Stunning blasphemous prayer caught on video in a Discovery channel documentary “God’s Soldier” – Chaplain Capt. Popov, illegally promoting evangelical Christianity in Discovery’s Military Channel documentary

(be sure and scroll down to the bottom of the page linked above to watch the video)

The most disturbing thing from this video was this portion…

Popov blessing a group of soldiers about to go out on a patrol: “I pray that you would give them the ability to exterminate the enemy and to accomplish the task that they’re been sent forth by God and country to do. In Christ’s name I pray. Amen.”

This is immediately followed by Popov saying to more soldiers: “Every soldier should know Romans 13, that the government is set up by God, and the magistrate, or the one who wields the sword — you have not swords but 50 cals and [unintelligible] like that — does not yield it in vain because the magistrate has been called, as you, to execute wrath upon those who do evil.”

CPT Popov is not a real minister of Christ, because he ignores and distorts the teachings of Christ.

Jesus said to not repay evil for evil, and to turn the other cheek, while CPT Popov presumes to pray in CHRIST’S NAME that his troops would have “the ability to exterminate the enemy and to accomplish the task that they’re been sent forth by God and country to do.”

CPT Popov needs to repent of this great evil as does the rest of the Army that is seeking to baptize the evil war with its Chaplain’s corps. CPT Popov would fit well into the history of the backsliding church post-Constantine, but his teachings would be seen as blasephous and evil in the early church.

P.S. With regards to CPT Popov quoting from Romans 13, I’ll post more on that in the comments…

Interesting blog post about a spiritual journey much like my own Put one back in the Mennonite column

So, here’s a typical and awesome story. I’ve met a whole bunch of people with a progression similar to this. There were at least a few other people with the same basic story there tonight; I also met a bunch of these guys on my visit to Ozark Christian College; and I’ve met scattered others.

“Ted” is about 23 (I think), really tall, blond, with a smile that never leaves his face. He grew up in a conservative evangelical family, going to a small country church in South Dakota.

His church had thread of historical connection to the Mennonites. He remembers in high school talking to a Mennonite pastor who served briefly at his church about pacifism.

Ted couldn’t understand how the guy could oppose just wars of liberation or self-defense (like, I suppose, Iraq—this would have been the early days of the war). The pastor told him, “I used to feel the same way as you. Just read the Word of God and see what it has to say.”

Ted didn’t take him up on that challenge right away. . .

From there according to this blog post, Ted put this challenge away until he was older, when in college he encountered Donald Miller’s book Blue Like Jazz, which made him decide to take the old Mennonite Pastor’s challenge seriously. (and a lot happens after that)

My own journey was different in some ways, but in many ways is similar. And I know many others that have similar stories, of coming from the majority American evangelical* protestant understanding of war, to one that I would argue is more rooted in what Jesus taught.

I guess I bring all this up to say that I think that progressives shouldn’t write off reaching out to Evangelicals. Some already are believers in non-violence (i.e. Evangelicals for Social Action are a prime example), but many others can be persuaded if you are willing to speak their language and relate to them using the Bible.

* The words “evangelical” and “fundamentalist” are often conflated and confused in the popular media, but I’m using the term Evangelical very precisely, to refer to Protestant Christians who place a high emphasis on scripture, who believe that accepting Jesus as one’s savior is essential to salvation, and that the Christian journey is one that is primarily about nurturing and growing in a spiritual relationship with Jesus. I would say too that Evangelicals tend to place a great deal of emphasis on the role of the laity in the church, and tend to see their ministers not as priests but rather as fellow Christians equipped and called for special works.

Fundamentalists on the other hand (the Christian kind) are a sub-set of Evangelicals, who have very rigid and dogmatic views on scripture, namely that there is one right way to interpret it, and that right way (with a few obvious to them exceptions) is the literal method. Most Evangelicals are not Fundamentalists.

I myself used to be an Evangelical. I still share lots of common ground with them, but I do have a more universalist theology and am more of an old school Anabaptist. I also have lots of common ground with the Emergent church movement, particularly on its emphasis on dialogue instead of proselytizing.

More troubling news about the Windsor Hills Youth Conference 2008

This is an update to an earlier post

I discovered two very troubling things on the websites of Windsor Hills Baptist church, besides the youth gun giveaway.

