In early 2006, firefighters in Orange County, California, anticipating a dangerous forest fire season, began a controlled burn of 10 acres of canyon land forest. They lit a small fire to prevent a bigger fire, attempting to reduce the amount of flammable material that might serve as tinder during the dry season. They thought everything had gone as planned until the winds shifted and picked up. Somewhere in the brush a hot coal sparked a new fire and soon the forest was burning anew. Almost 1,000 firefighters were called in to fight this new blaze. Within days area schools had been closed, thousands of homes had been evacuated and nearby roads had been shut down. In the end, the fire consumed over 8,000 acres of forest. The 10 acre controlled burn turned into an 8,000 acre raging fire. Lesson learned: there is danger inherent in fighting fire with fire.
Last Monday I posted an article called Evil as Entertainment in which the basic encouragement was to avoid reading watchblogs. Much discussion, much gratitude, much criticism ensued. I am caught somewhere between having so much more to say and never wanting to mention it again. Today I’ll tend toward the latter and perhaps in the future I can write about this again and in more detail.
I guess any writer can attest that every now and then you write something that is really, objectively good; and other times you lay an egg. Having talked it over and having read plenty of feedback, I’m going to have to say that I laid an egg on Monday. While I do not feel that what I said was wrong or unnecessary, I can see that I should have said it better. At the same time, I think it sparked some useful discussion and for that I am grateful. I can see how I should have nuanced my article and how it could have been so much better and so much more useful. In just a moment I want to point you to a couple of articles that may be of use to you if you wish to think further about the issues I raised.
Since I posted that article I’ve gotten heaps of email (I think only articles on homeschooling could generate more feedback) and have learned more about these watchblogs than I would have wanted. I received plenty of ugly, angry rebukes and a few kind, gentle rebukes. I also received many comments that echoed my own experience—that these sites are like an anchor to joy in Christ and an anchor for many a Christian’s love for his brothers and sisters in the Lord. These sites have undoubtedly caused much harm. Several others wrote to say that they are reevaluating their desire to read such sites. This is good, I think, and shows that God may be willing to use even a bad article for his purposes.
Let me offer this as an aside: a few people, including some of the angrier emailers, suggested that I was censoring comments in that article—that I was deliberately excluding certain comments. I suppose you’ll just have to take my word for this one, but I did not censor any comments. I checked published comments, unpublished comments and spam comments and there was no trace of anything beyond the ones that were published to the site (with the exception of one very long and rambling one that was about the length of War and Peace except with no paragraph breaks). ‘Nuff said.
Now, for those articles. Here are four you may find useful:
- Great Damage: The Gift of Discernment Used in the Flesh - James MacDonald wrote this a few weeks ago and in it he highlights some of the ridiculous, ungodly argumentation used against him by just the kind of watchblogger I wrote about. He says, “A post I wrote on January 20th when President Obama was sworn in was picked up by a number of ‘watch dog’ discernment groups and the rest is history. I have been called weak, soft on the truth, a compromiser, politically correct, foolish, and worst of all, apostate (not truly saved). Wow!!!” Read between the lines a little bit and you can see the tactics such packs of watchbloggers use against their quarry.
- Establish Elders - Frank Turk simply says this: “Notice that Paul here instructs Titus to appoint elders in every town and not watchbloggers. That is: the focal point and center of discernment ought to be in the local church. If your counter-concern is that local churches today lack discernment (and this may be a valid concern), I suggest that the place to fix that is in the place God ordained and not everywhere else but that place.” The discussion that follows is very interesting. With Frank I believe the best, most natural context for discernment is the local church.
- Among the comments is this one by Frank and I think it is a very valuable read.
- Turning a Blind Eye to Evil is Evil Too - Phil Johnson wrote about how he both agrees and disagrees with me. This article really helped me see the lack of clarity in my own article (well, that and my wife telling me that Phil’s article was better than my own). “I think what Tim Challies is saying is that it’s unhealthy to fix one’s attention on error full time rather than spending most of our time dwelling on things that edify. If that’s all he is saying, I say (as heartily as possible) AMEN! (Philippians 4:8). But if someone wants to seize that point in order to suggest that it’s always better to be an encourager than a critic, my reply is: That very attitude is largely responsible for getting us into this mess in the first place.” Exactly. There is a time and place for calling error error; there is a time and place for humor and sarcasm and all the rest. But a fixation on evil is dangerous!
