Possibly – well, even probably – you’re right: perhaps, in reading yet another slam on dispensationalists I threw you into a group to which you didn’t and don’t belong. So, if I was wrong and unfair, I apologize. I did notice, FWIW, that I didn’t draw a clear distinction between what you do (with the CBAs) and the puffed-up attitudes of those Reformed bullies I wrote about previously. You are not, as far as I know, guilty of that sort of thing. You’re not a bully. So, I apologize for that, too.

My point, though, still stands; actually, several of my points still stand, I believe. One, that I don’t think we do a lot of good by tearing down one another, whether in jest or not. There is little compassion shown to people on the fringes. If you want to point out their errors, that’s a good thing, but the manner in which it is done is, I think, as important as that it is done. We are, after all, dealing with people for whom Christ died and who still – as stupid as we may think them to be – bear the image of God.

I don’t think the comparison to Elijah at Mt. Carmel is a very good one: he was mocking a false god, not a false doctrine; he was opposing unbelievers who had rejected the truth, not believers who were off on a doctrine – albeit with serious consequences. A better comparison would probably be Amos telling the people of Israel to “go to Bethel and sin.” That’s directed at God’s people, albeit in disobedience, and is certainly mockery. You might sell that to me – if any of those people are reading your blog and hear what you are saying about their false teaching. But, somehow, I doubt that they are frequent flyers at your place – or mine, for that matter. After all, Bill Gates is the Antichrist, is he not? So anything involving computers has to be evil and I can’t image those folks on the internet – but maybe they are!.

Did I use the word wanton? It’s a good word but I don’t think I used it anywhere. But, regardless, it doesn’t matter to me if you do something four times out of four hundred or four times out of four million: if I think it’s wrong, I may say something. So the percentage thing is a red herring. You might note, too, that I didn’t trash your blog in general, just that one particular feature. If I thought your blog was worthless, I (a) wouldn’t read it, and (b) wouldn’t link to it, either in posts or in the sidebars of both my blogs. So calm down a tad, eh?

Re “No one is taking pot shots at dispensationalists!”

You’re kidding, right? Surely you must admit that there are people in the Reformed camp who like to take a swipe at dispensationalists at every opportunity. Now, if by that statement you mean that you are not taking pot shots, OK; if you mean no one at all is, well, you need to get around more.

BTW, I’m all for reining in false teaching. I just hadn’t run across any lately that was dispensational in nature. Tell me what it is and I’ll happily go after it, but dispensationalists are somewhat rare among Godbloggers and the ones I know and have read are pretty responsible.

Is there a “lunatic fringe” in dispensationalism? Sure. But they are as representative of dispensationalism as Rodney Brown is of Charismatics. Should I dragged the term “charismatics” through the mud when I expose Brown’s false teachings? Or should I be careful to identify him as someone pretending to represent or operate under the banner of charismaticism but actually being an embarrassment to and an aberration of that segment of the Christian community? Perhaps if I just call him a “hyperkinetic Charismatic,” that will be definitive enough.

I don’t take attacks on dispensationalism personally – I stopped caring long ago what others think of my beliefs: I know why I believe what I believe, and I’m aware of more difficulties and problems with dispensationalism than 99% (to borrow your figure) of those sniping about it. I just get tired of the apparent sense of superiority demonstrated by those who denounce them/us and treat them/us like bastard children in God’s family. If such “hyperkinetic dispensationalists” are not believers, then they need the gospel rather than mockery; if they are believers, then they need to be confronted and corrected with a view toward restoration.

Yes, it does bother me that it’s done with a mocking “humorous” tone. Wouldn’t sadness be more appropriate? I suppose I could sit back and laugh, ridicule, and mock what passes for “sound doctrine” among Charismatics – “Charismatic theology? Now there’s an oxymoron for you!” – but what is the profit? Who is edified? Is this wholesome speech?

If we’re going to laugh at and make fun of any group, it should be that group of which we are a member, be it a denomination, movement, or church. Otherwise, our conversations should be as serious as death because, after all, they are that serious: the consequences are eternal.

As far as CBAs go, we’ll just have to disagree about the inappropriateness of them. But don’t lose any sleep over it: I am a mere gnat among rhinos and other enormous mammals, and my opinion isn’t going to hurt you or anyone else. You’ll be around and teaching hundreds of people every day long after I’ve all-but disappeared from the Godblog radar.

Dispensationalists who make scary pronouncements (like the guillotine one in my post) and cause people to stumble with conspiracy theories are no better than out-of-control charismatics. Both need to be reined in. I am fully for reining in charismatic headcases, so I don’t understand why you are not for reining in dispensationalists who promote false warnings and pronouncements.

The “mockery” of the More Cowbell Awards is no different than Elijah’s mocking of the prophets of Baal. Those posts serve to call out the bizarre or unchristian practices within the Church and alert people to the problem. That it’s done in a humorous tone is what seems to bother you. Considering that 99% of what I post on Cerulean Sanctum is NOT in a humorous tone seems to have slid by. That I’ve taken four posts out of nearly four hundred and used humor to illustrate an issue doesn’t cast me as wanton.

You can say what you will – and who am I to say you can’t? – but the mockery of the ‘Cowbell Awards’ is hardly edifying: not for the people on the receiving end, nor for those who read, laugh, and thank God that they’re not like those Christians. As I said, it’s your blog – and thus your responsibility – but I don’t see how those awards manifest ’speaking the truth in love’ or seek to restore (rather than ridicule) such obviously misguided believers. But such dubious awards do keep people coming back and, as you have stated, numbers are important to you for reasons you believe to be legitimate. And so they may be.

But as for the condescension of the ‘CBAs,’ maybe that floats at your site, but it won’t float here. You want to take pot-shots at people in the dispensational – or any other – camp? That’s fine, but don’t whine when it comes back at you.

Did I slander all dispensationalists? No. I pointed out that Christians who get mired in conspiracy theories do the entire Church a grave injustice, whether they’re the one propagating the theories or running their lives by them.

Just ask all those people who read 88 Reasons Why the Rapture Will Occur in 1988 and euthanized their pets so they wouldn’t fall into the hands of Satan-worshippers. Ask them what that kind of lunacy breeds. Nothing Christian at all, frankly.