1. Their support of racist policies in Israel – I am doubly troubled because Windsor Hills buys into the nutty pro-Israel theology that backs the apartheid of the modern nation of Israel. The church even has a special website ( to promote this wacked out theology), that openly backs the oppression and displacement of the Palestinian people and the protection of the Israeli settlements in Gaza and the West Bank.

2. A video from their 2007 youth conference that includes extreme misogeny, blasphemy, and of course the use of automatic firearms – You can watch the video here. It is extremely troubling, but if you want to skip to the most disturbing parts, here are my notes…

Windsor Hills blasphemy
photo from video posted at

1:00 – makes horribly blasphemous statements about the so-called “Christian” nature of the USA, which teaches the idolatrous idea that being patriotic is the same as being godly
7:03 – an adult demonstrates the use of a fully automatic machine gun (only legal to own with a special registration in the US), then a young boy is allowed to shoot the same weapon
10:50 – besides the old white guys doing a goofy dance, note the troubling image of the statute of liberty on the stage — why does a patriotic symbol belong in a church?

14:58 – extreme misogenistic statements, also note the US flags around the podium

22:50 – The kids are sent out to “save” the folks who live in a lower income apartment complex. The church proudly claims that they had “fifteen salivations, dozens of prospects”

24:10 – more sexist teachings where the young men are encouraged to be ministers (but the girls are absent)

25:45 – lots of crap about the flag that again claims that the flag represents America’s “Christian” heritage

Maybe I’m taking this all too seriously, but ideas matter. I want to make sure that anyone google searches to find out about this youth conference knows there is another side to all of this. The teachings of Jesus are not nationalistic, and they are not militaristic or sexist, unlike the crap that Windsor Hills Baptist Church churns out.

Only in Oklahoma… Church planned to give away an AR-15 at a youth event!

This sounds too much like a spoof on the gun giveaway in Bowling for Columbine, but no it is for real.


photo from video posted at

KOCO (also posted on CNN): Church Cancels Teen Gun Giveaway

OKLAHOMA CITY — An Oklahoma church canceled a controversial gun giveaway for teenagers at a weekend youth conference.

Windsor Hills Baptist had planned to give away a semiautomatic assault rifle until one of the event’s organizers was unable to attend.

The church’s youth pastor, Bob Ross, said it’s a way of trying to encourage young people to attend the event. The church expected hundreds of teenagers from as far away as Canada. . . .

Raw Story: Church lures teenagers with assault rifle

Man alive!

I’m not anti-gun persay (I support the right of responsible gun ownership), but this is just nuts on so many levels. I want to begin though by saying that I could see potentially that shooting sports might be an appropriate activity at a youth camp or organization. I was a boy scout during most of teen years, and shooting sports were certainly one of our more enjoyable activities. I earned the shotgun shooting merit badge (which included being able to shoot a set number of clay pidgeons) and competed in a .22 rifle contest at scout camp. I had a blast, but also learned very much to respect weapons.

For a church though, boy, that’s a bit more complicated. We can’t deny that weapons are a potent symbol for youth today. And an AR-15?! Let’s not kid ourselves here. An AR-15 is the civilian variant of the M-16 used by the US military, and unless I’m mistaken would not be the best choice to use as a hunting rifle. (and let’s not even talk about the insanity of the church spending $800 for a prize like this when there are so many needy, right there in their own neighborhood on NW 23rd)

It seems to me that Windsor Hills Baptist Church is literally pimping itself out, by playing up to a popular media/youth culture that glamorizes gun violence and particularly big flashy guns. Their youth pastor pretty much said as much, when he said the gun giveaway was an attempt to lure youth to come to the conference from as far away as Canada.

I have to wonder though what this “sale gimmic” for the gospel has to do with the real message of Jesus. Jesus was about non-violence and love first and foremost, so I can’t imagine that he would be down with glamorizing gun violence to get out his message. Or for that matter, where is his message in all of this? I checked out the Windsor Hills BC’s website and also the website of the Windsor Hill BC youth conference (they have taken off the info about the gun giveaway), and there is no mention that I can see about caring for the sick, feeding the poor, or bringing justice to the oppressed. I see nothing about non-violence or peace. In fact, I don’t think Jesus’ message is taught at all at the Windsor Hills Baptist Church. The church claims that they will have “red hot preaching” at this youth conference and a “soulwinning blitz” but what about loving people? What about reaching out to those who feel they have no place in God’s Kingdom?