Most of what Phil says is most of what I should have said (or said more clearly) on Monday. There is a time and place to expose sin and even to expose sin publicly (see this article by James MacDonald for some good thoughts). But a blog that has as its bread and butter exposing error in the church, and especially error that is completely decontextualized and irrelevant to any of its readers, is a blog I think we ought to avoid. A Christian’s thoughts ought to be dominated by “whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things” (Philippians 4:8). As I said last Monday, “Do I really need to read and to know about the seedy underbelly of the church, when such things happen thousands of miles away, among people I will never meet and in places I will never be? Such news is plenty entertaining, but it is useless to me. It does nothing to further my faith or to cause me to grow in godliness.”
One analogy I opted not to use in Monday’s post was that of pornography. But let me haul it out now as I think it helps show what it is that I am reacting against. Imperfect, I’m sure, but worth thinking about. If a site wished to combat pornography, would the best way of doing so be to display lots of pictures of naked women with comments about how wrong they are to be doing what they are doing? Posted below the picture of a naked woman engaged in some lewd conduct are the words “This is what passes for sex in the church today. Lord save us!” If you were to visit this kind of a site day after day, do you think you’d continue visiting to help you be prepared to combat pornography (because by knowing what pornography looks like you could spot it in your own life)? Or do you think, just maybe, you’d find that you were visiting to see the naked women themselves? Isn’t it better to turn to Scripture to find what it says about sex and sexuality? Isn’t that the best way to learn about what is right? By studying evil you are learning about evil and are liable to be consumed by it. “Be infants in evil, but in your thinking be mature” (1 Corinthians 14:20).
Now I will grant that there are times when it is well and good to bring evil deeds to light and in such times there is a difference between heresy and nudity. But I think the point remains. Be very careful fighting fire with fire! Be careful fighting heresy with heresy, bad theology with bad theology, lack of love with lack of love. So easily the noble becomes ignoble. So often the controlled burn becomes the raging wildfire.
If you could take one thing away from this whole discussion I hope it is this: For the good of your own soul, think about why you visit the blogs you do. There is nothing wrong with entertainment and there is nothing inherently wrong with visiting a site to be entertained. But think about the nature of the entertainment. Is it possible that you are being entertained by what is evil? Are you finding joy in what God hates? Is it possible that there is no real value in learning what you are learning and in seeing what you are seeing? As you close down your browser and walk away from such sites, do you find that you are filled with the fruit of the Spirit? Or do you find your heart hardened and your mind cynical? Do such sites help you grow in your love for your brothers and sisters in Christ or instead do you find yourself hardened against them and mocking them? Think carefully about such things.
I leave you with those questions and with this Scripture: “The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law” (Galatians 5:22,23).



Comments (39) »
1. Tim Challies
April 13, 2009
8:36 AM
It is with no small trepidation that I post this article. For now comments are open, but I may close them if I find that the discussion is going quickly downhill.
2. jackie
April 13, 2009
9:14 AM
I’m still trying to figure out what kind of blogs you are even talking about!
3. Tim Challies
April 13, 2009
9:23 AM
Jackie,
I really haven’t wanted to name names as I thought that might just distract, incriminate, etc. Plus, there’s a sense in which it would go against the ethos of the article.
I think Frank Turk was well on the way to a definition when he wrote: “Any blog-like website which has the primary objective of “exposing” the church life errors of people in the English-speaking, North American church; sees “apologetics” as primarily the prosecution of guilty heretics and not as turning a brother away from sin; rarely turns its attention to exhorting the exceeeding beauty and sufficiency of Christ.”
4. johnMark
April 13, 2009
9:26 AM
Tim, thanks for the follow-up. I do believe I know what kind of blogs you are talking about. I think that sometimes it has to do with the approach as well as the content. There is certainly a difference in treating someone like a brother with a gentle rebuke where the clear motive is to inform and offer a more biblical perspective. This would be against the intent to do as you say about and basically offer a form of literary pornography.
