In my last post, I began commenting on Rick Warren’s recent appearance on Larry King. I said that I wasn’t going to do it, didn’t want to do it, but had finally given in and decided to do it anyway. My main reason for not doing it, which I did not state, was probably a good one. I didn’t think I could contain my disgust well enough to produce a dignified commentary. I was right. While there is surely nothing wrong with a little sarcasm, I did go beyond what even I care to see. So, as I continue commenting on this atrocity, I will try to tone it down a few notches, lest the Centuri0n label me “unstable” and launch a blogwar. We will continue with a somewhat kinder, gentler approach; but not today.
2005-12-21 at 4:10 PM MT | |

 Jonathan Moorhead sayth,

Centui0n label you “unstable”?! Frank doing that would be like Hugh Hefner calling someone a “pervert.” I rather enjoyed your post and found it quite stable.

12/22/2005 8:14 PM  

---

 Jonathan Moorhead sayth,

An observation leading to a complaint: Phil Johnson’s link to your blog omits David altogether. I'm upset.

12/22/2005 8:17 PM  

---

 ThirstyDavid sayth,

Actually, Jonathan, Phil originally linked to this blog only under my name, by mistake, before I was even on staff. Loki asked him to correct the error. You can't blame him for that mistake, as we are difficult to tell apart.

12/22/2005 8:41 PM  

---

 mjbeasley sayth,

David -

The Warren posts are important. The greatest dangers are often found with the subtle errorists, rather than with those whose whose corruption of doctrine is blindingly obvious; and the shrapnel that is often left behind from books like his are not always seen so easily, however the damage to individuals and churches will become more obvious over time. Interviews like the one that you are covering are important because they help others to see a little bit more than the ink and paper that they purchase at their local bookstore.

12/22/2005 10:39 PM  

---