And what does a giveaway of the US military’s rifle of choice at a church, say about Jesus’ message of peace? It seems like a complete contradiction to me, and makes about as much sense as meeting for drinks after attending an AA meeting. (interestingly enough, the pastor emeritus of the church, who according to KOCO was behind the gun giveaway, was a former Green Beret… hmmm?)

On another strange note, it is striking to me that this gun giveaway was going to happen on the week after a very successful Oklahoma City Peace Camp for high school youth (hosted by the Church of the Open Arms and the Oklahoma Peace Education institute).

What an incredible contrast?

Again I am completely mystified about what has happened to much of mass Christianity in Oklahoma. There are some wonderful exceptions, but most Christians in OKC make me almost ashamed to call myself a “Christian” when I see how the term is used and abused. I am offended to see the Christian faith hijacked by folks who aren’t even bothering seek to grappled with what JESUS ACTUALLY SAID.

Explain to me how you can turn the other cheek and love your enemy, while you blow their brains out, and I’ll try to accept the idea of a fighting Christian. Otherwise, I think it is an oxymoron. The terms “pro-war christian” and “anti-war Christian” are nonsensical. A “pro-war christian” is an oxymoron, and an “anti-war christian” is redundant.

I know I’m being judgmental tonight (committing the sin, I attack others for committing), so please understand I’m probably throwing around too much hyperbole tonight, but when you see crap like this gun giveaway, you can’t help but think that the mass form of Christianity today has nothing to do with what Jesus taught.

Or to quote Gandhi, “”I do not like your Christians..they are so unlike your Christ.”

Dr. Dobson convinced me to vote for Obama

Dobson accuses Obama of ‘distorting’ Bible”

(CNN) — One of the country’s leading evangelical leaders is accusing Sen. Barack Obama of deliberately distorting the Bible and taking a “fruitcake interpretation” of the U.S. Constitution.

In comments to be aired on his radio show Tuesday, Focus on the Family founder James Dobson criticizes the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee for comments he made in a June 2006 speech to the liberal Christian group Call to Renewal. . .

“I think he’s deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own world view, his own confused theology,” Dobson said, later adding that Obama is “dragging biblical understanding through the gutter.”

I decided to see of for myself and read what Obama said in the speech in question… ‘Call to Renewal’ Keynote Address
Wednesday, June 28, 2006

Such a powerful, thoughtful address. Here are a few parts that I though were worthy of special attention (but I recommend reading the whole thing if time permits) . . .

I think that we should put more of our tax dollars into educating poor girls and boys. I think that the work that Marian Wright Edelman has done all her life is absolutely how we should prioritize our resources in the wealthiest nation on earth. I also think that we should give them the information about contraception that can prevent unwanted pregnancies, lower abortion rates, and help assure that that every child is loved and cherished.

But, you know, my Bible tells me that if we train a child in the way he should go, when he is old he will not turn from it. So I think faith and guidance can help fortify a young woman’s sense of self, a young man’s sense of responsibility, and a sense of reverence that all young people should have for the act of sexual intimacy.

Obama has expressed what I believe about abortion and sexuality, but only far more eloquently.

For one, they need to understand the critical role that the separation of church and state has played in preserving not only our democracy, but the robustness of our religious practice. Folks tend to forget that during our founding, it wasn’t the atheists or the civil libertarians who were the most effective champions of the First Amendment. It was the persecuted minorities, it was Baptists like John Leland who didn’t want the established churches to impose their views on folks who were getting happy out in the fields and teaching the scripture to slaves. It was the forbearers of the evangelicals who were the most adamant about not mingling government with religious, because they did not want state-sponsored religion hindering their ability to practice their faith as they understood it.


Moreover, given the increasing diversity of America’s population, the dangers of sectarianism have never been greater. Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers.

And even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson’s, or Al Sharpton’s? Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is ok and that eating shellfish is abomination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount – a passage that is so radical that it’s doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application? So before we get carried away, let’s read our bibles. Folks haven’t been reading their bibles.