It’s easy to fall into this trap from time to time which is why we should check ourselves and examine our hearts in the Lord through the Gospel. I certainly try not to go the above route.
Funny, I pointed out last week where the watchbloggers were wrong about Rick Warren. A brother who was not seeing as I did ended up extending a little more grace in the matter.
It’s not about us but the Gospel.
Mark
5. chuck
April 13, 2009
9:36 AM
You should never have to defend preaching truth. I agreed with your article and it convicted me to stop reading foxnews for the horrible things they report simply for my entertainment (though you were referring to other websites I was unaware of).
Please don’t fall into the temptation of trying to appease everybody who reads this site. Flesh opposes truth.
6. Rick
April 13, 2009
9:40 AM
Hi Tim,
For the most part, I thought your article was fairly edifying. A good tie in from that article to this article was the analogy of pornography; much of the negative trash talk we see on particular watchblogs amounts to mere intellectual pornography - our robbing of our minds of the things of God.
I suspect that these watchblogs, and other negative things of the the blogosphere and Internet, don’t really have anything to do with one crucial aspect of the church that you enjoy - knowing Christian fellowship as a face to face encounter in the sanctuary every Sunday. You believe that Christian fellowship requires a personal touch, and in some ways, the blogosphere and alternative communication outlets overall (e.g., Facebook) limit what people can fully enjoy otherwise in a face to face encounter in the name of Christ. That is absolutely right, and I personally agree with you and applaud you on that. Ultimately, that thinking is rooted in Biblical truth; why waste paper when you can enjoy someone’s company up close and personal by grace?
This is what the second book of John says: The apostle John had much to say to the chosen lady of the elect, but he did not want to waste much paper and ink. I think blog writing and alternative communication outlets are good, as long as they are recognized as having a certain place. But nothing can touch brotherly words of edification in the actual body life of the church.
7. Chris
April 13, 2009
9:47 AM
Tim,
Above all else I thank you for your humble, gentle spirit. You have set a great example for us by handling all this with grace.
8. tim
April 13, 2009
10:08 AM
I have never realy payed much attention to these sites. But, the application of this subject is one I am sure I need to consider in a more broader context, throughout my life. Thanks as usual for making me think. There is a saying that goes something like this… When you dance with the devil, its not the devil that changes… Being informed on something, is sometimes just clutter that takes our attention away from reaching for the prize. Christ!
9. Reg Schofield
April 13, 2009
10:44 AM
I do think there is a clear difference in apologetic s ,defending the gospel , exposing error and warning the flock of dangerous teachers and teaching. Most of the sites I visit tend towards those elements. I think the spirit of the articles and tone is important. But at the same time I do hold that there are times when the gloves need to come off . You cannot argue that from the prophets to Paul and more importantly to Jesus , that at times there was no quarter given. When I think of people who have defended and contend in the right way I think of MacArthur,James White,Albert Mohler,Michael Horton etc.. Over all Tim you tried to be fair ,and I know you believe in exposing error . I have given your review of The Shack to one of my churches leading deacon’s and he has found it eye opening. When one only see’s the ugly , its hard to see the good. I was trapped in the cycle for years and I have finally broken myself of that cycle.
So keep up the good work. I wake up every morning with a coffee in hand and look forward to checking out your blog. It has been very edifying to me and my family . Grace and peace through our Lord Jesus Christ to you and your family.
10. Stacy McDonald
April 13, 2009
11:04 AM
Hi Tim,
Thank you for your article. You are correct; this problem deserves more attention/teaching than what can be accomplished in one short article. I look forward to the time when you (and others) are able to address it further.
Our ministry, and my husband and I personally, have been the targets of malicious Internet attacks for the last two years. I can’t tell you how thankful I am that godly men are beginning to address this issue. Part of our duty as Christians is to lovingly expose false doctrine and to diligently defend the Faith. But true “attack blogs” do neither. They are causing great harm to the Body of Christ and to our testimony as Christians.
