holies:
    “He shall put on the holy linen tunic, and the linen undergarments shall be next to his body, and he shall be girded with the linen sash and attired with the linen turban (these are holy garments). Then he shall bathe his body in water and put them on.” Lev. 16:4

    …and of course there’s the reminder in Isaiah that “all of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; and all of us wither like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.” (Isaiah 64:6)

    …and fast forward to today when, as prophecied, “…men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy…” 2 Tim. 3:2

    But then, do we even know or care what is Holy anymore?

    ‘You shall be holy, for I the LORD your God am holy.’

  43. but of course, if we are to take what is said in leviticus literally, then it is considered a sin punishable by death for the following:

    -wearing clothing of two different materials

    -touching the skin of a pig (I guess this means no more football)

    Plus it says that I can sell my daughter into slavery. Anybody want to offer a good price? She is a hard worker?

  44. Jeff,

    You’re right, there were a ton of rules for Israel, most of them health reasons that science now confirms!

    Now the passages I posted were answers to Sean’s interesting question: “what makes a thong unholy, but briefs or boxers (I presume)righteous…If there is a scriptural basis for thongs being unholy”…

    It would be quite ridiculous to assume from reading Leviticus (in order to understand the holiness/unholiness of certain undergarments) that we must now abide to all the rules(by the way there were 613 of them). Of course we take the Old Testament literally. Fortunately for us, we know that Jesus(Yeshua) came to live the perfect holy life for us (knowing we never could). The law simply showed us God’s expectations of Holiness that we could never reach no matter how hard we try. It’s good to be reminded of His Holy standard by reading these Old Testament passages.

    Doesn’t it make you greatful that now we are accepted, not by our own righteousness(which is as filthy rags) but by His robe of righteousness? That’s why out of gratitude we want to walk in a manner worthy of this underserved favour…guarding our conversation is one way of many to bring honour to our Holy God who purchased us for a great price.

  45. Wha?!?! Am I the only one who didn’t see an answer in Carla’s “answer”? I am just baffled.

    First of all, Leviticus 15 only talks about uncleanliness and what they did to keep clean. It speaks NOTHING at all about thong undergarments or ANY undergarments, for that matter.

    I didn’t care about this new thong topic until Carla posted the Leviticus scriptures as an “answer”. None of those scriptures even talk about thongs. If the fact that chapter 16 mentioned linen undergarments was the all-knowing “answer”. Then what if a thong is made of linen? Is it holy then? The verses given also don’t mention bras at all. So, are bras holy or unholy, Carla?

    I strive to reflect a holy life. I turn to God’s Word as my answer as an example but…Please. This is all completely out of context regarding the topic of thongs and is misleading and ridiculous…

Leave a Reply