This is the part that got Dr. Dobson all worked up, and if you read it in the context of his addresss, Obama was not saying “look at the Bible and how ridiculous it is” but rather that the Bible is only useful when it is interpreted, and that interpretation is something that is best done in an individual community of faith, not on the national level. (however, I got to say that I like his take on the Sermon on the Mount, and agree wholeheartedly with his interpretation of it!)

I can only assume that Dobson didn’t understand what Obama said here or he is purposely trying to confuse and mislead his audience.

This brings me to my second point. Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God’s will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

Now this is going to be difficult for some who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, as many evangelicals do. But in a pluralistic democracy, we have no choice. Politics depends on our ability to persuade each other of common aims based on a common reality. It involves the compromise, the art of what’s possible. At some fundamental level, religion does not allow for compromise. It’s the art of the impossible. If God has spoken, then followers are expected to live up to God’s edicts, regardless of the consequences. To base one’s life on such uncompromising commitments may be sublime, but to base our policy making on such commitments would be a dangerous thing. And if you doubt that, let me give you an example.

We all know the story of Abraham and Isaac. Abraham is ordered by God to offer up his only son, and without argument, he takes Isaac to the mountaintop, binds him to an altar, and raises his knife, prepared to act as God has commanded.

Of course, in the end God sends down an angel to intercede at the very last minute, and Abraham passes God’s test of devotion.

But it’s fair to say that if any of us leaving this church saw Abraham on a roof of a building raising his knife, we would, at the very least, call the police and expect the Department of Children and Family Services to take Isaac away from Abraham. We would do so because we do not hear what Abraham hears, do not see what Abraham sees, true as those experiences may be. So the best we can do is act in accordance with those things that we all see, and that we all hear, be it common laws or basic reason.

What a good example!

I guess I should thank Dr. Dobson for pointing me to this speech. I previously had doubted Obama’s sincerity of his faith (particularly after his leaving his old church), but now I must say that not only am I convinced of the depth and thoughtfulness of his faith, but also am convinced that he has the kind of faith I am down with.

I am still not 100% happy with Obama’s stands on some issues, but I think I can now be ok with voting for him.

The “Untold Story” about Sally Kern

Updated May 18, 2008 to correct grammatical problems in my original post.

First Stone Ministries: The Untold Story About Sally Kern

This article by a supposed de-gayification “ministry” is pretty stunning, and frankly shows the scope of Sally Kern’s homophobia and her involvement in so called ex-gay ministries.

. . . In her remarks during the January speech, Rep. Kern mentioned the parallel of the gay political movement in the United States – not individual gays. She said the agenda of the gay political movement is, in her opinion, as dangerous as terrorism. While I personally would not have used this parallel, the irony of this story is impossible to ignore. That irony is demonstrated very visibly in the hate emails numbering over 26,000, death threats, and the mean-spirited and orchestrated campaign calling for her resignation. These very tactics are akin to terroristic tactics, therefore point directly back to Sally’s original parallel. Truly this is ironic! This political tactic, directed to silence Rep. Kern, bully her and other conservatives and manipulate the unsuspecting public almost worked. However, what they did not realize was Sally Kern’s courage and steadfastness.

I find it interesting that these folks are claiming that all 26,000 of the emails that Sally received were “hate” emails, or that it is hateful to call for her to resign. I completely disagree.

I do not hate Sally Kern. I was and still am angry with her, and I do want her to either change her ways or resign from the state legislature, but that doesn’t mean I hate her.

In fact I went back in my own email box and found this email that I sent her on March 7, 2008:

Hello Ms. Kern,

I wanted to let you know that I have written a response to your
anti-gay speech on my blog at:

I think your anti-gay bigotry is disgusting. If you don’t believe in
freedom and equality for all, then you should quit the state
legislature. You have no right to be there, if you are going to use
your position as a platform to preach hate.

Please note that I did said that Sally’s bigotry is disgusting, not that she is disgusting. I do “hate” her hateful behavior, but I don’t hate her. It would be just as wrong for me to hate her, as it is for her to hate homosexuals.

OK, back to the quotes from the First Stone article…

. . . It has been an honor to be a friend of the Kern family for several years. I am Chris Morrison, development coordinator with First Stone Ministries. I want you to know that the Kern’s played a healing role in my life. Ten years ago I was battling with how I was to live my life. I would either continuing to seek the Lord in my weakness or just give up and live as a gay man. While in college in a neighboring city, I would drive to Oklahoma City and spend weekends in the Kern’s home; Sally Kern would also take me to the airport so I could fly home for holidays and leave my vehicle in their care.