Again, I am not referring to blogs that honestly lovingly, and accurately expose error in the Church. I am referring to blogs that use tabloid tactics and dishonest “spin” to falsely accuse and attack other Christians.
I wrote an article yesterday called Truth Hunt or Witch Hunt that I pray will be a help in addressing this problem. In it, I linked to you and others who have began to speak up.
Thank you for all you do.
11. sam
April 13, 2009
11:11 AM
TIm,
Thank you for your post this morning. It was very good to hear you refine and clarify your views from your previous post.
However, i must take exception to one point as it has been stated on other blogs since last week. The church and its pastors do not operate in a vacuum. What happens in Kalamazoo, MI can and does affect the whole church at times. One need only look at the rash of sex sermons that have swept the nation. False teachings can spread quickly in this internet age and affect congregations across the nation that are largely unaware of what is “trendy” in the church growth movement on any given day. AND what adds to the problem is that elder led churches are becoming increasingly hard to find these days with pastors often operating with little to no accountability to their congregation.
Therefore, since we are all in the universal church, we should be concerning with contending for the faith and also be watchful of our brothers and sisters in Christ warning others about false and heretical teachers. I do not think one need be an Elder to warn others. But, and this is where we all fail in certain areas, we must do so in love and you are right not take pleasure in the sin and folly of others.
Tim, I value your blog and its the first stop i make in my mornings. thank you for all that you do. you are a constant source of edification for me and i find your book reviews to be valuable.
12. Alexander M Jordan
April 13, 2009
11:26 AM
Hi Tim:
It is very nice to see this follow-up post—your humility in listening to and absorbing constructive criticism is a model for us all to follow.
I also wrote an article in response to your post on my blog, and was a bit critical of your post in that I thought by not being specific about what/whom you were talking about, the charges you were making became a bit nebulous. Which means that some whom you probably were not intending to target would feel that they were being targeted in your article. But on the other hand, I do understand your desire to not be unnecessarily hurtful.
I very much appreciate the gentle tone and manner in your writing.
Blessings,
Alex
13. Donovan
April 13, 2009
11:31 AM
Thanks Tim.
I think another huge danger with this sort of stuff is pride… Not that it’s prideful to point out error in and of itself - as you’ve pointed out, we’re called to do so. But when we “delight” in ridiculing error, I think part of the “joy” we find in it is in feeling like we’re SO above those who are in error. And the worse their error, and the more widespread, the more “spiritual” we feel in contrast… I think a good gauge is whether or not we’re still finding ourselves burdened for those in error and desirous that they would change.
14. Brenda@Coffeeteabooksandme
April 13, 2009
11:45 AM
I have been led (through Google searches) to a few websites that seem to enjoy blasting Godly people because they don’t agree with their theology 100%. I’ve avoided the blogs.
While it is very good to warn about theology that would lead someone away from the basic doctrines of the church (ie: salvation through Christ), most of these people are calling brethren in Christ unsaved because they disagree in the gray areas of theology.
However, like the boy who called wolf too often, I find myself turning to others for opinion rather than those who find fault with too many.
15. Nicodemus
April 13, 2009
11:55 AM
The important thing about your article and this one is that it has stimulated our critical thinking and there are many good points in there. It is not possible to get it right all of the time and thank God for His marvelous grace towards us in Christ, so that whatever we face we can turn to Him Our Father and receive the refreshment and reassurance of His presence and love, then pick ourselves up and move on looking only to Jesus.
Our own spiritual maturity is revealed by the grace we likewise show to others when we disagree. We thank God for your talent and your faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. Keep up the good work.
16. Betsy Markman
April 13, 2009
12:02 PM
Keep sounding the warnings, my friend. YOU are practicing discernment here, by discerning between godly warnings and fleshly fear-mongering.
I can’t tell you how much these two posts have impacted me. I have been feasting on negativity for my whole life, but it has been eating me up inside instead of helping me.
Yes, I will continue to exercise whatever discernment the Lord gives me, and will seek out those with godly discernment. Yes, I will refuse rose-colored glasses. No, I feel no temptation to lock arms with heretics and sing the Barney song.
