Please note: I have repented of my involvement with Robert Morey, Faith Community Church, Faith Defenders, and the California Biblical University and Seminary (CBUS). I have also called into question many of Morey's pet doctrines. This post contains elements which have been influenced, to some degree, by Morey or his organizations. The writer no longer endorses these groups or the person or writings of Robert Morey.
Note added on 1/17/2009
---
3 words. There are only 3 words in the title of my blog: "Don't read this!" It is a silly way to make the point I want to make in this blog, but it worked, I guarantee it. In order to get the message the 3 words convey you had to read them. BUT by reading it you violated the command issued in the message. Neat huh? Annoying, but neat.
How about this. What if I told you not to read anything that is false. A little different but the same problem arises. You are faced with a dilema: either don't read anything out of fear that you may read something false, or read things like usual and risk happening to read something false. The statement assumes that you have criteria to judge whether something you read is true or false, but if you are told not to read anything false then you must either stop reading or risk violating the new rule.
I feel as though I have been asked not to read certain things which I would be unable to identify without reading it! As absurd as it sounds my church, Faith Community Church in Irvine, has issued a letter in the Sunday (April 6th) announcements asking us to not read blogs, emails or websites which attack "FCC." In addition I am not to "receive any letters or calls from them." Not only is reading forbidden, now I am not to pick up the phone? Do I need to get the phone numbers of these people so I can not answer when they call?
In the letter it makes reference to Nehemiah and his dealings with Sanballat. What strikes me as a disjunct from the text of Scripture is that Nehemiah was sent messages four times (Neh. 6:4). Nehemiah did not ignore them, He answered them! His answers were consistent and coherent, for "[he] answered them in the same way" (v. 4). The fifth letter from Sanballat is forever recorded in Holy Scripture (Neh. 6:6-7). Please someone tell me why Nehemiah was at liberty to read and reply to at least 5 letters, why we can read the fifth letter as recorded in the Bible which we all cherish, why we can read Nehemiah's reply (v. 8), but I am not allowed to read criticisms about my church? If anything, this gives Dr. Bob biblical warrant to explain himself and correct those who lie about him.
And what's with the grandiose language? "All the forces of Hell are now mobilized..." If, as the letter indicates, there are still cults and false religions in the world today, then the forces of Hell are probably not all mobilized against Dr. Bob.
A few more thoughts:
If we are not to read slander and false accusations, etc then why are some of them listed in the letter from the board?
- If I agree to not read anything critical of my church then what right do I have to ask Mormons, Jehovah's witnesses, Catholics, etc to read anything critical about their church? Would I not play the hypocrite to ignore criticism against me and then offer criticism against others?
- Does the practice of ignoring criticism not preclude Dr. Bob and Faith Community Church from fair analysis? What if Dr. Bob as a pastor, or Faith Community Church as an entity, actually did something wrong? Would it be best to ignore it or confront it? Dr. Bob told me when I became a member of Faith Community Church that he would "fail my expectations and violate my rights." He tells this to everyone who becomes a member (to my knowledge). If he can say that about himself, how much worse criticism can there be when provided by others?
- I
wonder if this blog will be blacklisted? I sincerely hope not but I am
questioning the idea that I am not to read criticisms against my pastor
and my church. I believe I have biblical precedent to both read and
reply to such criticism if I feel the need to do so. I can only hope
that the merits of a public letter can be discussed, well, publicly.
(And if you don't like what I wrote, I warned you)