Sally Kern wept as she delivered her speech at the Oklahoma Capitol, April 2, 2008.Though I attended a Baptist university, I still carried my brokenness on my sleeve, as I struggled intensely with homosexual feelings. I will never forget the seed that was sown on Thanksgiving weekend in 1997. Sally Kern was taking me to the airport and she gently broached the subject of my homosexual struggle with me. I was surprised and scared of what she was going to say, because I hadn’t told many people about my struggle. It was rare for someone to bring up my struggle before I had ever disclosed it. Her tenderness was overwhelming; she lovingly ministered to me that day. She mercifully let me know that she and her family were praying for me, and that they loved me. That day is precious to me as I felt so loved and accepted. I am grateful to the Lord that Sally had enough courage to plant the seeds of God’s forgiveness, hope and healing.

In 2004 I had the privilege of supporting Sally Kern as she ran for State Representative. I attended her watch party on Election Day and remembered her saying she knew that God was calling her to run for State Representative, but didn’t know all the reasons. That statement resounded in my head as I stood and watch Sally Kern at the Freedom of Speech Rally – “Rally for Sally” on April 2, 2008. I remembered the words from the Bible, “For such a time as this.” Sally Kern, is a representative “for such a time as this.” I am grateful to Sally Kern for her humble stance, as well as her boldness to call the nation to repentance, and to call for Christians to stand for traditional values in our land. I am a man who was nearly enslaved by the lie of being born gay, yet Jesus saved me from that deceived existence. The Kern family played an integral role in my healing from homosexuality, for which I am eternally grateful.

This is the untold story behind the precious Kern family that you will most-likely never hear as a main story in the liberal media.

I don’t know Chris and I have no idea if he really was born gay or not. He may have been asking questions about his sexuality (which is normal for lots of young people) but was in fact straight, so no harm was done by Sally’s supposedly loving counsel. (except that he now feels the need to try to de-gayify people, who may in fact be gay)

Or, Chris was more likely born gay. But he was scared to death by a religious tradition that teaches that you will go to hell for being who God made you to be, and he attended a college (likely OBU, based on what he said in his article) that would expell him if they found out that he was gay. So, when Sally gave her counsel to Chris, it confirmed the homophobic pressure he was under and he took it to be the gospel truth, and thus chose to live a lie. Many, many LGBT folks choose to live this lie and it is unhealthy and destructive. (a prime example is found in the book Touched by Grace, by Ann Showalter (the tragic story of a female Mennonite Pastor who was married to a man for decades, who hid the fact that he was gay from her)

I am not gay (which I’m grateful for, not because it is wrong to be gay, but because of the prejudice that LGBT folks have to face), but I struggled as I think every young person does with sexuality.

I struggled with tons of questions… Is it wrong to masturbate? Is it sinful to have lustful urges? Will I go to hell because I had sex with my girlfriend before I was married? How is it possible to be both a sexual being (which all human beings are) and faithful to God? All of these questions are horribly tough ones to deal with, even for a straight person, when you grow up in a evangelical Christian culture that makes lots of absolute statements but doesn’t seem to be relevant to the very messy issues at hand. I can’t imagine trying to work through these questions if I were gay, but I do know now that the teachings of First Stone Ministries, and Sally Kern are DEAD WRONG.

Again if Chris isn’t gay today, it is because he was never gay in the first place. But for kids who really are gay, these kinds of teachings create an environment that fosters and encourages self-hatred and double-faced living, which in turn lead to tragic consequences both to the gay young people, but also to their families and the people who end up loving them (and later are heart-broken when they can’t figure out how to make their secretly gay spouse love them back).

I know that in many ways that Sally herself is a victim to these teachings. I’m sure she sincerely believes these horrible beliefs, but she and folks like her are doing so much harm. I wish there was some way to convince them to see things differently.

World Aids Day 2007

I got to listen to some of the special coverage on Out Q 109 (on Sirrius Radio) today and was touched in hearing the stories of both those who have survived AIDS and those who did not. Several of the guests on the show said that this is a day to mourn but also a day to celebrate survival.