BUT…I no longer want to be a slave to fleshly tactics or the responses they engender in me. I don’t want to be guilty of rejoicing in evil any more, or stewing in anger, or bracing myself in the fear of man.
You may have made a whole bunch of people angry, but God has used you to edify people too. And hey, Jesus made a lot of people angry, too.
Thank you for this post.
17. Grego
April 13, 2009
1:00 PM
Tim, thanks for posting your thoughts, opinions, and insights. I appreciate your efforts and communications. Don’t let one article (followed by a bazillion comments) hinder or inhibit you from exercising a clear God-given gift for writing. Be encouraged by your strengths, learn and grow from challenges, and know that you are a blessing to me and many others.
18. Dan
April 13, 2009
1:55 PM
Hi Tim.
I am a first time commenter to your blog. I completey agree with you about visiting watchblog sites,motives can easily become blurred and you can easily become addicted. I am an excharismatic. After reading several books on the subject I left the church I was in, I then began to monitor watchblogs and found my self spending time looking at all the crazy teachings, and sadly nothing else. Thankfully those days are over and God by his grace led me to a reformed church where I was saved. Sadly watchblogs are necessary to counter false teaching, the watchblogs that are God honouring and respectful and do not sink to personal attacks upon peoples characters, in my books are good and needed in these days. But your right, how much time do we need to spend reading about the latest fads and scandals, time that could be spent profitably in the word or in prayer or witnessing, ot too may other things to mention.
19. Chris L.
April 13, 2009
2:21 PM
Tim,
Michael “iMonk” Spencer wrote a similar article last week, in support of your thesis, using Weed Eaters as an analogy. It was an excellent read, as was yours, as well.
Blessings, Grace and Peace to you.
Chris L.
20. Darrin
April 13, 2009
2:22 PM
Tim,
It might have been more effective if you had simply brought out the importance of grace on the part of those who are led to follow the biblical mandates of defending truth and refuting error. Various watchbloggers themselves call for that quite often. I hope you’re aware of this.
I for one find little entertainment value in the good blogs, any more than in reading scripture or hearing the gospel preached. They are helpful in evoking thoughtful considerations regarding the counsel of God and its applications, which is infinitely more important than entertainment.
21. Bill Welte
April 13, 2009
3:13 PM
Tim: Thanks for your daily blogs. As you know, the moment you write a blog you are a moving target for criticism. What you shared was right on. I started reading blogs from World Magazine after Andre Seu did several articles about our ministry. I vowed never to read them again. I have found Christians to be so vicious and cruel. The old saying “the pen is mightier than the sword” is very true. I wonder how many people would have to courage to say what they write to a person’s face? Keep up your great ministry. You’ll never please 100% — in fact, you are only responsible to please the Lord! Keep with the stuff.
22. Cathy
April 13, 2009
3:16 PM
Thank you for your moderated comments. What you wrote last week was a little troubling to me since I read several good watchblogs. I can honestly say I’ve never felt entertained by them. I read them, as other commenters here have agreed, to be aware of huge trends that affect me, my church, my Christian friends, and unbelievers I meet. I want to be ready to give a response to those trends. I also want to pray about the church at large in No. America. Jesus loves His church, and He hates evil and tells us to hate evil also! When I read my several bookmarked watchblogs, I am warned, prepared, can pray, and am made vastly grateful for the strong, biblical church God has put me in. Maybe the key is in picking reliable, biblical, nonsensational watchblogs to read. One more thing: I thought the argument about obtaining discernment from your elders rather than from watchblogs was compelling. I agree that elders of the local church should be the primary disseminators of doctrinal truth. But absolute consistency with that argument would lead a person to avoid conference attendance, avoid reading online book reviews, avoid parachurch participation, etc.
23. Andrew
April 13, 2009
3:43 PM
Tim, thanks for a gracious follow up post to your timely article. The “watchblogs” at their best display a heart for the truth of the orthodox Christian faith. I wonder if it might be helpful to think through the age old nugget of wisdom that the best defense is a good offense? It is certainly right to be taken aback by many facets of contemporary evangelicalism. What is not right is to respond without grace and without the intellectual honesty to give our opponents a fair hearing - to really understand what it is they are saying. That, I believe, is where the watchblogs go wrong. Instead of throwing the limited time and energy we’re given into combating our perceived theological enemies, why not invest in a winsome and engaging articulation of the truth? If the theologically orthodox we’re more engaging, perhaps everyday Christians and even those outside of the church would be less likely to listen to those church leaders/thinkers who are often way off base. In my mind, Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck have done a great job of pointing out error in a graceful way while also articulating the truth. Tim Keller, in The Reason for God, has done a fantastic job of a winsome articulation of the faith for outsiders. Just my two cents.
24. T.J.
April 13, 2009
4:15 PM
If churches were about preaching the gospel insteading of growing the numbers it would be different. When I read these sites not only am I shocked and stunned but I weep and pray for the state of my nation. The CHURCH has up billboards of legs intertwined selling their sex series. The CHURCH has Highway to Hell from AC/DC as their opening number. The CHURCH has revivals with tattooed men kicking people in the head . The CHURCH has gay marriages, gay leadership and gay indoctrination. The CHURCH can not even decide if it’s for against sins. WHAT KIND OF PLACE HAS AMERICA BECOME????????????????????? My Pastor was shot dead on March 8th (Fred WInters) and he never compromised on truth and the “contoversial issues” of our day. We need to reach people with love..that is for sure….but Love stands for truth as well. When Moses came down the mountain carrying the 10 commandments he did not commend them for their inclusive orgy. He threw down the law!! Christ took the full wrath on the cross and fulfilled that law. How dare we wink and skip thru our daily walk with Jesus without remembering at WHAT COST He provided our salvation. Maybe the Highway to Hell opening at New Spring Church is actually the road American Christianity is on….think about it!!
25. Daniel Abbey
April 13, 2009
4:59 PM
“(I think only articles on homeschooling could generate more feedback)”
lol.
as for the watchblogs, i understand where you’re coming from tim. i’m all for watchblogs that are balanced and truly insightful (steve camp, phil johnson = awesome) but there’s one site i visit and often find myself simply entertained by the trainwreck, in a manner of speaking. the site highlights well the travesty of modern church pragmastism and other errors that should be addressed. but i can’t help but get caught up in the content sometimes, the video content especially, that it becomes unhealthy. so thanks for reminding us that we need to be careful how we use our time on these sites.
26. ianmcn
April 13, 2009
5:00 PM
Tim, I would disagree that your first article was an “egg”. It may not have been as complete as it could have been, but that is actually part of what stimulated the healthy debate within the blogosphere. Had it been more balanced and complete in its assessment, it probably would not have had the impact it did. What you said was spot on and extremely timely.
27. Tim Irvin
April 13, 2009
5:33 PM
I am currently reading, “A Commentary on the Revelation of John” by George Eldon Ladd. There was something he wrote that made me think of your original post and all of the discussion that has ensued.
In writing to the church at Ephesus, the Lord commended them because they could not bear evil men and because they tested those who call themselves apostles but are not. Ladd says that the “evil men” does not refer to evil conduct but to false teachers in the church.
The Lord reproved the Church at Ephesus because they had “left their first love.” Ladd suggests that “First Love” is a love for all Christians. We know we have past from death unto life because we “love the brethren”. Ladd goes on to say,
“The Ephesian converts had known such a love in their early years; but their struggle with false teachers and their hatred of heretical teaching had apparently engendered hard feelings and harsh attitudes toward one another to such an extent that it amounted to a forsaking of the supreme Christian virtue of love. Doctrinal purity and loyalty can never be a substitute for love.”
So, I would agree with you, Tim, that a steady diet of watchblogging can erode into a hunger for an unwholesome entertainment. Further, as Ladd suggests, it could be an indication that we have lost our first love.
28. Davidw
April 13, 2009
5:37 PM
I unsubbed from just such a blog on the strength of your article; I read, considered and realized I was using it as some sort of titliation “I may be a sinner but at least I don’t go to THIS church’ sort of thing.
I can only be encouraged that an article that really made me stop and think about *WHY I* was reading these blogs (and not judging those that wrote them) showed you a way to strengthen your argument and wite better.