One of things that hit me hard in listening to the programming was thinking of the way that the faith community in large part failed so badly in showing love to those affected by the AIDS epidemic, particularly in the 80’s. It seems so ironic that the folks who should have been loving victims of AIDS (remember Jesus hung out with people who had leprosy, which was the dreaded disease of his day) were instead all too often were the ones heaping shame and hatred on those who were hurting. (or worse dared to say that the disease was a punishment from God — I don’t believe in hell myself, but if I did I’m pretty sure God would save a special spot in the flames for those who said things like this).

Things are somewhat better today, but not that much better. Churches and social institutions are better educated and much of the hatred is gone (see this post from Dec. 2005 about the growing awareness of AIDS among Evangelicals in America), but the problem now is apathy. And more significantly, the disease has become much more widespread in the third world, and unfortunately the rich nations of the world are not doing enough with their resources to do something about it. (see this post about the 2007 state of union address)

Anyway in honor of the survivors and in memory of those who have left us, I’m posting this video from the AIDS charity Avert

Also here’s a couple more links about World AIDS Day… World AIDS Day 2007 (a UK based site)

Wikipedia: World AIDS Day

From the good ol’ days of Christian Rock God and Guitars — Christian rock might not have all the answers, but for one fan and one band, it’s the questions that matter. – by Joel Hartse (thanks to Rivers are Damp for leading me to KTB)

This article really took me back in time, to the mid-late 90’s when for a brief span of time Christian music was actually interesting, creative, and heartfelt (well at least at its best moments, but those best moments seem to happen pretty often for that short span of time).

But on the subject of Seven Day Jesus, I did have to hunt down this old article by my dear friend Kimberly from our old zine, Exitzine in which you see some glimpses of how Christian Rock was already beginning to be destroyed by “the industry” and where things were about to go:

Exitzine: Reflections from a bygone band…Brian McSweeney of Seven Day Jesus — by Kimberly Hall makes it to the NY Times


NY Times: Intimate Confessions Pour Out on Church’s Web Site

The on-going saga of the discussion and controversy over the OKC megachurch will probably really take off thanks to the NYT story. For the latest discussion on this blog, check out the many comments to my prior blog posts: here and here.

Also, here’s an interesting defense of the internet-heavy marketing approach of Life— 8 Lessons from My Secret. — While I don’t agree with this guy’s conclusions, I would say that he makes a better argument for his position than I’ve heard articulated elsewhere (and did touch on some of the pitfalls of this position too)

More discussion on


I’ve had tons of comments on my previous post about (the cyber-confession website of, so I thought I would follow up with what others are saying about it.

The Parish: or Voyeur Driven Church (also see The Parish: A Better Analysis on

I’ve written many, many posts about what happens when marketing language enters the church. One of the inevitable results is that marketing methods also enter the church. So now we’ve got the simulacra of an ancient Christian discipline, the false promise of freedom, and an offer of sermons to draw people to, all in a medium that accomplishes nothing for anyone.

The Parish’s post makes a great segue to this post from a site that celebrates “marketing” the church . . Internet a ‘Roadside Billboard’ With ‘Pull Over’ Benefits, says Forbes

I won’t paraphrase what this innane website says, except to say that it illustrates perfectly how wrong is.

Rae’s Space: Sensational sin

. . . Our state newspaper, the Daily Oklahoman, ran a story on this so I’m sure millions of people are flocking to the site. I just think this is irresponsible use of religion–to post “sin” online for the world to see, instead of making it a matter between a person and God.

Another issue I have are the categories of sin and what is/is not a sin. I think it’s safe to say that my understanding of sin is different than what LifeChurch would preach, but hey…..

The Ember: What’s your secret? – a rather sympathetic look at the website

Making Chutney: — In search of brokenness

. . . Almost all the confessions at MySecret have a raw honesty about them—the confessors truly believe they have sinned. And some have.

But then there are the posts where the confessors seek forgiveness for simply being human. There are folks who have bought a package deal of what it means to be a good human, and when their lives don’t measure up, they count themselves failures.

I was there once.

Possibly one of the best thoughts I’ve seen about the site (you really need to read the rest of this post), and reflects my own life dead-on-the-money.

The Swingset: The Beast…Pt. II (also see Part I