You were on the money with the article in as much as you lead me to consider *my* motives, find them less than Christ-like, repent and reorient my thinking on that which is lovely. I’m sure small encouragements get lost in your reading of screeds from all over - but if possible, take some small encouragement in helping me, at least.
29. donsands
April 13, 2009
6:52 PM
Nice post.
The key is to see what our truest motives are. What’s my heart’s desire here?
Mine are never pure to be honest. I wish they were. However, by the grace of God I can still speak the truth in love, whether on a blog, in the work place or public square, or church, or even in my home. Bottom line is always am i loving Christ by saying what I say, and desiring to honor Him. Soemtimes silence can be golden, and other times it can be yellow.
“lack of love with lack of love.” That says a lot to me.
30. MarieP
April 13, 2009
7:16 PM
Tim,
Great posts (appreciated the clarification, but knew what you meant on the first post). Just last month, my own pastor made a comment on how, if there were a moratorium on Christian blogging that said we couldn’t criticize our brethren, there’d be tumbleweed blowing through the internet. He said he may write a blog post for the Reformed Baptist Fellowship blog on the topic.
He just posted one that I would call on the topic of “watch-preaching”:
http://reformedbaptistfellowship.wordpress.com/2009/04/13/on-the-pleasures-of-preaching-to-the-choir/
I have to watch my own blog-posts and comments on blogs! Proverbs 10:19 is crucial to remember: “In the multitude of words sin is not lacking, but he who restrains his lips is wise.”
31. Louis
April 13, 2009
7:19 PM
Tim,
You are right on when you caution your readers about the dangers of the watchblog sites and those who read these sites should always be examining their heart to make sure that they are not going there for entertainment purposes. However, I believe that the watchblog sites are very necessary. What a pastor is doing a thousand miles away does affect me.
1. I have relatives that are thinking about attending churches that are exposed as poisoned wells on these watchblog sites. I am able to guide my friends and relatives away from these places and tell them why they should not attend there.
2. I also have friends and relatives who are reading the books of these “poison” pastors. The watchblog sites have helped me to steer my friends away from these books.
3. We don’t live in a world where people live 1,000 miles away. In fact, you come into my livingroom every day. Just think about the influence that you have had on the thousands of people who read your blog (many of whom, like myself, live 1,000 miles away)
Tim, if you had friends a relatives who were listening to sermons by Rob Bell and Brian McClaren, would you not tell them that these guys were poison? or perhaps you should just leave it alone because Brian McClaren lives 1,000 miles away?
If I’ve learned anything from Disney World, I know that “it’s a small world after all. It’s a small small world.”
32. rabanes
April 13, 2009
7:36 PM
Thank you, Tim, and God bless you. That’s all.
I look forward to seeing you again one day soon. I look back on our time together with great joy. You’ve blessed me beyond words.
peace in him, my brother,
Richard Abanes
33. Rose
April 13, 2009
10:07 PM
It was a “watchdog” blog that alerted me to the apostacy that had entered my church of 28 years. There was no help with discernment from our elders. On the contrary, they were quickly finding ways to get rid of people who were not willing to go along with the ‘new’ plan for our church. Those of us who tried to talk with them were called troublemakers, legalists. I left that church wounded as did many others. From that time on, I have read the discernment blogs because I want to understand new trends in the church so I can warn others and never again be caught off guard myself. I don’t go to these sites for entertainment. I read, try to check the sources to verify, and pass on information to others. This has lead to several family members coming out of apostate movements. Just because some people are being entertained by these blogs does not mean they do not have purpose/ value. If a person is going to the sites for entertainment, then they need to repent and find a more God honoring use of their time. That is not why I read them. I have learned a great deal from these sites and have helped others to be more discerning as well. Your word of caution is good for those to whom is applies …if the Holy Spirit so convicts them. We should take everything we read on the web and test it…do our research to make sure it is true…not just believe everything we read. For me, the sites I visit have been a blessing and I am walking closer to the Lord because of them. Besides discernment articles, there are also many articles that edify and strengthen my faith. There are often links to other sites which offer in depth Bible study and commentaries. God did lead me to good Bible teaching church in my area. But, sadly, there are many people who can’t find a good church and the blogs become a means of fellowship for them… a way to connect with like minded Christians. These blogs have their place, but, as with anything else, we have to use good judgment and be open to the leading of the Holy Spirit in how we use our time.
34. julius mickel
April 14, 2009
12:33 AM
Good post Tim, even though many are missing your point, when you’re not speaking of ALL watchblog sites, but ‘types’ of.
Also i totally agree that being specific is not necessary in this case, because you desire people to apply the PRINCIPLES warned (if it doesn’t apply to you then you need not be defensive) not just make a list.
Naturally with the church in America there is much to discuss, much that doesn’t relate, too much emphasis on what’s new while a low literacy of the scriptures (discernment grows with your knowledge of scripture-get Tim’s book)
I know of people that like what they call ‘hard’ preachers, not because they themselves are convicted but because they like to see someone point out something wrong. Any of us who have come out of dangerous teaching have experienced the temptation to become bitter and seem like we’re full of holy zeal when in fact we are more like the ‘sons of thunder’ ‘should we call down fire, Lord?’ -Macdonald is a great example, apparently the prophet Daniel would have been labeled a heretic for his honor and heart for King Nebby!
35. Michael Cordich
April 14, 2009
3:45 AM
Thanks for your thoughts on this issue Tim. I can not speak for all situations that “watchblogs” address, but there are several pastors who have a wider influence than their own church through books, conferences, and other media outlets. As such the influence of their bad teaching has significant impact in effecting or infecting those in other churches. This can have serious consequences as their bad teaching spills over to these other churches as it is carried along by those who lack the discernment necessary to hold fast to what is good and reject what is evil. Is it possible that some of the “watchblogs” are attempting to reach these lost souls before they cause great pain in their own church?
36. ScottL
April 14, 2009
6:12 AM
Tim,
Knowing your heart, or as much as I can know through your posts, I can only imagine that most people’s angry responses and emails are not worth it. I suppose those who enjoy the watchblogs might also easily enjoy tearing down the hearts of those they do not agree with. I completely understand we need to listen to our critics. But, knowing how much public outrage and severe criticism Jesus was given, I can only expect those who walk in his humble footsteps will receive the same. They did it to him first, they’ll do it to you as well.
Be encouraged that you speak truth, you speak it with tactfulness, you speak it with wisdom, and, for such, I (and we) are grateful. Thanks for your thoughts.
37. Phil Johnson
April 14, 2009
5:34 PM
Tim,
Thanks for this follow-up and your graciousness throughout. I wasn’t aware you had made this follow-up post until last night after I went to bed. I took my Kindle® for some bedtime reading and this post popped up in the list of new material. This is my first opportunity to comment.
For the record, my wife says, “Why don’t you sound as nice and kind-hearted as Tim Challies?”
Anyway, good clarification. And I think you’re exactly right about the comparison with porn. The worst varieties of “watch-blogging” are a form of gross exhibitionism. And people’s carnal tendencies can indeed be stoked by merely reading too much that’s negative. I know there are people who suffer from an unhealthy, voyeuristic addiction to criticism of others, because they occasionally show up in our blog’s comment-thread.
38. Brendt Waters
April 15, 2009
10:27 AM
Tim, I think you don’t give yourself enough credit. Though if you’re gonna err a bit, heading towards slightly too much (genuine) humility is a good direction. ;-)
39. Daniel Chew
April 20, 2009
1:09 PM
Tim:
Your two articles have been a huge disappointment. Being an author and blogger myself, I can see how you skillfully phrase your words to bolster your case that “watchbloggers” are indeed a nasty bunch of people who love evil as entertainment. I am in the process of preparing my lengthy responce as part of an analysis of the New Calvinist movement and your articles have confirmed my worst fears: New Calvinism is New Evangelicalism version 2.
As it is, your article have been the catalyst to make me re-evaluate my affiliation with the New Calvinist movement. After much thought, I think I would not want to affiliate myself with the movement even though I can be considered part of the group sociologically. I would rather join the Reformed Confessional crowd than the New Evangelical Calvinist crowd, and I must thank you for making that clear to me.